Slashdot Mirror


Netflix May Already Be Killing Blockbuster?

Mattintosh writes "A blogger at C|Net takes a moment to consider the impact Netflix has had on Blockbuster. Some notable highlights include heavy losses ($35 million), job cuts ($45 million worth), and store closings: 'Much like the print media and retail stores refusing to change, Blockbuster has been a victim on an online company finding new and inventive ways of bringing a product to a customer. And due to its size and outdated corporate culture, there really is no salvation for Blockbuster at this point. Try as it might, the future of Blockbuster is bleak, at best. Sure, the company still enjoys revenue that climb into the billions of dollars, but with an ever-increasing net loss and a public refusal to focus on Total Access--the area where Netflix continues to dominate--what is the impetus for us to jump on the Blockbuster bandwagon?'"

19 of 302 comments (clear)

  1. Thank Big Tel/Cable by dal20402 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Meanwhile, the only thing saving Netflix's ass is the anticompetitive nature of the telecom industry in the US, which causes us to have broadband slow enough to make downloading DVD-quality movies too painful... time marches on.

    1. Re:Thank Big Tel/Cable by yndrd1984 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When I go to Netflix I see "Watch movies instantly on your PC". Did I miss something?

    2. Re:Thank Big Tel/Cable by garcia · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I just don't get it. I refuse to go to Blockbuster and I cannot justify Netflix's fees and I really like to watch movies (I consider watching three or four movies a month above average). I go to the local grocery store and up to their DVD kiosk and rent a movie for 24 hours at 1.05 (including tax).

      I drive by the store containing the kiosk (which is directly across the street from Blockbuster and Hollywood) at least several times a day. I'd rather put my money there ($5 for a rental at Blockbuster? Please.) and have slim pickings than go to Blockbuster.

      Can someone please explain to me why you are willing to pay astronomical monthly fees for Netflix on a recurring basis and you might not even get your #1 choices? I just don't understand how the business model survives.

    3. Re:Thank Big Tel/Cable by frdmfghtr · · Score: 4, Informative

      Can someone please explain to me why you are willing to pay astronomical monthly fees for Netflix on a recurring basis and you might not even get your #1 choices? I just don't understand how the business model survives.
      Sure...because for $9/month (astronomical?? I think not), I can get a movie (have always been able to get my #1 picks so far) in my mailbox for an unlimited amount of time, drop it in the mail when I'm done, and four days later have another one in my mailbox. I don't have to stop anywhere, I can browse online, AND if I come across a movie I want to watch and it's available to stream, I can watch it instantly (assuming I have Windows; my Mac is thus far not supported). Nine hours (I think) of streaming per month is included in that $9 monthly fee.

      On top of that, when my monthly fee dropped from $9.99 to $8.99, I had to do nothing; my monthly rate automatically went down.

      Seems pretty fair to me.
      --
      Government's idea of a balanced budget: take money from the right pocket to balance...oh who am I kidding?
    4. Re:Thank Big Tel/Cable by pragma_x · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I can't speak for everyone else, but personally, I find Netflix fantastic at providing me access to a seemingly bottomless library of old, independent and foreign movies. I tend to have rather esoteric tastes, so paying for a subscription that is almost on-demand for just about anything I could want is well worth it. Basically they have all the stuff that more space-constrained institutions (Kiosks, Blockbuster, Hollywood Video, etc) can't be bothered with . To that end, I've never had to wait for a movie to become available.

      Now on the other hand: if all you want to do is see the major releases and not pay $10 to see it in a theater, then cruising the video kiosk is certainly the way to go.

    5. Re:Thank Big Tel/Cable by evilviper · · Score: 4, Informative

      When I go to Netflix I see "Watch movies instantly on your PC". Did I miss something?

      Yes you did... Try actually USING the service. Whatever they're using does a HORRIBLE job with the conversion from DVD.

      Lots of aliasing, like they use some incredibly crappy deinterlacing filter. The video is scaled out to square pixels, even though WMV supports aspects just fine. Anyone who knows one bit about video encoding will force dimensions to multiples of 16, but the videos I've seen aren't even multiples of 4... huge waste of bits. And that, unfortunately, holds true... don't even try watching at any bitrate below the max (some 6000kbps), even with a file size of 2GBs it looks like a 1-CD rip you might find floating around on some P2P network.

      Their inverse telecine filter is crap, if it exists at all. Progressive DVDs (film) are encoded passably, but anime I've seen is HORRIBLE. Take Ninja Scroll, use some braindead deinterlacing filter that blurs the two fields, so you have the old telecine ghosts every 5th frame and it looks like complete crap... then drop one out of every 5 frames (but be sure to keep the horrible blurred frames) to make sure you completely destroy the picture... then you've just started to approximate what the Netflix conversion process does.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    6. Re:Thank Big Tel/Cable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Your post only lacks one thing:

      Worst online video service ever.

  2. Blockbuster lost my business by philmack · · Score: 5, Informative

    Blockbuster lost me (and several of my friends' accounts) to netflix when they recently did away with their in store exchanges unless you opted to pay like 30% more for the exact same service. I have to imagine that a lot of people did the same.

