artsunlimited27
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2021
- Messages
- 112
- Likes
- 69
Yeah, you are. You "suggested" it right out of the gate, without any proof, and then expected that I should disprove something that doesn't exist, when your premise makes absolutely no sense in the first place. Don't look now, but that's exactly what "speculation," means, spanky. You also might want to look up the meaning of "exclusive."I am not disputing that. In fact there are plenty of examples where not all the content is available to stream with Amazon's Prime.
I'm not suggesting "exclusive content," in that I have no way to know how many sites have the proper licensing to stream a given program.
What has not been proven is that Amazon does not have at least 1 show that the license holder does not offer on their own site. There is nothing restricting MAX from allowing Amazon to stream content and deciding not to put all the content on their own site.
Until there is some actual proof, and not just speculation, or hand waiving by people who are not insiders, it will be an unknown if there exists that one show/episode that's on Amazon and not the license holder's site. It could be on many other sites, and thus not "exclusive," which I never claimed.
There's nothing restricting MAX from doing a lot of things - like putting up a big fat banner on its site stating that if you go to Prime for your subscription you won't get full access to MAX content, but that doesn't happen, now does it?
Keep prattling away about "unknowns" and "insiders" and shows that are only on Amazon and not the license holder's site but that totes aren't exclusive all you want, because "quit while you're behind" seems to also to be an unknown for you. There could also be hidden candy on many other sites - why don't you go look for it now? Take years.
Last edited: