Netflix To Offer Streaming-Only Service Plans

MojoKid writes "Debates are raging as to what the future of movie distribution will look like. There are those who claim that physical discs, like DVDs, Blu-ray, and whatever format will eventually supplant Blu-ray, will always deliver a superior viewing experience versus anything that will be available via streaming. Pundits on the other side of the debate say that as broadband's footprint continues to expand, quality is improving. Interestingly, Netflix CEO Reed Hastings is siding firmly with the latter camp, and it would even appear that Netflix is gearing up to move all of its eggs from the mail-distribution basket to the online streaming basket. Hastings indicated that perhaps as soon as later this year or sometime in 2010, Netflix might start offering online-streaming-only subscription plans beyond just its current Starz plan."

Comments

ok

[Starteck81]

I think that's a great idea but they need to get a much larger part of their DVD library avilable on the streaming side before that will become popular.

"all their eggs"

[Anonymous Coward]

Offering a streaming-only option IN ADDITION TO their regular mail+streaming option isn't putting all their eggs in one basket. In fact, it's the opposite. They're offering their customers more diverse options.

Not ready for prime time

[thered2001]

I've used the Netflix service and I'd have to say the quality is OK but not nearly good enough to replace DVDs. It's especially poor at the beginning of films. And while they have a lot of titles, there are still notable absences.

In my experience, Fox TV's service is far better w/r/t quality. It frequently looks as good as DVDs.

Unwatchable

[pete-classic]

Between the video quality and the quality of the selection, "watch instantly" is just about unwatchable.

The visual quality doesn't even begin to compare to DVD. There's a huge gap to make up to even consider comparing it with Bluray.

The question is, does a significant portion of the movie watching population care? It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

-Peter

Re:Unwatchable

[timeOday]

The question is, does a significant portion of the movie watching population care? It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

I consider this whole issue almost moot, since we already know how it will play out: streaming video will win.

Selection: It's obvious why selection will be so much greater without having to carry huge inventories of discs.

Image quality: again, it's only a matter of time. Online, software-based formats will have better quality since they can more easily evolve. For me this is already the case; since I haven't bought a blu-ray, the only way to get better-than-dvd quality is by downloading something in high-def and watching on a laptop. Bandwidth seems like a big-issue at the moment, but compared to the text-only Internet of the early 90's, we're already about 90% of the way there.

So what is this whole discussion about? Whether supplanting discs with streaming will take two years vs. five years?

NetFlix vs Blockbuster

[Registered Coward v2]

The real challenge is how do you give users the flexibility to watch multiple movies at the same time or watch without an active internet connection?

BB advantage is that not only do you get videos by mail but you can return at stores for an instore rental plus 2x month I get free game/video rental coupons. As a result, BB is a better deal since I get about 2x the DVDs at a time, plus a large mail back catalog of stuff not in the store. As a result, I get the latest releases from the B&M and the older stuff by mail. BB has so far leveraged the online/ B&M model quite well with something NetFlix can't match. So for only a few bucks more than NetFlix I get a better deal.

The challenge I see for NetFlix is dealing with the moves towards bandwidth caps - a movie a night is likely to rapidly push people to the cap; and they are likely to be mad at NetFlix, not their ISP. As a result, I see pressure form larger ISPs, at least, to pressure NetFlix in paying for bandwidth or working out a revenue split where NetFlix is bundled with the service.

Of course, once WalMart buys NetFlix and RedBox all bets are off for BB. You read it here first.

I'm not sure that's quite right

[93 Escort Wagon]

There are those who claim that physical discs like DVDs, Blu-ray, and whatever format will eventually supplant Blu-ray will always deliver a superior viewing experience versus anything that will be available via streaming

While this is the argument that gets bandied about a lot, I don't believe it's actually the crux of the matter. But I think it's more accurate of the situation to frame it this way: For the majority of people, is the (overall) streaming experience good enough? Because for a lot of folks, convenience may be more important than a small uptick in quality.

For a somewhat analogous situation, I look to my teenage daughter's friends and their music buying habits. They almost exclusively buy their music from iTunes, even though no one can really argue that an iTunes or iTunes Plus encoding is as good as a CD, and the costs are more or less equivalent. But the quality difference is quite small (subjectively speaking, of course), and the convenience factor is huge.

There will always be some people for whom absolute quality trumps all else. The REAL question is, is this group large enough to sustain an ongoing market of manufacturing and selling physical media?

Re:Support more Systems

[at_slashdot]

Netflix doesn't have ads, Hulu has. I moved away from TV to Netflix exactly because of ads.