Slashdot Mirror


Netflix Deflects Rage Over Price Increase

oxide7 writes "Netflix provoked an unprecedented outpouring of backlash across the Internet as the company unveiled plans to raise prices on its movie-rental services. The company said it would raise the Internet-plus-DVDs-in-the-mail plan from $9.99 per month to $15.98 per month late Tuesday sparking protests and rage across the subscriber base. Netflix brushed off the criticism however. 'We knew there would be some people who would be upset,' company spokesman Steve Swasey said. 'To most people, it's a latte or two,' he added."

722 comments

  1. No rage, just a lost customer. by Kenja · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Canceled as soon as they sent email with their new pricing scheme. Simply not worth that much money, especially with competition from Amazon and Google in the works.

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    1. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Let them drink Latte...

      My god! The stunning arrogance of the McMansion aristocracy.

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    2. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by rwven · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The fact is that shipping through the mail is just really expensive compared to streaming. Netflix needed to make this decision sooner or later, and I don't blame them for doing it. They've been talking about how expensive the mailings are for a long time now.

    3. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by neurocutie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Simply not worth that much money, especially with competition from Amazon and Google in the works." But the writing is on the wall that the content providers are going to be driving up the prices on ALL such online streaming services. Netflix just happens to be the first and biggest. As articles have said, Netflix USED BE just a "left overs" service, at least from the view point of the content providers (studios, etc). That is, the studios thought that MOST people bought DVDs and saw movies in theaters and Netflix was just there to "mop up" the small fraction of the market that didn't pay through the other channels. But now the studios see that Netflix is rapidly become a MAJOR if not THE predominant channel for customers to view content. So as revenues drop fro DVD sales, the studio EXPECT Netflix, Apple, Amazon, Hulu, Google, etc to raise prices to make up for the shortfall elsewhere. Point is, short of piracy, don't count on finding low cost channels for content from the studios to last forever.

    4. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by loteck · · Score: 1

      Same here. No rage or emotion involved, just don't think its worth it, so I immediately cancelled. I wonder how many there are like us?

    5. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If shipping through the mail is more expensive than streaming, why are they charging the same for both?

    6. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by MindStalker · · Score: 1

      I have Netflix but I hardly ever used it, so when the notice came out I switched to their 4.99 plan. Its slightly less than I use now, but meh.

    7. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Dunbal · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So expensive that they were able to build a huge company on it but now, suddenly, it's not profitable. Wake up and smell the cash grab.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    8. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree, there's no reason to get upset about the increase. If they were just arbitrarily raising it to make more profit, that would be one thing, but the reason for this is clearly because they're about to see a huge increase in streaming costs, and they need to pay for it somehow.

      The only thing that did annoy me was the manner in which they presented it: "Now you have a choice". We already had a choice...the streaming only option was already available. The only new choice was to get DVDs without streaming, which was never really such a big concern since they never raised the price when they added streaming, so it's not like you'd feel like you were paying extra for a feature you didn't want.

    9. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by jimbolauski · · Score: 2

      There must have been a little emotion because the change doesn't happen until September 1st.

      --
      Knowledge = Power
      P= W/t
      t=Money
      Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
    10. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by poetmatt · · Score: 1

      yep, cancellation on the way.

      Netflix is raising prices and reducing access. Since when did they think this would be a good idea?

    11. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by wcrowe · · Score: 1

      Same here. They're fooling themselves if they think that only a few customers are upset about the outrageous 60% price increase. Only a small percentage will actually say anything. There are a lot of us who know that our complaints will be ignored.
       

      --
      Proverbs 21:19
    12. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by localman57 · · Score: 3, Informative

      At some point it probably doesn't matter that much. Netflix is likely to keep enough people to be able to keep the lights on. And the price they pay for content will likely be proportional to their number of users, as will their bandwitdh costs, so their single biggest costs will scale up or down with their user base, keeping the margin per user relatively flat. If they can increase their margin by 200% at a cost of 30% of their users, that's a win.

      Personally, I think it's a smart move. Netflix has had by far the greatest success monitizing the content delivery business (excluding the wire-to-your-house providers like comcast or AT&T). Google and Hulu still have to figure out the business plan (Youtube is popular as shit, but hard to make money on). This gives netflix a chance now to try and raise margins, in order to try and gain enough capital clout to fight with their likely ultimate rivals for exclusive content, Comcast, AT&T, etc.

