Right, of course. Sorry.

It's because they hate money, right? How stupid of me.

Has nothing at all to do with the luke-warm test audience reception, or the fact that they determined based on their analysis that they'd get a better fiscal gain by writing it off than the money it would have made them by them releasing it commercially.

I'm the moron. Everyone is wrong except you, you see The Matrix. Share some red pills with the rest of us so we can be as enlightened, please.

Gonna ignore some of the obvious here and just say:

I promise you that if they determined they'd make more money by keeping it on than the supposed tax write-off they'd get to benefit from by cancelling it - they wouldn't have cancelled it.

I don't have the stats, obviously. Nor do I know directly how Netflix measure "success".

But, if I were to hazard a guess, I reckon it'd look something like this:

• Netflix knows how much a series cost them to make and/or license/distribute
• Netflix knows the overall produced runtime of these shows
• Netflix knows how much of the show was watched, and by how many unique users

Based on these types of stats (and many others), they'd basically be able to boil down the "success" of a show by creating a measure that expressed Dollars Spent Per Minutes Watched.

Suppose that when you look at the economics of some of these brilliant shows (I loved The Expanse), you find out that the Dollars Spent Per Minutes Watched puts it in the top 10%. Suppose they decide this means this show is "Unsuccessful".

I'm just a random internet dickhead, but I figure it is basically an advanced application of this or something similar.

A lot of people seem to be taking that headline at face value with some bad hot takes, in my opinion.

The full quote is this:

> We have never canceled a successful show. A lot of these shows were well-intended but talk to a very small audience on a very big budget. The key to it is you have to be able to talk to a small audience on a small budget and a large audience at a large budget. If you do that well, you can do that forever.

I don't have the data to know for sure whether he's speaking truth, but why wouldn't he? Be critical in your assessment of that. What could he possibly gain by being misleading about that?