Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Netflix Throttling Heavy Renters

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the don't-use-what-you-pay-for dept.

dankinit writes "Netflix has begun using a 'fairness algorithm' that slows shipments of movies to heavy users to protect profits, according to an MSNBC article. Netflix revised its terms of use in January 2005 to read, 'In determining priority for shipping and inventory allocation, we give priority to those members who receive the fewest DVDs through our service'. Since revising this policy last year, more and more users are realizing 'heavy renters are more likely to encounter shipping delays and less likely to immediately be sent their top choices' according to the article."

67 of 550 comments (clear)

  1. ironic by User+956 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's ironic.. because just today, they sent me this email:

    Since you're former member of Netflix, we thought you'd like to know that Netflix now offers a greater selection of plans that start at just $9.99 a month. Come back and enjoy the improvements we've made, including our new Friends and Profiles features. With over 55,000 movies and delivery in about 1 business day, Netflix is better than ever.

    I guess "screwing over people who watch a lot of movies" is one of their "improvements" that they've made.

    --
    The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
    1. Re:ironic by Hogwash+McFly · · Score: 2, Interesting


      I guess "screwing over people who watch a lot of movies" is one of their "improvements" that they've made.

      Actually, this is nothing new, despite the summary for this story leading with Netflix has begun using a 'fairness algorithm'. The article I link to dates back to April 2003 and such 'punishments' were apparent back then.

      I am signed up with ScreenSelect, a British version of Netflix, and it can be quite obvious that they throttle heavy users. For instance, I'm on the most expensive three-disk plan for £15 a month and if I were to send all of the movies back on a Monday, I will only receive two disks back on Wednesday. Looking at the selection page of the website, it will describe the third film as 'awaiting allocation' and the trailing DVD will usually arrive on Thursday, using the above timeline as an example.

      Having said that, I keep my account with ScreenSelect because I can still average 10-12 films a month and if you look at what I am paying it is good value when compared to walk-in rental like BlockBuster. Furthermore, the selection is huge, the website is excellent in all aspects and they are generally quite good in getting your high priority titles out to you first (although I hardly ever rent new releases so make of that what you will).

      --
      Mother, do you think they'll like this sig?
    2. Re:ironic by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      All of what you say is true, but none of it has anything to do with the fact that by claiming their service is unlimited, Netflix is lying. Do you not understand that? If a company would go out of business by doing what it claims to do, then it shouldn't be making those claims; it's really that simple.

      Your "welfare state" crack makes it pretty easy to guess your politics, so I'll add this: it's bizarre, but not at all surprising, that those who will defend just about any corporate atrocity in the name of "maximizing value for the shareholders" are the first to jump on customers and/or workers of those corporations when they try to maximize value for themselves. It's a two-way street, folks. If corporations are going to act like amoral predators, why shouldn't Average Joes act the same way in dealing with them?

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    3. Re:ironic by pla · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The guy who's interviewed in the article says he used to recieve 22 movies a month and no longer does. Holy shit, don't these people have no life of any kind?

      I watch VERY little TV, and can still EASILY watch up to twenty movies a month (even more in the winter) without lacking "a life"...

      During spring through late fall, Saturday and Sundays I'll go out fairly early for a nice hike, usually come home 6-8 hours later. Make dinner, watch a movie or two. Two on Friday after work, two on Saturday, one on Sunday, that adds up to twenty without wasting my life away in front of the TV.



      Thirdly, did they really expect 'unlimited' to mean unlimited?

      If you buy a 32" TV only to take it home and find it has a 20" screen in an 8.5" bezel, would you feel just a little cheated there? (And although that may sounds extreme, TVs and monitors NEVER actually measure their advertised value for that exact reason, often falling up to a full inch smaller).

      So yeah, it bothers me that Netflix translates "unlimited" as "as many as we want you to have". Their cheesy little mantra of "no reasonable person would really think they could get 8,000 movies a month" just doesn't cut it... NO ONE would have complained if they "only" received 45 movies per month, which would equal the 2-day turnaround imposed by the physical realities of sending it by mail. Even a mere 30 per month, at a 3-day turnaround, I doubt would have resulted in so much grumbling. But I haven't even hit 20 in over a year.



      Fourth, do you think there's someone else offering a sweeter deal? Good luck trying to find it.

      And that, my friend, describes the ONLY reason I still have a netflix subscription. Even throttled down to 12-15 per month, it still costs a quarter what renting from a physical Blockbuster does; and no one can beat Netflix for the size of their catalog.

      That doesn't make me a happy customer, however, and eventually, some company WILL come along and offer the same thing without lying about what "unlimited" means. And when that happens, Netflix will learn how the local crack dealer feels when the Mexican mob moves in.

    4. Re:ironic by jp10558 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      See, this is what bothers me. They have several tiers of service already based on how many discs you can get at a time, and certain ones limit how many per month.

      Why not either extend the limit to x per month on all the plans (annoying to heavy renters though) or just raise the price of the plan to where even if the person watched each movie they got the day they got it and turned it around, Netflix still makes a profit?

      Or, even better, do both, but have the ones with monthly limits be cheaper (like now, but allow some more expensive plans with 15 movies a month rather than say 4).

      I hate all these "hidden costs" now adays. Just put the real price up front, and charge what you have to to provide the service, don't put in hidden or vague delays, limits, caps whatever.

      --
      Opera, Proxomitron-Grypen,GPG 0x0A1C6EE3
    5. Re:ironic by dougmc · · Score: 2, Interesting
      From the article, it's not clear to me whether they're A) prioritizing requests so customers with fewer requests are more likely to get them or B) simply delaying the requests of active users, even if they have the movie, in order to save shipping.
      There's two effects going on 1) light users have much better chances of getting movies that are in high demand quickly -- heavy users generally have to wait until the movie is no longer in heavy demand before getting a new movie (unless they manage to get it on the day it comes out -- probably a weakness in their algorithm) and 2) heavy users will often have shipments of replacement movies delayed by a day or two, even though the movie is available now.

      Netflix has been admitting that #1 happens for a while (presumably since Jan 2005, I guess) but has been actively denying that #2 happens, at least until very recently. We've been discussing this sort of thing on the Netflix Operations discussion list for quite some time now, and this is the first time that I've heard Netflix admit that #2 happens.

      There are other ways that throttling could be done -- Netflix could deny that they've received certain movies right away, and instead check them in tomorrow or the next day. They could also deliberately ship a movie to somebody from across the country rather than from their same city, even though the movie is available in the same city, which would delay the receipt of the movie by a few days. People have accused Netflix of deliberately doing both of these things on the list above, and they seem to happen more often than one would expect, but not often enough to really show that Netflix has been doing it intentionally. It may be that Netflix has experimented with these methods of throttling, or that it was just a few accidents that were blown out of porportion. I don't know.

