You do realize they have "explained" this as a way to better address the cost of each aspect of the business individually? Why should people be happy that their money is going to subsidize the cost of a service they do not even use for others? We are talking about almost a 100% increase in price for the DVD by mail service (the way you do the math) within this year for a company that has no noticeable significant increases in cost for this aspect of their business.
Because their mail service was subsidized for years by their streaming service? Because their mailing service was much more expensive than streaming, and yet they were paying just as much (if not more, if you look at the $8 streaming only plan) for streaming as mail?
As I pointed out earlier, with postage and costs of business, $8 is a reasonable fee for a mail DVD service, in which you can get as many DVDs as you can watch and they can ship. We already put the Redbox argument in its place, so what's the problem? $8 a month for, let's say 10 DVDs, is unreasonable when they are literally being brought within feet or yards of your front door?
I don't see mail users subsidizing streaming, I see both sides pulling their weight. But at the end of the day, it's the same company responsible for both, and the value for streaming vs. DVDs is probably the same. With streaming you get instant gratification, but with DVDs you get a much larger selection.
I fail to see how this is a "ludicrous pricing plan".
And if it were three dollars people would still be upset. Nobody likes paying more money.
And yet, they all want that raise at work...