I did not know about Netflix doing it 100%. That makes sense, since they are a subscription service rather than beholden to sponsors. I like that.
But then isn't HBO, Starz, Showtime, and Hulu the same way? (I really don't know).
Sort of. HBO, Starz, and Showtime aren't beholden to advertisers, but their business model is different; they string out content across several months to make sure people stay subscribed. I know people who subscribe to HBO during Game of Thrones, then cancel it.
For a long time, those subscriptions HAD to be bundled with a cable provider. Those premium cable packages were far, far and away more expensive than what many are willing to pay. In the past couple of years, HBO got smart and offered their separate, HBO Go app that doesn't require a movie package, which is cool, though if you DO have a premium package, that's included in your subscription (which I like). Cord cutting is hitting the premium channels hardest.
Netflix's business model is focused entirely on bombarding their users with so much content that it becomes an essential part of their life. Do you know how frustrating it is to see an episode of a show after it's been on for a season or two, and not be able to go back to the beginning and watch it start to finish? I don't know about anyone else, but I don't watch shows piecemeal; I start at the start, and finish at the finish. If I see something I like, I go back to the start and catch up. Channels like Adult Swim or FX don't have their entire catalog available for viewing whenever you want; you have to wait a few months for the missing episodes to show up in circulation. For example, It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia may have a total of ten episodes from random seasons available on demand. If you want to see the others, you have to buy the DVD/digital copy, pirate it, or, if you're lucky enough for it to be available, watch it on Netflix. Netflix decided to change the rules about limiting available content; they just made it
all available, all the time. Because they don't care if it takes you two days or two months to watch a series; they want your eyeballs on their service for X-number of hours.
Hulu is partially ad-funded. You can buy an ad-free subscription, or an ad-supported one for less (I think there's a free option, but I don't remember; I just bought the ad-free one). They're interested in targeting ads appropriately, which requires gathering metrics on viewership on a week-to-week basis, so they don't always drop an entire season at once like Netflix does. Plus their video player sucks; I always have trouble streaming 4K or even 1080P from them (whenever THAT'S available, which is rarely) without constant interruptions, and that's on devices connected by a hard line. Way, way too heavy of a player. I never seem to have trouble with Netflix; it just works, perfectly, almost every time (browser crashes occasionally, but that's to be expected).
Anyway, Netflix's goal is to keep people subscribed by keeping people invested in their
catalog, not what's coming next week. They know that you'll stay subscribed between releases of Jessica Jones and Daredevil because they also have the entire series of Supernatural ready to stream.
HBO is in big, big trouble in a couple of years. Game of Thrones ends in 2019, and they don't have much to keep people coming back, aside from Westworld (maybe a third season of True Detective, if that ever happens), and that's not nearly as popular. I don't think they smartened up after True Blood ended. They used to have a solid release schedule, with good stuff coming out as seasons ended. Now everyone just waits for the one show anyone cares about. When GoT ends, nobody is going to want to watch the inevitable twelve spinoffs they try to launch, though people will try to act excited. See Better Call Saul, which is just as good as Breaking Bad, but has a fraction of the audience.
Sorry, this was like a weird tangent, but I think about TV and subscription services a lot.
On topic, I think Netflix is the perfect company to produce and distribute a Dresden show. I don't know about anyone else's experience with Dresden, but when I discovered it (funnily enough, because the terrible show was on Netflix; believe it or not, I saw potential after the pilot, found out it was a book series, and bought Storm Front that night), I binge-read the series in a week. This was in... 2009? It was before Changes. I find that Dresden books read really, really well in a single sitting, if you can manage it. Storm Front is way better if you read it all at once than split over a few sessions.
Anyway, because I believe strongly that any adaptation should stick to the source material, I think that Netflix is the right place because the plots play better when they're binged. I've mentioned in other threads that Netflix did an outstanding job with A Series of Unfortunate Events thus far (along with the cast; Nathan Fillion is going to be in the next season, so how bad could it be?). I'm giving Netflix a big portion of the credit for that, because network executives have a habit of screwing good stories. They really know how to get out of the way of the people who know what they're doing, and provide more than enough support for the production teams to do what they do best.
If the showrunners of an adaptation are fans, and Netflix stays out of their way, and they get a good enough cast, then the show could be perfect.
Meanwhile, someone needs to get a Peter Jackson type to adapt the Codex Alera as movies, because Hollywood needs new high fantasy.