      The need to shoot for the moon now and try to get to the point where they can square off against the 800 pound gorillas, or they'll end up like Tivo.

    13. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by OldeTimeGeek · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The cash grab is coming from the content providers. Netflix has become a major player so they want a bigger share of the pie.

    14. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same here, will cancel before the price hike kicks in. Was considering to cancel earlier as we have BlockBusters as well, this just made the decision easier.

    15. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by alostpacket · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Part of me wonders how much of the cash grab is coming from the content providers/movie studios though. Now that they see netflix is the path to the customer they decided to try and play a bit more hardball. That's just my speculation though, impossible to say for sure.

      --
      PocketPermissions Android Permission Guide
    16. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by rwven · · Score: 2

      Because you might stream 50 movies a month, but you're not going to rent more than about 15 through the mail in a given month, and that's if the stars align and USPS has a two day turnaround....

    17. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by deains · · Score: 5, Informative

      Happy Bastille Day everyone.

    18. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Sir_Eptishous · · Score: 2

      From what I've read, NF is going to get pounded by renegotiated contracts with the studios next year. So this move appears to be preparation for "paying the piper". I don't think it was a cash grab.

      --
      We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
    19. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by rwven · · Score: 1

      The cost of mail shipping has increased dramatically since netflix was founded. The cost of bandwidth has decreased dramatically. Wake up and smell the reality.

    20. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      I have little tolerance towards people who rage over good/services who's goal is for entertainment. Basically as the parent stated He didn't like the rate and didn't want to pay it so he left. I am OK, not happy but I think it is still worth it, with the rate increase so I will continue to pay it.

      Video Games, Movies, Games... They are just for entertainment if they get in the way of the rest of your life then they should be dropped.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    21. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rumor has it the price increase is due, in part, to increased royalty demands from the content owners, who contracts have recently been renewed (or will be in the near future) with new (more expensive) terms.

    22. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you can't afford a 5$/mo increase you probably shouldn't have a Netflix account in the first place.

    23. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by localman57 · · Score: 2

      I think that's the other elephant in the room for them. Saturday delivery is going away soon. And we'll be seeing 2 day a week delivery sometime in the next decade, so the USPS can use half as many carriers and trucks to hit the same number addresses on weekdays. That effectively kills their mail-order business.

    24. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not quite, per a single data point. A friend got the letter. As opposed to an increase of $2/month for her, as required by netflix, she change the plan and dropped $5/month off her current bill. Hey, she just saved $60/year. And she is not going to be feeling any pain. I suspect cancelling is going to be mainly: I am emotional about this. But optimizing the cost/services is just: Let me be frugal. The former item I expect will happen a lot more than netflix expects, but the latter, given their latte remark, is really going to blindside them.

    25. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by bkr1_2k · · Score: 2

      You're aware the USPS shipping costs have increased about 25 percent in the time Netflix has been in business, aren't you? That makes a huge difference in profits, especially when you're trying to expand your market.

      --
      "Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
    26. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by schlachter · · Score: 1

      I think they're spending more and more on getting content for their networks...and they just need to pass these costs along to stay profitable. I doubt they're doing this to grab more cash for their own pockets. Nonetheless, $23/month for my 2 disk plan (blue ray) is approaching on my threshold for considering other options.

      --
      My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
    27. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by jellomizer · · Score: 2

      Economy of scale often takes into place. As Netflix grows bigger Mailing becomes less profitable to a point where it cost more to ship a DVD where it use to be their bread and butter.

      A typical Manager can directly manage 8 people effectively. So every 8 people hired they need a new manager. every 8 managers there needs to be a new upper manager and we continue.... We can assume that each management level will get paid more then the one that is under them. So as the business grows you get more bureaucratic. Now this is often balanced due to the fact the more you produce the better prices you can get in bulk. So depending on how the numbers work out you could see that that DVD mailing past a particular size will not scale well and become unprofitable at the current rate.

      When they switch to streaming the problem still exists however a human can normally manage 25-100 computers which allows the business to grow with less bureaucratic problems.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    28. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by sneakyimp · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Mod parent up. This is definitely about the content providers wanting more money. The reason the Sony movies were removed is because they had hit a contractual cap and Netflix was unable to offer them anymore until a renegotiation followed. At the renegotiation, the content providers are all too aware of the soaring Netflix profits and stock price and are demanding more money. My actor friend in Hollywood (an armchair industry analyst) has been moaning for months about how the studios let Netflix get away with the content too cheaply.

