Cakebatter
All Star
My Netflix, Max and Paramount+ subs alone offer me much better content than Cable offered at any point in time. No commercials, higher budget content, more international content, an ability to rate and judge the content, every piece of streaming content is inherently time-shifted, and faster transition from Theatrical releases to TV. All for only pay $40/month. I paid $40/month for basic cable in 1996 ($78/month in today's dollars). Since the late 90s Cable and Satellite has pushed quantity over quality (More channels), but when viewers are polled, they really only watch 10-20 channels on the high side. Cable customers are really only paying for 5 -10 channels, with the rest just bundled in. Before streaming, Cable customers begged for Ala Carte pricing, and streaming comes close to offering that. No one is going to gaslight us into believing what we want is somehow not what we really want. Customers aren't complaining about streaming prices and their overall cost. That's just the media or those too young to remember the days of Cable TV.
I can't speak for all other streaming services, but Netflix has persistently gotten better over the years, and I've been a Netflix users since it was just a DVD rental service. I remember when they first started streaming and it had the quality of ebaum's world videos. Today, they offer 4k, HDR, and Dolby Atmos audio for a lot of their content. People use to watch Netflix for movies that previously were Theatrical releases, now Netflix's most popular content is homegrown.
When it comes to stock prices, profitability has always taken a back seat to marketshare (ie Uber). Netflix can easily be profitable, but they know their stock price is more closely tied to their marketshare lead than their profitability. They bring in a ton of revenue, they just reinvest it in content. People act as if the bulk of Netflix revenue is going to server farms or infrastructure, when its not.
Yes, 2-3 years ago, streaming services were a better bargain, but like every new tech, it's sold cheap at first or at a loss, to gain marketshare. Its not unique. We see it at the supermarket with new food products. They too start cheap, then the manufacturer raises prices. No one is making a convincing argument for why or how higher priced streaming services being worse than cable TV? Even at the same price, 3 streaming apps is better than cable services. If Disney charged $70 for its Disney+/ESPN/Hulu bundle, its still offers more content and higher quality video/audio than its cable TV counterpart. That streaming bundle is only $20 right now.
I watch zero ads, I get better video and audio quality than cable, and have the ability to time shift (DVR) everything. I'm a very strategic TV watcher, so I don't channel surf, but if I did the Disney+/Hulu/ESPN bundle along with 2 other streaming services is roughly $50. Even that is still better and cheaper than cable TV. 
