I continue to be baffled by this sale. Letterboxd was acquired by Tiny 3 years ago, Tiny’s entire premise is that they hold for the long term. Selling after 3 years is not long term. I don’t understand why Tiny would undermine their raison d’etre unless it’s because the founders (who retain a minority stake) are pushing for it.

Tiny just recently updated their website to emphasize how long they’ve owned each property which is especially confusing given they’re now offloading things https://tiny.com/companies/letterboxd

“Tiny's model — long-term ownership, founder autonomy, no pressure to flip the company in three to five years — fit naturally.”

…?

Having such a high profile film rating site be potentially owned by a film studio has serious conflict of interest issues. Same goes for amazon buying imdb and they've already used that to adjust scores for at least one film they released because of bad reviews. I'm happy to see this get some attention here after my submission didn't because the potential implications of this purchase are big.

Edit: I believe I made an error re the claim imdb changed the score of at least one amazon owned film. See replies for more info. Apologies!

Is there an ATproto or activity pub version of letterboxd? I like A24, but not sure how much I trust Sony or the NYT to run it reasonably

Amazing. So Imdb 2.0 has become Imdb 2.0.

I use https://movielens.org/ and it is ran by the University of Minnesota.

Why not $3B? or $30B, even?

Damn, that asking price is insane

Heh, the name makes it sound like a daemon.

service letterboxd enable; service letterboxd start

Can't wait for the enshittification of Letterboxd.

Dear God, don't let Amazon do what it did to Goodreads here.

Truly, everything good gets milked dry for someone's exit. I know that's usually celebrated in a forum like this, but is it possible things are just a bit out of balance?