Netflix Subscriber Base Eclipses Comcast's

NicknamesAreStupid writes "Netflix just announced its earnings and claims to have more subscribers than Comcast. 'Netflix's global subscriber base grew almost 70% over the past year, to 23.6 million users. ... More than 7% of Americans now subscribe to Netflix.' Does that go to show how great Netflix really is or, well, you know?"

Comments

superior value

[SpiralSpirit]

obviously, netflix is the far superior value to what most cable companies offer.

Re:superior value

[Mad-Bassist]

They certainly made me forget about Hollywood Video and Blockbuster back in 1995.

While their price rose to $19.99/mo this year, I'll always remember them for sending me an e-mail a few years back, saying their rates were going to be lowered from $17.99 to $16.99. There is also the way they like to send an extra "+" movie if something in my queue comes from another part of the country because of the delay.

Superior value indeed!

(I killed my cable back in 1999, but that was because most of my entertainment came from reading and writing on the net, as well as the previously mentioned video stores.)

Re:superior value

[Coren22]

Which is why forcing net neutrality is important.

Comcast makes Netflix crawl to make their VOD service look like it is a better deal. Yes, it is intentional, Netflix wants to put a server on Comcast's network, but are not allowed to, and Comcast's outgoing pipes to the internet are perpetually full because they refuse to upgrade them, even after L3 offered them the upgrade for free.

There's a big difference, though

[nysus]

Netflix isn't sucking about $2K/year out of me like Comcast.

Re:There's a big difference, though

[Tony Isaac]

True, but Netflix is going to eventually force Comcast to lower their prices significantly.

As Netflix offers more TV programming, there may come a tipping point where you don't need Cable TV at all, you could just get all your programming from Netflix. THEN all you need is the broadband service + Netflix. Even though the broadband service might come from Comcast, you don't have to pay the exorbitant rates for the TV channels!

Re:There's a big difference, though

[jhoegl]

My tipping point was last year.

Re:There's a big difference, though

[kimvette]

True, but Netflix is going to eventually force Comcast to lower their prices significantly.

No, that is not true at all. Netflix reaching critical mass is what prompted Comcast to introduce the bandwidth cap. The way Comcast will compete is not by continuing to improve their network, or improving product or cutting prices, but by lowering bandwidth caps further. Comcast is old media which is dabbling in interweb technology. Comcast is not an ISP - at least not in mindset.

Re:There's a big difference, though

[jroysdon]

No one provides the pipe end to end. Comcast provides the last mile to the end users and makes money providing Internet access to home users.

Perhaps Comcast should pay for Netflix's pipes? Just as ridiculous as the other way around.

Or, how about this - each entity pays for their own pipes. Comcast is an ISP and should provide its customers transit to whatever content they want to. End of story.

Re:There's a big difference, though

[Anonymous Coward]

If they lower their caps one iota further I will leave.

Re:There's a big difference, though

[moredrivel]

Between Netflix & Hulu Plus, I've got all the TV and movies I can stand to watch. I dropped my cable plan down to local broadcast only and if I don't find a reason to watch any of those channels soon I'll drop the whole shebang.

Re:There's a big difference, though

[bjwest]

And this scares the shit out of the major ISP/cable providers. This is also the reason for the big push for metered broadband. Comcast (or any other cable provider for that matter) will not drop their prices on cable without being able to make it up in their broadband income. And you bet your ass they're in the process of buying the representatives to make it happen.

Re:There's a big difference, though

[hellwig]

Here Here.

As I like to point out, for $8/mo not only can Netflix afford to pay the content providers for their content, it can also pay it's own internet bills. Yet supposedly for $45+/mo, local ISPs can't seem to provide enough internet access to home users. Every byte home users pay to download Netflix paid to upload. And if Netflix gets some sort of "bulk deal" on bandwidth (yeah, I don't know how that would work either), you'd think actual ISPs like AT&T and Comcast could get a better deal, yet all the ISPs do is complain about bandwidth and put download limits in place.

Re:There's a big difference, though

[stretch0611]

True, but Netflix is going to eventually force Comcast to lower their prices significantly.

Not true... More than likely, broadcasters and networks will continue to increase the carry fee that they charge Comcast to carry their channel(s). This will force Comcast to continue to increase fees for cable. While Comcast can decrease their profit margin, I think most people realize that Comcast will only do this as a desperate last resort.