      But the throttling that Netflix is now admitting to -- we've known they've been doing this for a long time, and they've been denying at least part of the it for a long time.

      Of course only Netflix knows for sure.
      Well, what is `false advertising' is not for Netflix to decide -- it's for a court of law. But the users of Netflix have definately been able to determine at least much of what Netflix has been doing, for a long time. I'm glad to see that Netflix is finally admitting it.
    6. Re:ironic by dougmc · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Do you really think this makes sense?
      Yes. It makes perfect sense.

      Suppose you have a Netflix user who returns every movie he gets from Netflix the very next day -- he's a heavy user. Suppose this user lives in a city where Netflix also has a distribution center, so mail only takes one day back and forth. And suppose that Netflix wants to slow him down and reduce the number of movies he gets, because he's costing them money (being a heavy user.) One possible way to do this, one that's somewhat subtle if not done too often, is to send some of his movies from the center across the country, even though they're also available at the local center. That way, a movie will take 3-4 days to reach him rather than just one day. Each time a movie takes 4 days to reach him rather than one, that's one less movie he can rent that month.

      You need to put some more thought into your conspiracies, dude.
      You need to read more carefully, dude. I didn't say Netflix did this, only that they've been accused of it. (I personally think that if they have done it (and this is an if), they've not done it very often, at least not to me.)

      But whether they've done it or not -- it still makes sense. Netflix does occasionally send movies from across the country -- this is a well known fact, and one that they've always admitted. If you want some obscure movie and Netflix only has two copies of it, it makes perfect sense that they may have to send it from Kalamazoo rather than your local city. But to actually prove that they do this intentionally when they don't have to, that would be tricky -- it would require that 1) they do it often, or 2) you have lots of data from lots of people, both heavy and light users, to analyze, or 3) have access to Netflix's inventory information. And as far as I know, nobody has shown that Netflix has done this, at least not in any very convincing manner.

  2. Voluntary and well-understood by Toby+The+Economist · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As long as a contract is well understood by both parties and voluntarilty entered into, it's fine.

    NF have discovered they can't operate an entirely flat-rate service and have modified their behaviour accordingly.

    One could argue that customers originally signed up to a contract which has been unilaterially modified; but I would expect the T&C to allow them in that circumstance to terminate their contract without prejudice.

    NF can offer a certain service for a certain cost. Either you like it or you don't. No one forces you to buy. If they change what they offer (for better or for worse, although one wouldn't anticipate customers terminating contracts after a service improvement) then you can leave the contract.

    It would only be ethically wrong if they could change their contract and you could *not* leave.

    1. Re:Voluntary and well-understood by kfg · · Score: 5, Informative

      As long as a contract is well understood by both parties and voluntarilty entered into, it's fine.

      I don't suppose you RTFA and discovered that they denied it for months after they'd been doing it and only changed the terms of service after a lawsuit was actually filed, which they offered $2.5 million to settle?

      KFG

    2. Re:Voluntary and well-understood by wfberg · · Score: 3, Informative

      As long as a contract is well understood by both parties and voluntarilty entered into, it's fine.

      For existing customers, it's a simple bait-and-switch tactic. Offer one thing, deliver the other.

      For new customers (or those who are actually informed of the choice and consciously agree with it) the new contract is basically, well, not understood. A contract is a promise to do something in return for something else. The something else is clear; you have to pay netflix money. And in return? Well, they won't say you will get anything. Not guaranteed.

      Of course, people were already getting delays, so what's changed isn't what you're getting. But it's the fact netflix doesn't say they want to even make the effort anymore. They promise... nothing.

      That's not a contract. That's a lottery.

      Seeing as they're called "netflix" and not "loan-a-dvd lottery co." I'd say they're trying to pull a fast one.

      --
      SCO employee? Check out the bounty
  3. Bait by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Switch

    It's like the British ADSL industry... you sell something you know to be unsustainable, then add fair usage policies.

    1. Re:Bait by loraksus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A very good comparison.

      My experience is with the Canadian internet access industry - and mirrors (and, I believe, will predict) the netflix situation quite well.

      Shaw (who provides cable internet) once advertised "unlimited" service.
      Once people started signing up, they realized that they weren't willing to actually offer unlimited service.
      Then they put a statement about "excessive usage" in the AUP - it wasn't defined, of course, but people still got nasty letters and the mouthbreathers who man their "excessive use" line even threatened to charge people for "excessive usage". These "excessive usage" fines were, of course, pulled completely out of their ass. No documentation could be found regarding when the limit was reached, what the overage charges were, etc, etc, but people were still threatened with, and possibly even were charged those fines. An almost magical fee, but one that would appear on your bill and would have to be paid, or your service would be disconnected and your account sent to collections.
      After several nasty letters from lawyers and possibly some lawsuits, Shaw finally decided to write down the bandwidth limit in their advertising, at almost the exact same time their competitors did the same. Sounds like a couple people had a meeting.

      What you can clearly see is that not only was Shaw involved in false advertising, but it continued to engage in such criminal activity far after their illegal activities were exposed. Moreover, their actions clearly were to the detriment of the person buying the services. Furthermore, collusion - whether intentional or just the other company matching policies - between Shaw and its competitors has led to an continuously decreasing level of service for the end user and shaw has suffered virtually no consequences.

      In the end, netflix will face virtually no consequences (and before anyone says anything about the settlement, please, don't waste your breath. Bumping your users to the next tier for a month - and not bumping them back down at the end - is undeniably a win win situation for netflix).
      Furthermore, the shady - if not outright fraudulent - actions of netflix in stating the return date of dvds*, has gone, and will go unpunished. In the end, blockbuster (ok it has) and the completion will eventually adopt a similar tos - putting in writing what it is doing - and the situation will only get worse as time goes on. Furthermore, "advanced throttling" - such as sending the dvds on time, but from a service center across the country - will become commonplace, since once something is in writing, it will be used.

      And finally - and perhaps most importantly - "unlimited" will still be used in their advertising until a regulatory agency or a number of lawsuits convince them to change it - both Blockbuster and Netflix currently do on their websites - even though their ToS states that they throttle. And have no doubt, once one company changes it, the other will change their advertising within a month.

