The so-called “streaming wars” are truly brutal, with the WSJ today reporting that 1/2 of the US viewers who sign up for Disney+ within three days of big blockbuster releases (Hamilton, Wonder Woman, etc) are gone within 6 months.

Even the mouse can’t work his usual magic.

From the January 31 Wall Street Journal article by Benjamin Mullin and David Marcelis: “Streaming wars require all players to consistently churn out popular and often expensive programming to keep fickle subscribers satisfied. ‘You constantly need new content,’ said Michael Nathanson, an analyst for MoffettNathanson. Streaming services not only have to build vast libraries of old shows and movies, he said, they also ‘need a couple big, nice theatrical movies every quarter to make it feel like it’s really valuable.’”

The demand for new “content” is insatiable, with a global population that is currently addicted to this content conveyer belt firehose (pls mix in your own metaphor as desired). It is the classic endgame of web1 and web2, where “you can have EVERYTHING and there’s MORE COMING ASAP” and yet your audience is not loyal at all.

It will take some work to wean people from the firehouse and get them excited about engagement rather than simple passive receipt. But they’ll catch on fast.

A secondary lesson not mentioned here by the WSJ’s reporters is that audiences still have strong loyalty to the original artists, just as always. They’ll follow Lin-Manuel Miranda to whatever platform or DAO he inhabits. That’s why the deals keep getting bigger for the creators.

But why do the creators need the content aggregator at all? Who owns the data? Who owns the audience? Who takes most of the revenue?

Artists are getting wise fast.