While I am one of the minority of people to cut the cable connection, It will be a very long time before most people do the same. Some people will wrongly assume that it is too difficult to use Netflix or other resources, but many more people are just too reluctant to change -- they will just stay with the status quo.

Even if Comcast is forced to lower cable prices in order to retain customers, they will just increase internet fees. If they don't extract their money one way, they will adjust their pricing to take even more money from you a different way.

Re:There's a big difference, though

[Rockoon]

Discovery, History, National Geographic and the Science Channel.

In the past 3 years, even these channels have gone way downhill. The history channel is now known for "doomsday" documentaries and National Geographic is the Border Patrol channel. I believe Discovery is now the Chopper and Logging channel, ..

The Science Channel did buy the rights to Firefly recently... so maybe there is hope for that one channel.

Re:There's a big difference, though

[Methuseus]

My tipping point was about 7 years ago

Re:There's a big difference, though

[tripleevenfall]

If you have comcast, the local-only is about $10 a month, but if you dropped that and had internet only without the cable TV, they charge an extra $10 for that. the local channels are essentially free when you factor that in.

Re:There's a big difference, though

[Anonymous Coward]

And go where? to another crappy cable company that has the exact same limitation and level of service. you are locked in my friend.

Redbox is doing well too

[symbolset]

It's a different format, but I'm liking the Redbox thing. It's handy and inexpensive, and importantly - commitment free. If you're going to do a rental and it's in your area, give it a try. The website will tell you what movies are available in your area, and which box to get it from. You can return the movie to any box. DVD's are $1, Blu-Ray is $1.50 (per day). If you don't bring the movie back they just ding your card a reasonable retail price and you're done. I hear they're considering video games as well. It's credit card only though.

/obviously no, I don't work for Redbox.

And yeah, Netflix is kicking butt. They're coming to some large numbers though and the studios are on to them now. They're going to see increasing friction. It remains to be seen if they can see it through. I hope they do well. I also hope they release an Android client.

Re:Redbox is doing well too

[Crimson Wing]

Games have been in RedBox locations in some areas for a few months now. $2.00/night.

And yeah, Netflix and Redbox are both awesome. Between them and GameFly, the three of 'em pretty much ate Blockbuster alive.

Maybe someday

[Beelzebud]

all this streaming video will force Comcast to raise their monthly limit. 250gb per month might be a lot for some, but not for a house full of video watchers...

Re:Maybe someday

[rsmith-mac]

Why would they raise it? If anything they'd lower it, and not just to protect their profits.

Unicasting content is insanely wasteful. Even with CDNs with good placement (Akamai, etc) that's 1 unicast stream per TV. If you follow this to its logical conclusion and Netflix or some other IPTV provider usurps cable/satellite for subscription channels, what happens the next time Monday Night Football is on ESPN? They're going to stream it to unicast it to 11 million households, many of whom are going to want to do DVR things like skipping and pausing?

Multicasting is going to be around for a long, long time still. So long as it does, the cable/fiber/satellite networks are still the gatekeepers; they're not going to embrace IP multicasting when they have a perfectly good system that does the same thing.

SOMEONE is inviting lower bandwidth caps...

[mykos]

Watch as Comcast and other ISPs claim how much HD film watchers are "degrading the quality of their networks".

Don't think Comcast and etc. will let this go.

[WiiVault]

The problem today is that at least in the US most broadband providers are TV providers also. The telecos who don't have a TV network have even gotten on board with "bundles" including DirecTV and Dish. They are smarter than consumers give them credit for though. You might think your poor service is proof of their incompetence- your wrong... sooo wrong. They will do anything to maintain a baseline of service that is merely tolerable because raising the bar costs them money and frankly where the hell will you go? To the other massive evil teleco/cable, overpriced wireless (3G/4G) or satellite? Dial-up perhaps? Of course not, they've got you buy the nuts. So expect Comcast's already pathetic 250 gig limit (even for 100$ monthly subscribers BTW) to go down (in GB per month), AT&T and Verizon are sure to follow (shocking!!). In the end, if they have their way, you will be able to watch Netflix, but it will cost in bandwidth fees nearly as much as it would cost to rent- with their respective pay-per-view fees. With today's government oversight and teleco mentality could it end any other way?

Re:Don't think Comcast and etc. will let this go.