      I'll be canceling my account too for a variety of reasons:
      1) The streaming selection has been awful lately. Like really awful.
      2) The site redesign really sucks. You have to hover over a movie to see the rating.
      3) The recommendations for me are ghastly. Maybe it's because my girlfriend has been watching too many movies.
      4) I've received scratched DVDs and had streaming movies drop repeatedly (despite my 10Mbps connection). I have yet to receive any compensation or even an apology for these service failures.
      5) No video rental on demand? WTF??
      6) Yes, the price increase.

    29. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by dougmc · · Score: 1

      and that's if the stars align and USPS has a two day turnaround....

      For most (more than 50% anyways) Netflix customers, the USPS already has a one day turnaround -- get the DVD in the mail today, it arrives tomorrow. So most people can have a new DVD in two days as long as they get their DVD postmarked today.

    30. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by sneakyimp · · Score: 1

      My cost of bandwidth has increased 20% in the past 3 years for the same goddamn connection. What fantasy world do you live in?

    31. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by kcitren · · Score: 1

      It doesn't seem like this is something that they *want* to do. The reduced access is from their content providers, the increased cost as well.

    32. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by localman57 · · Score: 2

      If you can't afford a 5$/mo increase you probably shouldn't have a Netflix account in the first place.

      I disagree with this. Of the utilities I would drop for economic reasons, cable would be first, before my high-speed internet. Netflix makes that internet a lot more valuable in terms of entertainment content. I can get a huge amount of quality programming from netflix for a month for less than going to a first run movie with my wife.

      People with money tend to bitch and moan a lot when they hear about poor people with cable TV or an XBOX, but the fact is those things become very valuable and provide a good return on investment if you don't have cash to do other things, money to get transportation to get to places like libraries, parks, etc. A $25 pawn-shop PS2 and a pile of 5 year old games goes a long way in terms of entertainment, when you have no other options.

    33. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Dhalka226 · · Score: 1

      I will cancel the DVD-out portion of my plan. I'm at the point where the things I want to watch are mostly already gone and I'm just shuffling movies around the queue to get the most for my money. That's simply not worth $8/mo to me.

      The streaming, however, I will keep. That is still providing tremendous value to me, even with the limited selection. So long as that remains the case, I will remain a subscriber to it. Just like you guys, no rage or emotion involved -- just a cost-benefit, and right now the streaming portion remains a value to me.

      Ironically, the net effect of all of this from Netflix's side is that that they're going to lose $2/mo from me which somebody else will probably get (Amazon VOD perhaps -- all depends on who has what I want available).

    34. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by sycorob · · Score: 1

      Then wouldn't the price of the service go up some similar amount? It went up 50%

      I think they were either underselling it, or the streaming portion has got more expensive since they started it, due to studios and networks trying to get paid more. Streaming is actually a weirdly weak spot for Netflix. Due to the way our content laws work, Sony can demand more money for the same product next year - the rights to stream. In the original model, Netflix could in theory buy DVDs from Walmart and start shipping them to customers, so there was always a constraint on the cost. It's gonna stay weird for awhile.

    35. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Jim+Hall · · Score: 2

      For me, it's a math problem. I moved a year ago, and we decided to drop cable TV. Instead, we subscribed to Netflix, and regularly use Amazon Instant Video and PlayStation Network.

      Look at it this way: Looking at the cost of cable TV (at our old house, but it's about the same here) it was about $80 per month.

      But without cable TV, we're watching (mostly) the same shows from Amazon and PSN for $2 per episode. We watch movies and catch up on series (that we didn't watch the first time around) using Netflix. Streaming is great for shows and some movies, but they don't have everything available on streaming, so DVDs are a must-have for us.

      Now the cost of Netflix is $16 per month. That's $64 remaining per month to spend on Amazon and PSN. Assuming 4 episodes per month of a current show, we're spending $8 per month per show on Amazon or PSN. That works out to 8 shows per month until we break even with the cost of cable TV. And that's a lot of TV, we just don't watch that much TV.

      So at our house, we looked at the price increase as a measure of how that impacts our Amazon and PSN viewership. And so far, we're not unhappy with the price increase. Still less expensive to use Netflix + Amazon + PSN, rather than cable TV.

    36. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      How dare a company make profit. Evil! Evil!