      *If you're being throttled, if you send back 3 dvds - even 3 dvds in the same envelope - netflix will receive 2 a couple minutes apart and then "receive" the last one several hours later. Try it out ;)

      --
      1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
  4. customer service denied anything was going on by syneca · · Score: 5, Informative

    Netflix did this to me. When I contacted customer service to ask why movies were suddenly taking so long to arrive, they sent me unrelated generic responses and then blamed it on the postal system. I finally sent them this email:

    "Thank you for the response. It does not address my question. The problem is not with the transit time; it is with the processing time at Netflix. When I ship the DVDs back, they get there in one day. Then there is a period of 5 to 6 business days before the next DVD is shipped to me. Once it is actually shipped, it arrives in one day. I recently had to rent a movie from Blockbuster because Netflix took so long to process my DVDs. Netflix has wide selection, but I am becoming frustrated with the generic customer service responses and the lack of service in general. Please send me a real reply."

    and they replied with this one:

    "Thanks for your inquiry.

    What titles are you referring to specifically? Rentals process within one business day from the time we receive a return.

    We process nearly 100% of returns the same day we receive them. When we check-in a return, an e-mail is automatically and promptly sent to you to let you know that we have received your DVD.

    Our goal is to ship you the DVDs listed highest in your Queue. We try to ship you DVDs from the distribution center closest to you so that you get movies quickly. Often, on the same day that we receive a DVD from you, we will ship the next available DVD from your Queue. In certain instances, your next available DVD will not ship until the next business day following our receipt of your returned movie. This can occur, for example, when your top choices are not available to you from your closest distribution center or the number of shipments to be processed by the distribution center on that day has been exceeded. When this happens, your DVD will ship on the next business day and may come from an alternate distribution center.

    If you have any further questions or concerns, please feel free to contact us.

    Thanks,
    Scott,
    Netflix Customer Service"

  5. Re:Allah Ackbar! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You apparently don't know Jesus is also an important prophet in the Islam. Learn to troll better, dumbass.

  6. Re:subject by Professor_UNIX · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Luckily, they're not the only game in town. Though I would probably feel dirty renting movies through them.

    On the scale of evil companies, from 1 to 10, Netflix is a 2 and Blockbuster is an 11. Face it, they're just trying to slow down the DVD pirates and I don't see anything incredibly wrong with that. It does look damn suspicious for a guy to turn around 3-5 movies a day and honestly claim he's NOT pirating them and just shipping them back as soon as his DVD ripper is done grabbing the movie. I'm sure there's a small percentage of legitimate people out there that really do nothing else all day but watch movies from sun up to sun down and they don't have cable or satellite, but they're few and far between. If you look at more legitimate users they most likely see patterns like people holding onto DVDs for several weeks at a time until they find a chance to watch them whereas the DVD pirates are turning around 10-15 discs a week (or more).

  7. not the only ones... by loraksus · · Score: 5, Informative

    Blockbuster also does this - basically, if you send 3 dvds back - even in the same envelope, blockbuster will "receive" 2 at x time and then "receive" the other one later.

    We aren't stupid, so we can see that this is clearly bulllshit on their part.

    As a result, you'll only get 2 dvds shipped out that day, and a third will ship a day later. That said, blockbuster is really forgiving about missing dvds (damn post office lost 15 or so in a couple months)

    BTW if you want a free month with blockbuster and have had their service for a while (3 months in my case), go to the cancellation page and they will give you a free month or two.
    Not sure what netflix does for customer retention, but I'm sure it is something. The legal settlement with netflix is a joke, btw (google for details)

    Also, for those with "long delays" for certain movies under netflix - try killing your queue and re-adding the delayed movie. Theory is that they have to send you something and you should get bumped. Of course, this does kill your queue...

    --
    1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
  8. So don't advertise "unlimited" by Huntr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    FTFA:

    Hastings said the company has no specified limit on rentals, but "`unlimited' doesn't mean you should expect to get 10,000 a month."

    Well, der, no one wants 10k movies a month.

    But, if Netflix had a point they didn't really want people going over, why not just advertise X movies per month, instead of unlimited? According to the articles, most people don't rent more than 11 per month. Set the limit higher than that, but at a point where they can make the profit they are aiming for with throttling.

    They don't end up looking like buttholes if they are just honest about it up front.

    1. Re:So don't advertise "unlimited" by globaljustin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They don't end up looking like buttholes if they are just honest about it up front.

      you're 100% right. What is wrong, however, is that our way of doing business rewards businesses who are as hidden and dishonest about their business practices as possible. Really, it comes down to pleasing shareholders vs. customers...

      good businesspeople understand that pleasing shareholders and customers is, at it's core, the same thing...anyone who makes a distinction is selling out

      --
      Thank you Dave Raggett
  9. horrible but expected by globaljustin · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I really hate that this is happening, but it makes total sense. First, netfix has its customers by the balls. NF is guarateed that automatically billed monthly fee. They are counting on people being ignorant to new, abusive policies like this one that penalizes people for using the service they pay for.

    Before I get any further, let me address your defense of NF:

    It would only be ethically wrong if they could change their contract and you could *not* leave

    first of all, shame on you for defending such abusive business practices. second, this is only ethical if NF sent out a notice saything something to the effect of:

    we are changing our policy regarding rentals. we have designed a computer program to identify people who rent excessively (more than x number of rentals a month) and those excessive renters will have their movies shipped later, and be put lower in the que for new releases


    Anything less than the above admission from NF in PLAIN LANGUAGE is abuse of their understanding with their clients, and no ammount of counterpoint/cabal.bs can change that fact.

    another thing, from TFA:

    After collecting consumer opinions about the Web's 40 largest retailers last year, Ann Arbor, Mich., research firm ForeSeeResults rated Netflix as "the cream of the crop in customer satisfaction."

    so this is what passes as collecting customer feedback??? this 'foreseeresults' company is probably full of shit...just like most of the people in their profession...an evil, self-sustaining virus of a profession that only circulates bullshit and misperception.
    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
    1. Re:horrible but expected by paeanblack · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I really hate that this is happening, but it makes total sense. First, netfix has its customers by the balls. NF is guarateed that automatically billed monthly fee. They are counting on people being ignorant to new, abusive policies like this one that penalizes people for using the service they pay for.

      Give me a break...am I supposed to believe that the Netflix customer that gets 12 movies per week is some wide-eyed babe struggling to understand this brave new world of technology?

      Bullshit.

      The only reason the abusers have been copying movies faster than they can watch them is they knew the deal was too good to last. Otherwise, what would be the hurry?

      The people getting throttled aren't "ignorant to new, abusive polices"; they have been scrutinizing the Netflix TOS and dreading this day's arrival. They know they got a good ride. Now the ride is over. Deal with it.