[Samantha Wright]

The only thing we have in Canada that isn't worse than in the States, network-wise, is the total absence of effective copyright enforcement. For now, at least. Our infrastructure is much weaker, our cell companies gouge even more aggressively, and small ISPs are constantly under threat of execution by Bell Canada and the cable companies, who are determined to get out of the obligation to resell, or at least find a way to monetize their resellers' customers directly. Fortunately, the trash that was elected when Bush was popular is on its way out—since we can call elections at just about any time—and it's looking that the next government is probably going to be legitimately left-wing and staunchly pro-consumer. So that might help.

Or, well, you know?

[BlueF]

Netflix is a great STEP in the right direction...

I'm far from alone in saying -- until we can access content, on AND offline, from any device, and for a reasonable price -- entertainment industry is far from where it needs be!

Re:Let's just get this out of the way..

[kvvbassboy]

Why is it available on iPhone then?

No Shit Sherlock

[l0ungeb0y]

I, like many others dropped Comcast Cable like the flaming turd it was a couple years ago and went with Digital Antenna + Tivo for HD local network broadcast. I still use Comcast for my internet connection via Comcast Business, but hey.. that's a tax write-off. They give me decent enough upstream (10Mbps) that I can host servers, and higher than advertised downstream (I usually get about 24Mbps) with no bandwidth throttling.

HBO is run by shitheads who pretend that P2P lawsuits are an effective deterrent and somehow think their offering is enough to keep people bound to Comcast Cable. Well HBO: FUCK YOU AND FUCK YOUR GO SERVICE.

I pirate HBO's shows because HBO wont let me get their shows with an iTunes purchase, they wont put them on Netflix and they seem to think I'll happily bend over and let them and Comcast have their way with my anal sphincter. But I wont -- the shitfest that is Cable TV is not worth $100.00 a month. So fuck you HBO and fuck your GO service. I hope you and Comcast and Viacom die the painful and agonizing death you deserve

Re:Let's just get this out of the way..

[binarylarry]

Microsoft fears Android (Linux) far more than permaniche apple products.

Apple will never unleash mass market versions of their products, Linux has and will. That's Microsoft's territory and it scares the fuck out of them to be replaced as the default OS.

It's already happening though, the Desktop market is their last stand... they've lost everywhere else.

A story of a simple but great customer experience

[Anubis IV]

A few weeks back, I finally got around to sending back the DVD that I had been holding for about the last six months, having never once been hassled, harassed, or charged extra by Netflix for holding onto it for so long. Two days later, Netflix let me know that they had sent me film X from my DVD Queue.

"Hmm," I said to myself. "Wasn't X #2 on my queue? Well, no matter, I must be confused since I was rearranging it the other day."

Before film X had even arrived, Netflix notified me that X had been my #2, but that they had tracked down a copy of film Y, which was the actual #1 on my queue, and as a result, they would go ahead and send me a copy of that as well, despite the fact that I only had the plan that allows for one DVD at a time. They sent it out at no extra charge to me, and the two arrived on back-to-back days. It was great. It may have been a simple thing, but I hadn't had a company treat me so well in quite awhile. Despite that, it was the sort of thing that seemed natural with Netflix, since everything they do is so oriented around the customer.

It was with great sadness that I temporarily suspended my account the day after sending the videos back, since I needed to spend less time viewing films in my Instant Queue and more time on my graduate research. Even in that however, Netflix was great and continues to be great. They let me suspend it for up to three months, charge me nothing during that time, allow me to manage my queues and rate movies while my account is suspended, don't harass me to come back, and give me immediate access to a button for if I do want to close my account entirely. Compare that to Facebook, which makes deactivating your account a chore, places access to the feature in an out of the way location in your settings, only offers to deactivate but not delete your account, and swindles you into reactivating it if you simply log in.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to being done with my research and back in the embracing arms of Netflix in a few months. Chalk me up as a fanboy.

As for a story of great customer service from Comcast...

Umm...

Yeah, I got nothing. My latest experience with them involved 2-5 minute Internet outages that happened a few times every hour while I was visiting with my parents for the Easter holiday. I'm glad Comcast doesn't have a stranglehold over my area yet.

Re:Let's just get this out of the way..