      Pricing everywhere is based on trying to get the balance of getting the most money net. So if you raise your prices too much you will loose customers, if you drop prices to be too small you will get a lot of customers but the total will not be optimal.

      Besides if you look at the books those big profits are more often then not reinvested in the company for growth. Sans an expensive CEO fee.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    37. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by blackbear · · Score: 1

      I agree that the unbundled services are not worth the money, and I will vote with my wallet. Specifically, I'll be keeping the streaming service and save $2.00 per month. That's a couple of lattes made at home on my prosumer espresso machine. (I saved about $600.00/year when I started making them at home.)

      Meanwhile, I'll be looking at their competitors to see what my options are. I'm not real comfortable with a service provider that takes such huge gambles with a service I'm using as my primary form of video entertainment.

    38. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by RKBA · · Score: 0

      If:
      Power= Work/time
      Knowledge = Power
      time=Money
      Money= Work/Knowledge

      Therefore:
      Knowledge = Work / (Work/Knowledge)
      Knowledge = (Work/1)*(Knowledge/Work)
      Simplifying (work in numerator cancels work in denominator):

      Knowledge = Knowledge

    39. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Simply out of touch with America.
      I already gave up my lattes just so I could afford Netflix, and because I could no longer afford Blockbuster's pricing.
      The Pricing is why I switched to Netflix to begin with.

    40. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Mordok-DestroyerOfWo · · Score: 1

      So let them make the change in price if/when the change n delivery options occurs. This is pure and simple greed.

      --
      "Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right" - Salvor Hardin
    41. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Maestro4k · · Score: 3, Insightful

      From what I've read, NF is going to get pounded by renegotiated contracts with the studios next year. So this move appears to be preparation for "paying the piper". I don't think it was a cash grab.

      Netflix is still handling this atrociously from a PR standpoint. If it's due to the studios demanding more money (reports are it'll be considerably more, not a small amount more) then they need to tell their customers that. "Sorry, but licensing costs are going up as we have to renegotiate streaming deals with the various studios so this price increase has been forced on us from outside." Then consumers will direct their anger more at the studios, instead of Netflix. Saying something idiotic about the price increase being "a latte or two" is more or less guaranteed to make the PR situation WORSE. Much, much worse.

    42. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by sneakyimp · · Score: 1

      Studios facing lost revenues somehow makes me happy. That they are forcing prices up to make up the shortfall doesn't necessarily seem like the right approach. I think cutting the fat out of their operations is probably smarter unless they want to end up like the music industry (which had it's greatest sales in 1999 before a 10-year decline started). Personally, I would start by scaling back investment in traditional distribution like DVDs and Bluray and start investing in things like Hulu. Hulu's about to sell for an enormous profit while Blockbuster just went bankrupt. The longer they take to provide legal alternatives to P2P piracy, the sooner they can expect massive revenue losses and the decimation of their industry.

      As a side note, I would start investing less in Michael Bay and Martin Campbell and a lot more in Peter Jackson and the Coen brothers.

    43. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by rwven · · Score: 1

      I'm talking about at a high level. Not for us poor peons.

    44. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by mitgib · · Score: 2

      Right, with the 3 out at a time plan I am able to get a DVD in the mail everyday the mail runs. So about 25 a month, or about $1 each with the current plan. I've very torn as I do watch some streaming content, but not enough to pay about $5 more for it which is the increase I will face. With 45tb of storage I have a very healthy library already. No, the extra money will not mean much to me, but the data point to the Hollywood execs of another in the pile who won't pay $X for streaming is worth it to me. I'd rather take that money and give it to someone worthy at Vodo.net where an extra $5 month could make or break something getting made.

      --
      Being a spelling & grammar Nazi is a sign you do not poses the intelligence to contribute to the conversation
    45. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you hit the nail on the head. Hulu isn't a golden goose, or the people who own it wouldn't be selling it. Google is powerful, but tries to support everything through advertising; People aren't generally used to giving Google their credit card (Google Earth premium is the only service I can think of). The Cable / uVerse type companies are the biggest threat because they have two clubs to use: Outbid netflix for content, and cap internet bandwidth to make their service more costly and directly profit the ISP.

    46. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If that is indeed true (and it very well may be) then why does the new DVD only "mailing" plan not cost more than the new streaming only plan?

