• Sabin10@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      62
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Lack of net neutrality is a huge part of it. Korean ISPs bill sites like twitch for the data they use.

    • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      53
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      IIRC, South Korea charges an import tax for foreign media. It’s part of why Korea has become a sort of media powerhouse, with K-pop, K-dramas, K-comics, etc… Those things are much cheaper in SK because they’re all local and aren’t being charged that extra tax. So they’re naturally very popular in SK because they’re much cheaper. Sort of a positive feedback loop where the media is cheaper so people consume more of it, which makes the media popular enough to survive on its own outside of Korea as well.

      • roguetrick@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        64
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It’s not about media or taxes, it’s about inflated fees for traffic period. It’s regulatory capture (which Korea has a long history of) and subsequent collusion by Korean ISPs. Prohibitively expensive to run a streaming service like that even if you have local datacenters to reduce international transit fees (because you still have to connect to the local ISPs who will still charge you). https://carnegieendowment.org/2021/08/17/afterword-korea-s-challenge-to-standard-internet-interconnection-model-pub-85166

        Edit: To be clear, this sort of situation is about the only one where to effectively have a streaming service, you’d need to use peer to peer and make it “come from inside the house”, so to speak. Even their local streaming services are over the barrel and only the ISPs themselves could actually make an affordable streaming service.

      • JohnWorks@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s interesting that it’s still classified as foreign media even if the streamers could be local. Wonder if there’ll be a Korean twitch competitor that comes out of this.

        • Pleb@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          There is AfreecaTV. I don’t think Twitch was a big competitor to them locally in the first place. At least from the little I know about it, so take that with an extra train of salt.

            • Pleb@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              That and they are a Korean company as far as I know.
              They sponsor a Starcraft 1 League in Korea at least.

                • Pleb@feddit.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I do too. But I always get behind and have to binge it to get back up to date.

                  Currently binging Season 14. So I’ll hopefully be up to date around christmas again.

              • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                I imagine they have CGNAT already. But you can run servers that only assist users to establish a connection handshake from behind CGNAT, then all traffic happens peer to peer.

                Now, whether the ISPs can get away with blocking that handshake is another story…

                • redcalcium@lemmy.institute
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I’m behind cgnat myself and I can download but can’t seed. If everyone is behibd cgnat the swarm would be dead fast. In Korea, there are only 3 ISPs and if they collude to use cgnat with client isolation, they can kill these P2P scheme used by streaming site and boost their profit sharing revenue.

    • Mac@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      SPNP - Sending Network Party Pays
      The party that creates the traffic pays the operating costs.

  • CluckN@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Damn I didn’t know it was 10x the cost. Crazy how a company that size still can’t handle the fees.

      • glimse@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        41
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        It says they operated at a loss in SK. If that’s true, I wouldn’t wanna, either.

          • FeelzGoodMan420@eviltoast.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            1 year ago

            What the actual fuck are you talking about? A simple google search shows that Amazon very much makes a profit. Do some basic research first before posting bullshit please.

          • nave
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            Amazons last financial report has its profit at $10 billion dollars.

        • schmidtster@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          43
          ·
          1 year ago

          Dang, stores better get rid of their loss leaders than.

          Sometimes you gotta take a small loss for the overall benefit of the company/system.

          • SuperDuper@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            23
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            How is remaining in an unprofitable market a “loss leader”?

            Sometimes you gotta take a small loss for the overall benefit of the company/system.

            You really don’t think Twitch did some analysis on this matter before making a decision? Or do you just figure that your uninformed assumptions about their financials are more accurate than their internal analysis? Clearly whatever benefit they were or were not getting from their SK business was not enough to justify the operating costs.

              • roguetrick@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                18
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                They’re leaving the market. If anything Amazon is putting a shot across the bow of the ISPs who are charging these interconnect fees to get THEM negative press and make the Korean public demand a change in the laws so they can get the Internet they pay for.

                Amazon may be quitting twitch in Korea, but their cloud services are still paying for the dumb fees.

              • SuperDuper@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                11
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                What negative press? They’re no longer going to do business in a particular market for completely normal reasons. This isn’t some kind of scandal, it’s a standard decision for a company to make regarding unprofitable operations. Everyone besides you seems to understand this.

                You clearly have no idea what you’re talking about.

            • SuperDuper@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              12
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Neither does the person you’re replying to. They probably just learned the term “loss leader” and thought they’d sound smart bringing it up but have no idea how the concept actually works in practice.

          • DeepFriedDresden@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Loss leaders work because customers will purchase other products/services. Operating in a market at a loss isn’t what a loss leader is.

          • iegod@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Gaming nerds dictating how business should operate is one of the funniest things to observe.

              • cerement@slrpnk.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago
                • “corporation” + “bribery” “lobbying” … nope, never seen that before …
                • “corporation” + “breaking the law” … nor that one either …
                • MolochAlter@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Correct, but those are both expensive in their own ways.

                  If they don’t see a return they won’t do either.

            • schmidtster@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              1 year ago

              Which would cost you more in the end, so if removing it costs more, you keep it in.

              That’s what’s a loss leader is……

      • CluckN@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        1 year ago

        I also didn’t know that South Korea charges extra for foreign content providers which is also pretty aggressive.

        • sigmaklimgrindset@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah, and it all started from a lawsuit between SK Telecom and Netflix because in 2020 people watching Squid Games in Korea used an unprecedented amount of bandwidth. Reuters article

          Most telecom providers make deals with the big platforms regarding payment, but I guess S. Korea really wants Afreeca to be the only player in the streaming space. It could also be chaebol shenanigans.

      • DarkThoughts@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        There’s no “don’t wanna” unless there’s a “can’t” due to not being able to make a profit. If they could they would. It’s simple as that.

        • PrettyLights@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Companies don’t just want to make a profit, they want to make the largest profit. Plenty of businesses turn down profitable ventures in pursuit of more lucrative returns.

          • DarkThoughts@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Why would they do that if they aren’t mutually exclusive to one another? I’d get this notion if they’d started to do some sort of alternate way of providing for the SK market where their original platform would have been in the way but why close off profitable branches for no reason at all?

            • PrettyLights@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Because an organization or person only has so much bandwidth and attention. You can’t infinitely scale to grab every bit of profit.

              “Tripping over dollars to pick up pennies.”

          • Chailles@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            While true, that’s not exactly relevant when it’s a choice between losing a lot of money and not losing a lot of money.

    • CaptainSpaceman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      10x the cost of what tho? They just say “most other countries”, but tahts just spin and essentially meaningless without more data

    • Konraddo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      No need. Asian countries are not blocked from using Twitch. It’s just Twitch won’t have local business in Korea now.

    • sigmaklimgrindset@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      This’ll probably happen, anyone wanting to watch or stream on Twitch will probably just go through the Japanese servers. But Twitch isn’t that popular in Korea anyways, most of the Korea-based streamers on the platform have large foreign audiences.

    • roguetrick@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      What’s funny is Korean VPNs would be paying the fees to the ISPs instead, lol. ISPs still get their money.

      • redcalcium@lemmy.institute
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Which would be passed to their customers in the form of more expensive VPN price. Either way, the ISPs are the winner here, and I think someone mentioned that it’s practically impossible to create a new ISP due to regulatory capture so there will be no competition to challenge the oligopoly.

    • panchzila@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Are you trolling? Korea has a 97% literacy rate and is in the top 20 of best educated countries in the world.