[Anonymous Coward]

Because Apple is Apple. Apple does not take on Microsoft territory, they do their own stuff and dont care about the other ecosystems. Yes, they are big, but they are a niche and are happy with their (quite big) niche. Android, on the other hand, is what microsoft used to be, a platform open for business from both hardware and software partners and everybody else who want to mess with it. Microsoft failed to be microsoft in mobile and came up trying to be Apple with Ms WinPhone7. Under the hood, the philosophy of Ms is similar to AT&T, a crumbling monopoly trying to regain their past strongholds to be itself again. Microsoft do not own the Operating System market anymore, nor does it own the office document viewing market (it still own the authoring part of this market).

that's why Ms exec hate Android deeply and dont care about Apple as long as Apple dont try to rob their stronghold. After all, Apple has so much success creating new ones that it doesn't need to push for the old ones.

Hmm, not sure.

[WiiVault]

To be fair there is a Win Phone 7 version and iOS (which has lots of MS apps thus far). I wouldn't scream fuck MS, but at the same time providing a Win7 Phone client before Android does suggest something. Perhaps the GP is biased, but reality doesn't seem too far off.

Re:Let's just get this out of the way..

[curunir]

They've explained why...:

The hurdle has been the lack of a generic and complete platform security and content protection mechanism available for Android. The same security issues that have led to piracy concerns on the Android platform have made it difficult for us to secure a common Digital Rights Management (DRM) system on these devices. Setting aside the debate around the value of content protection and DRM, they are requirements we must fulfill in order to obtain content from major studios for our subscribers to enjoy.

So, yeah...it has nothing to do with it.

Re:Let's just get this out of the way..

[keithpreston]

These is no Netflix client because DRM is hard to impossible on Fragmented Open Source Android. Apple and Microsoft have protected video paths. They either have to relicense content to stream DRM free, or come up with a solution on a phone by phone basis to meet the DRM requirements of the content agreements.

Not a big win for Silverlight

[PetiePooo]

I routinely watch Netflix streams via 5 different devices, and not one of them requires MS Silverlight. I view on an AppleTV, a Tivo HD, an iPad, an iPod Touch, and occasionally a Wii.

This is not the big win for Silverlight you think it is. This is proof that Netflix streaming is being built into more and more consumer devices. If the only way I could view their streams was via my PC, I wouldn't bother... I'd just stick with the disc mailers.

Re:7%

[gyroidben]

That 7% statistic appears to be taken from dividing the number of subscriptions by the population. In fact it should be divided by the number of households. The real number is likely higher.

GB Cap = Back to ripping or buying Netfix DVDs

[GabriellaKat]

Just for the reason that I do have Comcast. And I do agree they will probably lower the GB cap eventually, and when/if they do, I will just stop streaming and go back to DVDs. Either ripping or buying. You know, like the old days. Or maybe Netflix will start their own ISP, or buy Comcast.

Re:Let's just get this out of the way..

[hairyfeet]

Riiight, you want to know the REAL reason why Linux doesn't have (and never will have) a Netflix client? Two reasons: #1 No kernel level DRM is allowed, ala Janus which is supported by both MSFT and Apple and which IIRC Netflix uses, and #2 because you have Linus "We don't need no steenkin plans!" Torvalds going Goatse on the kernel whenever he gets a bug up his ass.

So that means you either hand out your code, which in the case of Netflix would have a "Razr1911 fuck teh man LOL!" edition less than a week later, or they "pull an Nvidia" and pay a whole team of developers round the clock to deal with everytime Torvalds breaks every damed thing with one of his wild hairs.

Free as in freedom has a price my friend, and as long as you have the one two punch of no kernel DRM and Linus "Plans? What are they?" Torvalds you can give it up on ever getting Netflix. But cheer up, maybe Torvalds will retire and then you get someone to actually run it like a multimillion dollar project (can you imagine going to YOUR boss and saying "we don't need no plans!" on a multimillion dollar project? Can you say fired?) and then instead of having to keep a development team you'll actually have "write once, use for years" like Apple and MSFT (and Solaris, and BSD, and OS fricking 2) have had for over a decade.

Oh and BTW, before anyone brings up the LinuxTM "StableKernelABINonsense" you might want to actually look up the post against a stable ABI and you will see that is was/is completely POLITICAL in nature. The author went so far as to actually call anyone who doesn't have all their code over to the tender mercy of the kernel devs "leeches" and hoped their devices were Goatse'd quickly. Meanwhile Linux has yet another "killer app" that it can't use while its competitors CAN. How many honestly think you are gonna get any of those people to switch to Linux now?