    47. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by aztracker1 · · Score: 1

      Personally, I really haven't been using the DVD delivery much at all, they tend to sit on my shelf for months, until I get around to it... the streaming is used a lot more, and I'd rather drop the DVDs, have my overall price down a few dollars a month and see more streaming content. I don't get the "just drop it" attitude.. if you aren't using both, as most people I know are either DVD only, or stream only.. it's a drop. I do think that if you keep both, you should get a $1 per DVD discount up to $3 for having both services.

      --
      Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
    48. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by sneakyimp · · Score: 1

      The recent investor interest in Hulu suggests that profitability is imminent, if not already happening. Google's problem is that they have failed to make nice with the content studios. On the contrary, content providers were furious about YouTube and likely still are. Content providers are a pretty tightly-knit little group and have been loath to do business with Google. I wouldn't be surprised if they have put google on some kind of secret blacklist. Personally, I think the content providers are shooting themselves in the foot. Google has the bandwidth, the expertise, and the ability to funnel the entire world to their content and put ads in it or charge money for it.

    49. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by faedle · · Score: 1

      So, it's just a coincidence that this price jump happens right around the time that they've effectively put the competition out of business?

    50. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 3, Funny

      Wake up and smell the cash grab.

      Heh yeah, back in my day big successful companies were philanthropic.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    51. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by hal2814 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Whatever. Just eat one fewer of those tiny spoonfuls of caviar or drink one less glass of Dom. Or if you don't want to skimp there, light your Cuban cigars with $1 bills instead of $5 bills now. You can cover the difference with the change left in your swim trunks after swimming in your money bin. Why are we complaining about such a small price increase?

    52. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by CTU · · Score: 0

      Being able to afford it and wanting to pay it are two different things. I have wanted an excuse to go to Blockbuster online for DVD's as I want to get more blue ray movies for my PS3. This is a great excuse to switch as I will be paying extra anyways.

      As for streaming, I might give that up as well, I am not sure yet.

    53. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure they exist. I call them the bargain bin at wallmart. For the cost of netflix now I can BUY 3 movies for 5 bucks each every month. The bargain bin has as good or better selection sometimes than streaming from netflix...

    54. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

      The fact is that shipping through the mail is just really expensive compared to streaming. Netflix needed to make this decision sooner or later, and I don't blame them for doing it. They've been talking about how expensive the mailings are for a long time now.

      If that was the only reason they increased prices, they would have upped the price on the disk shipping only. Instead they raised the prices across the board, and it seemed like they intended to gouge their largest userbase the most. To most users it just seems needlessly greedy.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    55. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by BarryJacobsen · · Score: 1

      What if part of the contract with the studios is that they must take the heat for the price increase and cannot blame the studios? MPAA Exec: "If the sheep bitch, tell'm it's a Latte"

    56. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      #1 and #5 are really the problem. Now that content providers woke up, they'd rather just deal with Comcast and TW directly. Heck, NBC and Comcast have the same owners now... Why share anything?

      Streaming is cheap, and cable provides own most of the high speed pipe to homes anyway. What I'm seeing is that all the providers would rather add streaming "free" to the existing tiers to keep you locked into the high priced cable plans with 75% content you don't even want.

      The only real power Netflix had was with the back catalog, but now that Netflix has to tell their numbers to studios for streaming, all the good stuff, no matter how old is pulled... Even stuff from the 70's and 80's will have two sequels but not the original...

      Now with the "crackdown" on Redbox and Netflix, even the older physical copies are being pulled from circulation. Even Apple is having a hard time keeping PAID content stocked without the 30 day penalty.. And again older stuff "goes missing" from iTunes on a regular basis as well.

    57. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1

      1) The streaming selection has been awful lately. Like really awful.

      I've just found it's harder to discover. It's no better or worse than usual, but finding the interesting things has gotten painful.

      2) The site redesign really sucks. You have to hover over a movie to see the rating.

      I don't know about this as I never browse through the site, but I do think the PS3 interface redesign really sucks. Makes it impossible to browse quickly, and difficult to browse at all.

      3) The recommendations for me are ghastly. Maybe it's because my girlfriend has been watching too many movies.

      The lack of separate "instant" queues for different account memebrs is extremely frustrating for this reason alone. Recommendations are useless to me, b/c my wife and I both rate instant content.

      4) I've received scratched DVDs and had streaming movies drop repeatedly (despite my 10Mbps connection). I have yet to receive any compensation or even an apology for these service failures.