    2. Re:horrible but expected by farker+haiku · · Score: 5, Interesting


      Give me a break...am I supposed to believe that the Netflix customer that gets 12 movies per week is some wide-eyed babe struggling to understand this brave new world of technology?

      Bullshit.

      The people getting throttled aren't "ignorant to new, abusive polices"; they have been scrutinizing the Netflix TOS and dreading this day's arrival. They know they got a good ride. Now the ride is over. Deal with it.

      Actually, my wife wife and I just had a baby (well, she did all the hard work). My wife was just asking me last night how to add a header to a word document. Not two breaths later she was saying she had gained a reputation at work for being the tech savvy person in the office. When I was done laughing, I told her how to do the header thing.

      While you may wonder what this has to do with netflix, my wife watches dvds from netflix all the friggin time. She only works 12 hours a week. The baby sleeps a lot. We don't even have a DVD burner.

      Recently, my wife has been complaining that the netflix rentals have been taking longer and longer to arrive. It seems that every three day holiday weekend for the last few months we've had to go to Blockbuster to rent a movie - simply because there wasn't a netflix movie in the house. I'm emailing the link to my wife, and I guarantee we'll be considering alternate vendors.

      --
      Your sig(k) has been stolen. There is a puff of smoke!
  10. Re:subject by brennz · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is such a crock of shit.

    Lots of people do not have cable/satellite and prefer to watch DVDs only. Some of them for religious reasons, other economic, and others still to escape the low quality programming.

    I have noticed that when I turn around Netflix DVDs the fastest, the new DVDs tend to take longer.

    I'm going to look over NF's competitors now, to see if they have any deals going. F'ing NF.

  11. Re:What's the big deal? by stove · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'd love to walk to my local video store (really), but...

    -The closest video store is about 7 miles away. The closest real video store (not just one wall of videos) is more like 15 miles away.
    - Said video store does not carry old silent movies, current documentaries or eclectic TV shows. Which, interestingly enough, is what I'm interested in.

    I'm unhappy that Netflix is doing this, but it does pretty much provide me with a relatively unique service.

    --
    Ack!
  12. Netflix contact info by loraksus · · Score: 4, Informative

    Give 'em a ring.
    1-888-638-3549

    1-800-290-4518
    M-F 6AM-7PM, Sa-Su 6AM-2:30PM

    --
    1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
  13. Re:What's the big deal? by Mikey-San · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's not an issue of being lazy. Blockbuster is notorious for either not carrying titles or carrying shitty, edited versions of the titles they DO carry. See Requiem for a Dream as an example. It's only been recently that Blockbuster has started doing away with non-widescreen DVDs, too.

    Its big-chain competitors aren't really much better, selection-wise, and the non-chain local stores I've lived near have always had pretty bad return windows compared to the bigger guys.

    Little non-chains == more eclectic selection, small return windows (in my experience, that is . . . your mileage may vary)

    Blockbuster and similar chains == Better return windows, crappier selection

    Netflix == Good selection, kickass return window

    Once you add "it comes right to your door", it's absolutely no wonder that NF has taken off.

    --
    Mikey-San
    Karma: +Eleventy billion (mostly affected by watching Celebrity Jeopardy)
  14. It's my fault by fishdan · · Score: 4, Informative
    I don't know that I'd call it "Screwing Over" but to be fair, but it is deceptive advertizing. I'm not a huge fan of class action lawsuits, but I do trust them to take care of things like this. Everyone should make sure that they get their piece of the settlement, and feel free to organize and sue again until their practices are actually outlined.

    I wonder though if my habits screwed everyone...my general netflix usage is DVDShrinking the disc as soon as I get it (my mail gets delivered about 2:00pm) and then walking it down to the Post Office for the 5:00pm outgoing mail collection. I've wondered if this sets off any flags, and I guess it does. I think maybe I'll throw a 24 hour delay into there.

    My Bad.

    --
    Nothing great was ever achieved without enthusiasm
    1. Re:It's my fault by vp_development · · Score: 5, Funny

      ...My Bad... If you're sharing on p2p, there's no need to apologize to me.

    2. Re:It's my fault by Reliant-1864 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      While we're on the subject of "ulimited" being deceptive, let's also sue ISPs for offering "unlimited" internet access. I wanted to have 800 hours of interent access in January, but because of my ISP's "throttling", I was unable to exceed 744 hours of internet access, a far cry from the "unlimited" they advertised.

      And how about downloading? My dial-up was throttled down to 28,8 which meant I couldn't download an unlimited amount of content, my so called unlimited account was throttled to force me to have a limit of less than 9 gigs of traffic per month. How is that unlimited?

      It's because of stupid claims like this that you get those idiotic warning lables on products, like a bag of peanutes that says "Peanuts" still needs to have the label "Warning: May contain peanut products", or commercials that say "Professional driver in a closed course" when showing F1 racers, and the classic "Do not try this at home"

      If they were to put a numeric limit, such as "3 DVDs per day, with a limit of 20 per month", you'd still have people accusing them of deceptive practice if they couldn't physically reach 20 per month because of time constraints. Must we have ads with more legalese words just so lawsuit phreaks don't run around pointing "Hey! That's not technically correct, it's deceptive advertising".

      "Unlimited" means without limit, but if you give a time period of a "month", you have already limited it, therefor, it can never truely be unlimited. If you rented thousands of trucks and completely emptied out their warehouse, it still wouldn't be enough to qualify as "unlimited"

      --
      The universe is held together with duct tape and karma. What goes around, comes around, and gets stuck to your forehead.
    3. Re:It's my fault by paeanblack · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Copying Netflix movies is like bringing a doggie bag to an all-you-can-eat buffet.

      Suing them for throttling is like complaining when the waitress won't clear your plates every two minutes.

      In advertising, "unlimited" is still used within the context of reasonable behavior. If copying a Netflix movie were "reasonable", you would not need to ship the discs back, since they could make a new copy themselves for less than the cost of the return postage and let you keep the old one instead of bothering with DVDShrink.

    4. Re:It's my fault by Heem · · Score: 5, Funny

      "I wanted to have 800 hours of interent access in January, but because of my ISP's "throttling", I was unable to exceed 744 hours of internet access, a far cry from the "unlimited" they advertised."

      You're not going to be happy about this then....

      This month, I heard they are only going to be allowing you 672 hours.

      --
      Don't Tread on Me
    5. Re:It's my fault by iphayd · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Suing them for throttling is like complaining when the waitress won't clear your plates every two minutes."

