I think it's just the other side of the coin. Because they have no airtime limits, they can commission many more series than traditional networks used to; but they just don't want to keep them around for long if they think they are not working, because unlimited airtime does not mean unlimited funds.

In practice, I think some of the series this piece laments would never have been produced by networks. Would you be happier reading only one half of a story, or not even knowing the story existed at all? I think the answer can differ between different people.

This makes sense in the abstract, but watching season 1 of the The Office (US) suggests that if NBC had the same view, we wouldn't have one of the most popular long-term binge-watch shows, for which streaming services are paying $500mm now.

As the article mentions, Schitt's Creek apparently had a low-rated first season, but since the execs in charge didn't have the mindset you describe above, it survived long enough to become the award-winning more popular show it is now.

Netflix may not be doing anything wrong here, but if they're not careful, it may bite them hard in a few years as their reputation continues to grow.

If they're good enough it will stick. See stranger things, house of cards, and orange is the new black for examples. The problem is that Netflix isn't very good at picking winners. They pay way more than anyone else for content and the results aren't there.

I think it's just a reality that in the era of streaming very few people are going to stick out a mediocre series in the hopes that it has enough good bones that the showrunners will eventually do something with them.

Netflix made a lot of promises about what data would enable. There's very little indication it's helped Netflix to develop better shows.

I'm arguing that isn't always true. Yes, some shows knock it out of the park in season 1. Other shows take a few seasons to really hit their stride.

It appears Netflix is taking a SV/VC approach to shows. Spend big, fail fast, and count on a small number of massive hits to succeed. While this may pad revenue in the short term, I'm not convinced it's the best long-term play. If subscribers get annoyed at short production runs and inconsistent programming, they leave and go to Disney or Hulu or Amazon.

Of course, I'm not in the industry at all, so I could be wrong. But, as a consumer, it is annoying to have Netflix push a few shows really hard, only to have them cancelled after 8 episodes.

It's easier to stick when you are early in the game and the marketplace is less crowded. Hose of Cards got a lot of extra publicity for being the first.