      Do you report them? Every time I report an issue (and it's been infrequent, but it happens) I at least get a form letter apology. And in the case of bad DVD/BD, they ship the replacement same day, before receiving the bad one back from me. Hell - they detect when I stop watching a streaming movie partway through and send me an email encouraging me to report any issues.

      5) No video rental on demand? WTF??

      It's not their business model. Kind of like getting pissed at McDonalds for not selling Whoppers.

    58. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by TopSpin · · Score: 3, Interesting

      don't count on finding low cost channels for content from the studios to last forever

      Don't count of the value of the studio's assets to remain high forever. When cable appeared the legacy networks found themselves competing with new content that emerged exclusively on the new medium. Today the old networks are just slots in the basic cable lineup.

      Streaming is a true a la carte platform, far more liberal than cable/satellite. Anyone can knock together a Roku channel, contract with a CDN and deliver broadcast quality content to the world. No cable company need be dealt with. No big content gate-keeper gets a cut. That is an irresistible temptation to entrepreneurs.

      Eventually new and popular content will emerge that is exclusive to streaming. Competitors for staple cable channels will appear. Note that you can get live Al Jazeera on a Roku, but not CNN et al. The old cable staples will never truly make the transition. They'll have to be bought by those who do.

      Streaming is absolutely fucking excellent. The ultimate potential of streaming is way better than anything the traditional cable/satellite model offers, and it simply doesn't need Sony/Time Warner/Disney to succeed. As the big content owners of the world realize that consumers are happy with what has independently emerged on streaming media they'll have to compete with it. That is when the prices will be rationalized and the big content libraries get commoditized.

      In the immediate future the big content owners will play their games and try to squeeze the new medium for all it's worth. All they're really doing is creating opportunities for competitors. Streaming dominance with endemic competition is an inevitability. It will be the premier platform inside of ten years and all else will be legacy prizes lined up for the auction block.

      --
      Lurking at the bottom of the gravity well, getting old
    59. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by sneakyimp · · Score: 1

      In the United States, prices have not "decreased dramatically" for consumer broadband. In fact, they have remained largely stable with a mild increase.
      http://www.techpolicyinstitute.org/news/show/23252.html

      See figure 6 in the linked document which shows that the 25Mbps to 100Mbps plans have *increased* 25% from 2007 to 2009.

    60. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by FirstNoel · · Score: 1

      That's the big push, Netflix wants to push people to streaming, saving the people and them money.

      Unfortunately for Netflix, the streaming side is lackluster at best. They need a little more sugar with their medicine me thinks.

      They should ( and maybe will) increase the quality of their streaming service, people who don't want to pay $16 will drop the disks, save $2 and go to streaming. win-win...

      Disks are becoming an antiquated delivery mechanism anyway. Hell I'm ripping my dvds to my HTPC just so I don't have to get my lazy ass up to change the disk in the player.

      This reminds me though, I should change my netflix subscription, I'm still at 3 disks at a time, should bump that down to 2. Save a couple bucks.

      --
      "Hmm. I am to metaphor cheese as metaphor cheese is to transitive verb crackers!"
    61. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by lbgator · · Score: 2

      I read a theory yesterday that under the $9 grouped pricing scheme the mail-orderers and the streamers got counted together for their streaming costs. This move will likely split people into streamers or mailers. That shrinks the pool of potential streamers which lowers their costs.

      As I understand it, at least some of their contracts with the content industry force Netflix to pay some amount multiplied by the number of potential streamers. They are trying to save money here.

      I'm just repeating a rumor though - so.... you know....

    62. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by FirstNoel · · Score: 1

      They may save more money than that $2 by not having to manage the DVDs for you though..

      It works out for them as well.

      --
      "Hmm. I am to metaphor cheese as metaphor cheese is to transitive verb crackers!"
    63. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by hedwards · · Score: 1

      I'd be perfectly happy dumping the discs for streaming, but right now the options for streaming suck. It's got only a small fraction of the selection that they do with the discs and the selection changes regularly.

      On top of that, they're limiting the number of simultaneous streams which they hadn't previously done. So if you want to cover your whole household you might end up having to pay more.

      The real arrogance here isn't the price hike it's the pretending like it isn't a massive price hike and failing to give the customer anything for it. I'll be dropping back to 2 DVDs at a time with no streaming the way I did originally. I like streaming, but $8 a month is way too much considering the lack of selection. And don't forget the lack of any sort of bundling discount for folks that want both options. Which really most people need because the two services are really incomplete without each other.