      No, its more like complaining that you can't get a new plate until 5 minutes after you've finished with the food on the previous plate.

      The advertisement states "Unlimited," which should translate into "Everything we can do to make sure that you have three movies checked out to you at any one time." Having secret or public delays is not right, because that is the antithesis of "Unlimited." In otherwords, NetFlix is lying when they say "Unlimited."

      The whole idea behind "three movies" was that it takes roughly three days for the old movie to get to Netflix and the new movie to get to you. You should be able to get 28-31 movies/month if you watch a movie a day. However, if you are watching that many movies, I suggest you do something else.

      As for those jackasses that are ripping the movies. Why? 1) what you are doing is illegal, not just on DMCA standpoint, but also because you don't even own the media. You are renting the movie. Renting voids any right for time-shifting, media shifting, backup, or any of the other excuses you think you have. 2) If you want the movie that bad, either buy it or put it back in the Queue for when you want to watch it again. There are very few movies I have an interest in buying anymore. I just add them to my queue. If they are good enough to watch again, I return them and add them back into the end of my Queue. When they come up again, I decide if that is what I want to watch. If not, I move it back again.

    6. Re:It's my fault by msobkow · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not to defend outright piracy, but I know many people (sometimes myself as well) who rent and return movies within 24 hours. It only takes a couple hours to watch a movie, and it beats the heck out of TV tripe most of the time. Some of them will watch a couple movies a night.

      So for them, this "heavy usage pattern" is perfectly normal and not a sign of piracy. Having their shipments "throttled" means they aren't getting the full use of the service they signed up for. It's up to the service provider to adjust capacity and/or pricing tiers to deal with the load, not choke off paid subscriptions that actually use the service as advertised.

      --
      I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    7. Re:It's my fault by NeoSkandranon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Some people have a fetish for cataloging data it seems. I know people who rip movies even though they have no intention of ever watching them again, it's just a point of penis envy competition to point out they have that many binders of ripped DVDs

      --
      If you can't see the value in jet powered ants you should turn in your nerd card. - Dunbal (464142)
    8. Re:It's my fault by vp_development · · Score: 3, Insightful
      There is a perception that there is no legitimate reason for violating the DMCA, and that people who are doing this are selfish. Think what you want, but I have an anonymous friend who spends uncompensated hours a week ACTIVELY opposing copyright law by breaking it. He's not doing it for shits and giggles. He's doing it because he thinks copyright is morally wrong. I'm gonna throw some Thoreau at you:
      Unjust laws exist: shall we be content to obey them, or shall we endeavor to amend them, and obey them until we have succeeded, or shall we transgress them at once? Men, generally, under such a government as this, think that they ought to wait until they have persuaded the majority to alter them. They think that, if they should resist, the remedy would be worse than the evil. But it is the fault of the government itself that the remedy is worse than the evil. It makes it worse. Why is it not more apt to anticipate and provide for reform? Why does it not cherish its wise minority? Why does it cry and resist before it is hurt? Why does it not encourage its citizens to put out its faults, and do better than it would have them? Why does it always crucify Christ and excommunicate Copernicus and Luther, and pronounce Washington and Franklin rebels?...

      As for adopting the ways of the State has provided for remedying the evil, I know not of such ways. They take too much time, and a man's life will be gone. I have other affairs to attend to. I came into this world, not chiefly to make this a good place to live in, but to live in it, be it good or bad. A man has not everything to do, but something; and because he cannot do everything, it is not necessary that he should be petitioning the Governor or the Legislature any more than it is theirs to petition me; and if they should not hear my petition, what should I do then? But in this case the State has provided no way: its very Constitution is the evil. This may seem to be harsh and stubborn and unconcilliatory; but it is to treat with the utmost kindness and consideration the only spirit that can appreciate or deserves it. So is all change for the better, like birth and death, which convulse the body.

      There are certainly people who are ripping music/movies/software for kicks, their own usage, or to share with friends/family -- but they are not part of my scene. I'm doing it because I do not support the idea of intellectual property. Period. Call me an extremist if you will, I think my ideas are less radical than most of the people demonstrating in the media for this that and the other.

      I think that anything man can think of he should share with his fellow man. I should get paid for my service, and my labor, but I completely disapprove of people OWNING ideas. Millions die each year because of patents on medicine. Millions live in poverty because of their lack of access (no pun intended) to productivity enhancing machinery and software. I don't know that anyone dies because they can't hear the latest Kanye West song, but I object tot he fact that the industry deliberately surpresses musicians whose ideas are not "commercial" enough. I'm convinced that powerful media companies war against media they do not/cannot own, and this affects us because we are limited in our choices to whom the powerful media companies are willing to present to us.

      And they do this because of the money involved. Only by making their products equally (in)valuable to the products that I want access too, can I be assured of access to everything. I think the system is broken, and the only way it can be repaired is to demonstrate to everyone how actually broken it is. I am doing what I can to bring down the system.

      Call me a jackass all you want -- I think of myself as a citizen. This is my civil disobedience. There are others like me, and considering the damage one person can do to copyrights, with our infantile technology now -- imagine how much damage we can do to copyright in 20 years, with 100 recruits. P2P now is about gaining those recruits, but eventually, we WILL crush copyright.

      We're here, we share. get used to it.

    9. Re:It's my fault by jZnat · · Score: 2, Funny

      Troll? Do the mods realise that there are only 744 hours in a normal month? The parent is joking...

      --
      'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
  15. few days by wwmedia · · Score: 2, Funny

    hmm why wait few days, when ur nearest Usenet outlet delivers in few hours? beat that netflix

  16. Old News (On Slashdot in 2003!) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Analysis of Netflix's DVD Allocation System - "Netflix uses the number of movies you have previously rented to determine your priority in getting movies. The more movies you rented during your last billing cycle, the less chance you have of receiving a movie versus an individual who has rented fewer movies. This is why new users have great success getting their movies and older or heavy users have a difficult time getting some movies."

  17. In fairness to Netflix by Wansu · · Score: 2, Funny



    Perhaps they just have too many customers.
     

    --
    Wansu, th' chinese sailor
  18. Their Advertising is the problem by Crashmarik · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Netflix still advertises as an unlimited service. They make no attempt to inform the subscriber that they are throttling them. This is at the very least a deceptive practice.

    Now when you couple the throttling practice with the terms of the lawsuit settlement, the subscriber gets a bump in service level for one month theres a real problem. What prevents them from just further adjusting their shipping algorithym so there is no actual bump ??

    Say what you want the problem is netflix not informing their customers about what they are actually buying.

