When I first launched Streamonomics™ last year, I defined it too narrowly—just the unit economics of TV and film in the streaming era.
But quickly, it was obvious: streaming had reshaped music and gaming too. YouTube, for many intents, was a streamer. Netflix in fact called it “the other leader” in D2C streaming. And unit economics, while still key (not just for understanding these businesses but for growing, competing or negotiating with them), are only a subset of Economics.
Economics itself has evolved. It started as the study of how people, companies and nations allocate limited resources to satisfy unlimited wants and needs. But over the last decades, Behavioral Economics added psychology—accounting for how people and companies often make ‘predictably irrational’ decisions.
Meanwhile, the story around streaming has changed. We’re past the consensus that the “streaming wars” are over, and that streaming is inherently a bad business. Today’s players compete with different strengths and models. For many, streaming is just one piece—three of the top ten most valuable companies in the world fall in this camp (Apple, Amazon and Alphabet; meanwhile, Tencent and Netflix are in the top 20.) And we’ve seen successful models in one content type expand into others –like short-form drama apps borrowing tactics from gaming.
So if Streamonomics™ becomes the Economics of Streaming—traditional plus behavioral, across TV, film, music, podcasts, audiobooks, and creator content—then it needs a framework within it to explain how streaming companies build value, how they compete, and if you’re working with one, how to best position yourself.