Re:Let's just get this out of the way..

[Inda]

Why's it even an issue? Who's going to take this path to 'piracy'?

If you had the knowledge and means to save the stream, you wouldn't bother.

Proof!

[ThatsNotPudding]

The way Comcast will compete is not by continuing to improve their network, or improving product or cutting prices, but by lowering bandwidth caps further.

See? The free market works! USA! USA!

Re:Proof!

[what2123]

The way Comcast will compete is not by continuing to improve their network, or improving product or cutting prices, but by lowering bandwidth caps further.

See? The free market works! USA! USA!

The "free market" you describe is not what you think. Having a government-set monopoly almost guarantees that the markets will need to be regulated.

Re:Proof!

[imric]

Yes because without regulations, barriers to entry vanish like the wind! Property holders offer up their land for free so cables can be run, thus foiling local monopolies. 'First in' companies for new tech would never sign exclusive contracts with property holders, and enlightened carriers would make money by allowing all to profit from existing lines and never, ever sabotage their own customers in attempts to capture end users and take all the profits.

Monopoly is foiled, hurrah!

Face it, if there was the free market your dogma dictates, we wouldn't have cars, freeways, or even telephones. All railroads would have different standard sizes and signalling standards, the only way to GET those standards would be to succeed in monopolizing an industry - and the claim that monopolies are benificial in an unregulated world where the government just gets out of the way is ridiculous as well - guess what - new and better products at lower prices would simply be bought out, crushed or otherwise suppressed.

Your economic dogma would place us all back in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, technology, medically, socially, economically, and militarily.

And the bulk of the people wouldn't even be happy - remember, monopoly abuses provoke riots - sometimes with shotguns. Corporations hired private armies (pinkertons, wells fargo) as well.

What a paradise!

Re:Proof!

[vaporland]

Yeah, corporate oligarchy masquerading as democracy is SO much better.

Government by the lobbyist, of the lobbyist, for the lobbyist.

I'm Lovin' It!

Re:Let's just get this out of the way..

[iamhassi]

"Apple will never unleash mass market versions of their products, Linux has and will."

1999 called, they want their quote back.

Ever heard of the iPod? iPhone? iPad? I think those are all mass market versions. How's the Linux mp3 player doing? Or Linux tablets? Even Android phones are just barely competing with iPhones despite having being offered by every carrier and having dozens of models and being free.

Android loves to say "Look, we're beating the iPhone!" but how hard is that when you pay people to take your product? I could beat Walmart's sales in no time if I was paying people $25 to take a new LCD and underwear.

Re:Let's just get this out of the way..

[jedidiah]

...you mean how the Linux variant known as Tivo doesn't have a Netflix client?

No. This whole "no kernel level DRM" nonsense is just a smoke screen. Clearly there are netflix supported platforms that don't conform to the Vista model. So obviously there are other things at work.

Just as with many similar corporate statements, they are just BS to hide the company's real intentions.

Re:Let's just get this out of the way..

[Sprouticus]

Which is more likely. That netflix is antagonistic toward android out of some vendetta, or that netflix is afraid of Google and their ability to marginalize netflix at some point?

Re:Let's just get this out of the way..

[nedlohs]

Because that's what their contracts likely say, and it doesn't matter if no one would bother if the contract says "you must do X", then you have to do X if you want to do whatever the contract is giving you the rights to.

Re:A big win for Silverlight

[ConceptJunkie]

For rich content on the web, Silverlight is not a bad technology. It's better than Flash in a lot of ways.

But not in the one way that matters to me. Flash is on Linux. In every other respect, Silverlight being better than Flash would be no great accomplishment because Flash is awful.

Netflix still doesn't do captioning

[mcspoo]

Netflix having so many customers demonstrates a viable business model. One that has more or less destroyed the Blockbuster empire. I would have no problem with being a Netflix customer myself, except that Netflix still demonstrates they have no desire for DEAF customers. They insist on pretending that Closed Captioning is an arcane and difficult technology to implement.

So, while I applaud Netflix for their massive customer base, I do NOT welcome these Netflix overlords, because they insist on treating me as a second class citizen. Shape up, Netflix!

EXACTLY

[Sir_Eptishous]

Customer Service, which Netflix actually cares about, is one of the main reasons why I continue to espouse their greatness. Compared to the other digital entertainment providers, Netflix is a Knight in Shining Armour.