  19. Broken DVDs per customer (dirty but point across) by layer3switch · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Once in a while break the DVDs and tell them it was "Postal Service" fault if Netflix lies to you that your DVD is delayed because of "Postal Service."

    That oughta fuckup that fairness algorithm.

    If it's the cost, just increase the subscription fee. If it's the piracy, just limit the DVD rental amount per month. But don't fucking lie to your customers like everyone is a cheap ass thief who's out to get everyone in Hollywood.

    --
    "Don't let fools fool you. They are the clever ones."
  20. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  21. The problem with monthly fees by Kris_J · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Whenever you have an ongoing monthly subscription to something the provider has no incentive to do anything fast, or at all. Microsoft has demonstrated this, as has Blizzard, now its Netflix's turn. When I trialed a similar system in Australia I worked out that postal delays and scratched discs were like free money to the company. (Meanwhile, the selection was seriously crap.) These days I buy ex-rental DVDs from a friend at work who also owns an old-school video rental place.

  22. How to piss off your biggest customers by 99luftballon · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm not a Netflix user but I know those that are. The heaviest users tend to be evangelists for the company and have an important role in growing the company via word of mouth, the most effective form of advertising.

    If this gets widespread coverage I can see them having some serious problems, that would only be slightly mitigated by people who aren't heavy users joining for the preferential service they would get.

    While the company isn't doing anything worse than credit card companies that cut the time required for payment for those that pay in time in an attempt to get them to miss the due date. If you don't like those kind of practices don't use the company.

  23. From TFA: just wanted 18 to 22 movies per month by michaelmalak · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Since you obviously didn't read TFA, here is the relevant excerpt:
    Netflix typically sends about 13 movies per month to Villanueva's home in Warren, Mich. -- down from the 18 to 22 DVDs he once received before the company's automated system identified him as a heavy renter and began delaying his shipments to protect its profits.
    That comes to about 36 to 44 hours per month, which is just 26% to 32% of the 138 hours per month of television that the average adult in the U.S. watches.
  24. Re:subject by mikael · · Score: 4, Informative

    It does look damn suspicious for a guy to turn around 3-5 movies a day and honestly claim he's NOT pirating them and just shipping them back as soon as his DVD ripper is done grabbing the movie. I'm sure there's a small percentage of legitimate people out there that really do nothing else all day but watch movies from sun up to sun down and they don't have cable or satellite, but they're few and far between.

    In both the US and Canada, I've met bus drivers (mainly in their 50's) who would work long hours all week, and then rent a stackload of videos so they could spend the entire weekend indoor watching films from dawn to dusk without going outside - driving in traffic for five days was enough of the outside world for them.

    --
    Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
  25. Not an improvement but biz as usual. by MisterSquid · · Score: 5, Informative

    I guess "screwing over people who watch a lot of movies" is one of their "improvements" that they've made.

    I'd like to gently disagree with the article and with the parent poster because this is something, I believe, that Netflix has been doing since day one. I'm guessing, though, that now they either have a auditable trail (e.g. software) or for other reasons they are formalizing throttling frequent renters.

    In 2002 I began a Netflix subscription which back in those days came in one all-you-can-watch for about $20.00 (iirc). I watch movies sometimes three at a go because it is a professional interest of mine and, well, I love film. So, for my first couple of months, I was watching maybe 12 films a month.

    My third month or so, I stopped getting DVDs. I checked my queue and discovered they'd not received the DVDs I returned. After 2 weeks, I reported the DVDs missing even though, by gum, I knew I had sent them back. My queue resumed and when I returned the 5 DVDs within one week of viewing them the USPS mysteriously failed to deliver those, too. While considering reporting these lost DVDs to the US Postmaster, I came across an article in WIRED explaining how Netflix loses money on frequent renters: "Some subscribers rent twenty or more. (Which is a problem: Netflix loses money on postage for households that rent more than five a month.)" (emphasis added).

    That told me all I needed to know and I cancelled my Netflix subscription. Occam's razor is here inadequate since it would suggest that the DVDs were in fact getting lost in the mail. But I had been using the USPS for objects large and small for 20 years by that point and not a single piece of mail had ever been lost either coming to or going from me. And I'm supposed to believe that somehow, of all the mail I send, that only my DVDs to Netflix get lost?

    Netflix is a company like any other in that it wants to make a profit. However, in 2002 they engaged (I believe) in unethical business practices to protect their bottom line rather than, for example, simply billing renters for postage overages. Netflix will never get any of my money ever again and when Internet distribution finally kills them, I probably won't care enough to tell this story again.

    --
    blog
    1. Re:Not an improvement but biz as usual. by dnoyeb · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think its rather stupid on Netflix part. Those passionate users are likely passionate advocates as well. This is what happens when bean-counters run the ship.

    2. Re:Not an improvement but biz as usual. by LordNimon · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Most likely, someone at the post office was stealing the discs. The envelopes are very easy to identify and steal.

      --
      And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
      To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
    3. Re:Not an improvement but biz as usual. by lubricated · · Score: 4, Insightful

      >> drained of any profits by freeloaders

      yeah, those damn freeloader, actually expecting to get what they paid for. Who do they think they are.

      --
      It has been statistically shown that helmets increase the risk of head injury.
    4. Re:Not an improvement but biz as usual. by eclectic4 · · Score: 2, Informative

      "And I'm supposed to believe that somehow, of all the mail I send, that only my DVDs to Netflix get lost?"

      Pretty tempting though, I might say. Little red envelopes, you know what's in them... or, you can speculate as you did. Either way though, it's still far cheaper than going to blockbuster (or any other video store), you don't have to leave the house, and you do get them quickly so your argument is completely illogical. Yeah, you go ahead and protest them by going and renting 12 movies a month from BlockBuster at $4 a pop. That'll show em that delivering movies to your house cheaply won't be stood for! Unless I can burn 30 DVD's a month for 75 cents, I won't stand for it! Boycot!!!

      This is far better than what was available to the average person just a little bit ago. NetFlix rocks, and your argument is completely illogical.

      When Internet distribution starts, you can say goodbye to quality, and hello to DRM madness. Yay again!!!

      --

      "The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance - it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel Boorstin
    5. Re:Not an improvement but biz as usual. by palmpunk · · Score: 3, Informative

      I have worked in a main USPS plant. It is extremely unlikely that a postal worker is stealing mail. Thousands of letters are processed every minute. They are handled by the bundle. Plus you have Postal Inspectors watching your every move.