  3. Re:My only problem with neflix by pappy97 · · Score: 4, Informative

    cafedvd.com offers the service you want, you rent by mail per DVD you actually watch, no subscription. Check it out. They call it "a la carte" renting.

  4. Netflix confirms it! by Verte · · Score: 4, Funny

    Blockbuster is dead!

    --
    We at slashdot are scientists, specialists and kernel hackers. Your FUD will be found out.
  5. It would not be hard to beat netflix on-line... by (H)elix1 · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm a netflix cusomter - 4 CD's in three queues (child, bride, me). As a perk, they also let you have an hour/usd of streaming content each month. For me, that works out to ~24 hours a month. Great, right? Well, it only works in the States, so any gigs in Canada are right out.

    The chink in the armor is the selection. While they have a massive collection of DVDs, the streaming selection is really poor. I would not pay extra for it as it stands. At home, It looks about the same as a DVD on a high bandwidth connection - here for example, is a movie getting piped to a TV via my laptop. Bandwidth in hotels works better than I expected, and it is good enough for watching on a computer. I hear Blockbuster might have better selection... they should embrace the streaming!

  6. Total Access kicks Netflix's butt by llamalad · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Blockbuster's online offering is far superior to Netflix's.

    Netflix constantly sent me random movies from my queue instead of using anything remotely resembling the order I'd prioritized them in. IIRC, they were everntually sued for that.

    Blockbuster only seems to have tried that twice with me and a single email to their customer care address resolved that and got me an apology along with it.

    I can also drop my total access movies off at the local LackLuster and trade them for free in-store rentals. And they ship my next online rentals the next day.

    Not affiliated, just a happy customer.

  7. Re:Needless to say... by aztektum · · Score: 4, Insightful

    For a minute there I was going to mod -1 overrated but I thought I'd reply instead. Apparently some mods were swayed by your flashing for the cameras and offering up a sound bite.

    But as I see it, even if the MPAA *did* blame it on piracy, the article is about Netflix *winning*, so right there is a built in counter-argument. That is to say, "If it's piracy, MPAA, then shouldn't Netflix be eating shit too??"

    However, there is the argument that the MPAA is a buncha lying fucks, so in a way you have a point. Don't put anything beyond them, even if there is a possibly logical argument to the contrary.

    --
    :: aztek ::
    No sig for you!!
  8. Amazingly... by whystopnow · · Score: 5, Insightful
    ...Netflix lowered monthly subscriptions a month or so ago. Sent me a letter saying "we're dropping your monthly subscription cost by a dollar and adding streaming movies."

    First time in my life a subscription service has gotten cheaper.

  9. Re:Needless to say... by i+kan+reed · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Actually, the netflix settup uses fewer copies of movies, because each individual shipping location covers a larger population than a given brick and mortar blockbuster. Basically, the statistics of it say they need fewer padding copies to cover the (unexpected) surges in demand. This means that even though the same total amount of renting happens, the movie studios see fewer dollars as a result.

    I know my statement appeared as a general hatred of the MPAA, without much forethought, but they do lose money with netflix compared to brick and mortar.

    This whole argument depends on netflix and blockbuster both having sensible purchasing policies with demand analysis. I don't know that.

  10. Re:Don't they have a similar service now by siriuskase · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If they had a system where the top items in my queue were in the store when I returned a DVD, it seems that would beat the service I get from Netflix. They don't need to always have MovieC in inventory, but if it is near the top of my queue, they can arrange to have it in stock, then after I rent and return it, they can send it off to wherever else it might be wanted. All the stores in a region could share the less popular movies. And I rent a lot of TV series. You don't even need to look at my queue to know what I will want next since I watch each season in order, and if I like the show, I watch the seasons in order, too. A system like that would easily beat Netflix since the transit time would be shorter.

    --
    If you must moderate, please moderate as irrelevent, not something bad, because I'm sure someone will find this interest
  11. Re:Lovely Contradiction by wuputah · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Revenue is not profit, and if your market is a brick and mortar store, there is a limit to how much you can cut costs - you have to stock the store, pay employees, etc etc. Closing stores means losing that market, but I suppose they could simply close all stores operating at a loss... I wonder how many stores they would have left.

    --
    Brought to you by the numbers π, e, and 0x1B.
  12. Re:My only problem with neflix by bjorniac · · Score: 4, Funny

    How much for the girl?

  13. Re:Needless to say... by GWBasic · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This means that even though the same total amount of renting happens, the movie studios see fewer dollars as a result.

    About a year ago, I stumbled into a forum where film makers were talking about current distribution trends. Apparently, Netflix is considered a major distribution venue, and is quite profitable for films that normally wouldn't see a wide distribution. Some independant filmmakers see Netflix as a godsend.

    There was some discussion on some of Netflix's constraints; Netflix will only carry DVDs that are at least 1 hour in length. This causes some documentary producers to stick 10-15 minutes of filler into a special edit for Netflix.