    6. Re:Not an improvement but biz as usual. by porcupine8 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      actually expecting to get what they paid for

      Judging from several comments here, it sounds like some people are expecting to get a lot MORE than what they paid for - they're expecting to get permanent copies of as many DVDs as they want, by getting the DVD, copying it, and sending it back the next day. I would call that "freeloading," as well as "illegal" and "ruining it for the rest of us."

      I realize that some people are legitimately renting lots and lots of movies, but I have a feeling that if you took away all the "copiers", the problem wouldn't be so big that Netflix would have to stoop to massive throttling. Yes, they handled it in a dishonest manner, but just the fact that they're doing it isn't at all surprising if so many people are abusing the service.

      --
      Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
  26. Netflix, Blockbuster, then Netflix again. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Isn't there an obvious answer?

    1) Start a Netflix subscription. When throttling starts, cancel.

    2) Start a Blockbuster subscription. When throttling starts, cancel.

    3) Go back to step one, this time using another person's name in your household, with a different credit card. This will be indistinguishable from a new renter/owner of your house or apartment.

    The above demonstrates one of the problems with a company being tricky with customers: Customers can be tricky too, and there are a lot more of them.

    --
    Before, Saddam got Iraq oil profits & paid part to kill Iraqis. Now a few Americans share Iraq oil profits, & U.S. taxpayers pay to kill Iraqis. Improvement?

  27. Where to begin? by bigtallmofo · · Score: 5, Informative

    Face it, they're just trying to slow down the DVD pirates

    Made up facts sure are convenient, but that doesn't make them true. More likely, what Netflix is doing is trying to reduce their shipping charges by taking steps to limit their advertised "unlimited" movie rentals per month. Both are speculation. Which one is more likely?

    It does look damn suspicious for a guy to turn around 3-5 movies a day

    I suggest you look at the data at the Netflix Queue Tracker. People are apparently getting throttled for getting as few as 6 movies per month. That's a little less than the 90-150 movies per month you're quoting as being suspicious.

    the DVD pirates are turning around 10-15 discs a week (or more).

    Where in the world are you getting these numbers? I challenge anyone to turn around 10 to 15 discs a week (or more) with Netflix. Maybe if you're on the 8 at a time plan, this might be possible. With the three at a time plan, you're lucky to turn over 6 discs a week. That's assuming you're not being throttled at all. Is it unreasonable to speculate that someone that doesn't have cable and doesn't watch broadcast TV might watch one movie per night? (and even take off a night every week!) No, they must be a pirate.

    --
    I'm a big tall mofo.
  28. Re:what an amazing business decision.... by NorbrookC · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Tell your biggest customers that they're no longer your priority.

    Biggest does not mean profitable. In this case, just the opposite. Every business, if they hope to stay in business, does this in some form or another. The service levels match the profitability of the customer. It's why you have to go through several levels of phone prompts and wait listening to muzak to get tech support, while a corporation with a big $ support contract gets someone on the phone immediately.

    This is the problem with any "flat fee" system. The profit is from those who use the system the least, not those who use it the most. Rent a lot of DVD's, and you're not their best customer, you're their worst.

    So what everyone is complaining about is that NetFlix is giving priority to their best customers, while stepping back service to their worst customers.

  29. Weird Netflix Story by TallMatthew · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I rented a movie from them a few years ago and mistakenly returned a Rolling Stones CD in the envelope. The DVD player went unused for months. When I went to do something with it, I found their DVD and wondered what the deal was. They had processed the return as if nothing happened. One of those mysteries of life ... this is what I figured.

    About a year later, I got an envelope from them in the mail. It had the Stones CD in it. My guess is the DVD I rented wasn't that popular, and had just then been sent to someone, who subsequently discovered my Stones CD and sent it back to Netflix. I thought it showed something they actually bothered to return it.

  30. Re:I was a subscriber, happened to me... by dema · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Holy shit mods!

    THIS IS NOT INSIGHTFUL!

    I'd get 3 DVD's in the mail, I'd rip them to my HD for encoding and backup (to watch later), and send them out the next day. The day after I sent them Netflix would confirm that they had them and send out the next ones

    YOU are exacly why Netflix is inclined to put something like this in place. You are not "backing up" these as you don't own them. Seriously mods, what are you thinking moding this insighful? I would vote with my points, but they won't matter with the sea of idoits who seem to get them.

  31. Re:I was a subscriber, happened to me... by Solder+Fumes · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Agreed...can we hear from a subscriber that DOESN'T copy the DVDs and still got throttled? The firsthand accounts I've seen in this thread so far involve copying.

  32. Re:What's the big deal? by boingo82 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Lazy doesn't even factor into it.

    I recently went for 7 months with no car at all. We're a family of 3, including (at the time) a toddler of just over a year, and we walked everywhere - to get groceries, to get movies, to work, to the bus stop, to the bank, etc. Carrying a 20+ lb baby.

    I joined Netflix when Blockbuster charged me $14.95 for returning ONE movie 15 minutes late. The sales slip said "due back on Friday, 12 pm" and I mistakenly thought that was midnight...it was noon. (Off topic - why the heck doesn't 12 pm come after 11 pm?)

    At the time I was working a 4 pm to 2 am shift, and most days I was not even AWAKE by noon.

    I realized that not only was Blockbuster's schedule completely incompatible with mine, but they were assholes too. They refused to remove the late fees - they had charged me for another 5 days for being 15 minutes late - why not ONE day late? There was a class action lawsuit against them a few years back for this.

    Nevermind that I can't get the movies I want through Blockbuster anyhow - when's the last time you saw Cannibal the Musical on their shelves?

    --
    As a republican I feel it my responsibity to manufacture criminals. People need punished!
  33. Statistical information about throttling by tom_gram · · Score: 2, Informative
    As a netflix user, throttling is something that i have experienced, and am frustrated with. But my biggest problem with netflix's approach is not that they throttle, but that they claim ignorance, through emails and advertising, of what many of us have clearly observed. I would be much happier as a customer if I knew, in detail, what their usage policy was and how it was implemented.

    Scouring the net to try to learn what I could about their throttling practices, I found the following site: "An Analysis of Netflix's DVD Allocation System"

    http://dvd-rent-test.dreamhost.com/

    It contains, by far the best information I could find regarding throttling. It includes enough data to actually draw reasonable conclusions about some of the thresholds that netlflix uses for limiting rentals. It has allowed my to adjust my use to almost always get sent new releases.

  34. How it seems to work. by weaklink · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I've been a happy customer with Netflix for a year and a half or so. I recently canceled my account with them but thats because I can not get the postman to take my returning netflix movies. So I canceled rather than trying to deal with the guys supervisor, and have to worry about my incoming mail arriving. Anyway... my lifes problems aren't the point of this post.

    During that year and a half, I noticed that my movies started coming slower. I figured they had an algorithm to keep the flow of DVD's at a rate that kept their profits at a certain point. This didn't seem like a big deal to me, all you can eat... isn't... unlimited bandwidth... isn't... so it would stand to reason unlimited rentals would follow the same pattern.

    However if Netflix was using an algorithm, that would mean that by changing my behavior I could maximize my return. Now I didn't try to make a thesis, or even write down data, so take my results with a grain of salt.

    I learned that how many movies you send is the most important variable. I had a three at a time account and then went to a five at a time account to see if that would get me faster results. What I found is that the recieving time didn't change. I recieved my "We got the DVD" email from Netflix no matter how many DVD's I sent back. This allowed me to factor out the post office.

    I have a taste for indy movies, weird Japanese movies, and Samurai flicks, so I never had any notice for waiting times as my movies were not in as high demand. When I wanted more popular movies it was not irregular to have a notice saying there was a short or long wait. So I could factor out other user demand.

    So I tryed various schemes from sending one movie a day to sending all five at once, but only once a week. Effectively this is almost the same thing. The first method was sending 6 movies a week the second was sending 5 movies a week. One movie a day kicked once a weeks butt. When I sent one a day, Netflix would send me a message the next day that it had recieved my movie, would ship it out that day, and I'd recieve it the day after. To be more clear, I put it in the mail on Monday, recieved emails on Tuesday, recieved DVD on Wensday. So one day there, one day back.

    When I sent 5 movies I would recieve the email notices from Netflix the next day that they were recieved, but typically would not have any movies shipped for two to three days, and that would be one or two, the rest would trickle in after. To make that more clear, I if I put them in on Monday, I recieved email on Tuesday, a movie or two Friday, a movie or two Saturday, and typically what was left on Monday, but sometimes not till Tuesday. This means 10 movies equals something like two and a half to three weeks. Remember I was sending them all together to test response times, so I wouldn't finish watching the last movie until Tuesday or Wensday. Sending them every day 10 movies equals about a week and a half. So sending them all at once was twice as slow.

    The delay from sending the mean average of 3 movies at once seemed to be on par with sending 5. What I mean by that is it tended to be two days delay rather than three days at 5. 2 movies seemed to incure a one day delay.

    I don't claim to know their algorithm, but it seems like functionally it is near: delay time = (# of movies shipped) - 1

    So my recommendation would be figure out how many movies you want on hand, and add two, and that would be the plan to get.

    I'd love to hear if other people had the same or differing experiences.

  35. Letter Sent to Netflix; Terms of Service Excerpt by decomp · · Score: 3, Interesting
    My wife and I have been using Netflix since Nov. 2004, and we have experienced a marked decline in service over that time. Having just learned about the "throttling", we sent them the following letter:
    I have just been alerted to your new changes in the "Terms of Service" regarding heavy users. Personally, I am appalled by the intent and also the wording of this recent change.

    Perhaps you have serious abusers of your system, but my husband and I are teachers who work 12 hour days. Watching movies is one of our only luxuries. We have seen our level of service go down significantly since we signed on with Netflix. Now we understand why.

    After reading some enlightening articles about Netflix and its practices, we will be seriously considering whether or not to keep our relationship with you.

    Most importantly, we will no longer be suggesting your service to family and friends, which we have done many times in the past. Instead, we will be sending copies of the articles concerning your business practices to family and friends who already have the service so that they might be aware of what's going on.

    For what it's worth: We would have been happy to pay a reasonable surcharge in months when we rented more DVDs. What your company has chosen to do instead is offensive and insulting.
    Here are some eye-opening parts of their terms of use:
    We make no guaranty as to the shipping and delivery of DVDs and may, in our sole and absolute discretion, change our business practice regarding allocation, delivery and shipping, without notice. We may from time to time revise these Terms of Use but we will not necessarily provide you notice of the revisions. It is up to you to review the Terms of Use frequently to determine if there have been changes.
    They send us emails about everything else...but they can't bother letting us know when the terms of use have changed? Something smells bad here...
  36. Change is in the air... by mlantz7 · · Score: 2, Informative
    Netflix can afford to do this to their customers because, for the most part, not enough people are going to notice. When you have millions of subscribers, and you p!ss off the ones who are "taking advantage" of your service, most of your subscribers will never know.

    Now, don't get me wrong, I can understand their concern over piracy/copying, but lets look at the big picture here: How many of Netflix subscribers rent 3 to 5 movies per month (or less). They are making big bucks off these folks (just like most "buffets" do).

    There are new companies out there now like Redbox that are starting to gain marketshare. And, for those who mainly watch new movies, it is probably a better choice than Netflix. And, right now you can get a lot of free movies from Redbox if you have one nearby (checkout the link above).

    So, just as video stores started to lose to Netflix, I believe Netflix will start to lose to these local kiosks.

    What will the future hold? Imagine going down to the local McDonald's or supermarket, and sliding your card at the kiosk, and it will burn the movie you want to see on the spot. And, when your done with it you will either have to return it, or it will "self-destruct" after 24 hours...

  37. Give the heavy renters quick service by Rich+Klein · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm a pretty infrequent movie viewer. Sometimes it'll take me a full month to send a movie back to Netflix. I think they should give priority to people who watch movies all the time. I don't think I'd be terribly bothered if I had to wait an extra day for my next movie so that someone who cares more about it can get their next movie. I like the quick turnaround I currently get, but I'm sure other subscribers would appreciate it more than me.

    --
    -Rich
  38. Simple Solution?? by michaelconnor · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If netflix is having difficulty making profit due to a small percentage of heavy users, perhaps they should tweak their rental plans.
    Just as an example:

    Current Rates

    New Rates
    $09.99 1-at-a-time Unlimited
    $14.99 2-at-a-time Unlimited
    $17.99 3-at-a-time Unlimited (with current throttling algorithm)
    $20.99 3-at-a-time Fast Unlimited (no delays for heavy usage)

    Flat rates are easier to understand, but netflix is established now, and should give customers more options. If the plan don't fit the customer, change the plan!

  39. really? by artifex2004 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Read this, please.

    This is just the latest instance.

  40. HackingNetflix.com by Statecraftsman · · Score: 2, Informative

    A useful link to add perspective on this story. This guy has been following Netflix, their practices, and their industry for some time. Of note is his opinion and the fact that renting from Netflix is still a good deal even if you are throttled. http://www.hackingnetflix.com/ Thanks to The Economist for pointing me to this site in a somewhat prophetic manner.