    64. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by localman57 · · Score: 1

      You can also make an analogy to an all-you-can-eat buffet. Cable is all you can eat. But you order your TV of a menu, and pay for it per item. Just as an all-you-can-eat buffet has a tendancy to make you fat and unhealthy, cable tv has a tendancy to make you fat and mentally lazy. If you're sitting there flipping channels for an hour looking for something to watch, you really need to find something better to do. Some of you are going to think I'm being an arrogant, judgemental asshole for saying it, but it's true. I've made the transition myself, and love it. Go outside and plant some flowers. Learn how to do something you've always found interesting. Volunteer in order to help someone else. Focus more effort on dating / trying to get laid. Do anything...anything!...where you're producing or growing rather than just consuming. Do this for a year or two and you'll be amazed how much happier you are.

    65. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Tetsujin · · Score: 1

      If shipping through the mail is more expensive than streaming, why are they charging the same for both?

      Well, for starters they've also seriously decreased the amount of DVDs you can get from the service, right? Down from X number of DVDs at a time to X number of DVDs per month. With one DVD at a time you could potentially get four or more DVDs per month (assuming about a week turnaround in the mail, and assuming you watch your DVDs and return them rather than hold on to 'em for a while.) Compare that to streaming where you might watch a couple hours of video per day and it's different every day.

      But, if I'm not mistaken, streaming carries a different kind of cost: broadcasting rights. Movie rentals via physical media were negotiated a long time ago: I think someone renting out movies in that fashion doesn't need to do much besides just own a copy of the disc. But renting streaming movies over the internet is a different ball-game legally, because it's different enough that the studios saw and seized an opportunity to change the rules.

      I, too, believe they're trying to wean us off DVD rentals. Honestly, we got our three Netflix discs in the mail months ago and haven't yet returned any of them. We're very undisciplined with the DVDs. The one thing that makes me feel it may be worth holding onto Netflix DVD service is the fact that they have a good catalogue: lots of things that I wouldn't expect to find at the local video store (if I still had a local video store) let alone a dinky little Redbox kiosk. I haven't quite decided what I want to do about this change yet.

      --
      Bow-ties are cool.
    66. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      I was happy as hell with my 3x DVD's at a time out....from an account I've had since 2000!!!

      The streaming thing was nice...I had a PS3, a new Samsung tv and iPHone app that would stream, so it was a nice free addon.

      I didn't mind upgrading my Netflix for BluRay...they are a bit more $$, so I can see that.

      I rarely used the streaming...I'd look at old shows that weren't HD (not mentioning that the selection for streaming is VERY lame)...but for wanting to watch a modern movie in HD with great audio..I want the BluRay anyway. I mean, I didn't shell out money for a 59" plasma and sound system to play sub standard content on....

      Streaming was a fun thing for free...but when my billing time in Sept comes up, I'm dropping to the 3 at a time out for $19.99. It isn't worth the almost extra $8/mo it would cost me to add streaming back on.

      At the very least...I'd have thought they'd have grandfathered in existing customers, and only done the price change to new customers.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    67. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by HermMunster · · Score: 2

      A couple latte's cost from you, $40 more to fill the tank every week, an increase in the cost of food because they are using corn to make fuel, the price of education rising dramatically...after a while you miss a car payment or a house payment because you don't have the cash or you are forced to put this stuff on credit which costs even more in the long run. Then what? And what's the increase in value for the extra cost?

      At least a latte has some nutritional value and coffee had a reported medicinal value. What?

      --
      You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
    68. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by ethanms · · Score: 1

      ...or in my case a reduced customer.

      I was happy paying $10/mo for unlimited streaming and 1-DVD at a time, the thing is that I almost never cycled DVDs, the one I have now was shipped to me back in April, and the one before that was from 2010.

      For customers like me they had next to no cost for the DVD portion of my account, yet they were getting the $2/mo. Now they are making $2/mo less off people like me.

      For their sake I hope their number crunching works out because they will have a number of customers who opt to pay LESS money each month, but possibly cost them less then the $2/mo... they will have people like you who cancel... and they will have a few who agree to the extra $6/mo...

      I've been a customer since 2006, I enjoy their service, but in all honestly I have no particular loyalty to their brand. If Amazon's streaming service offered as much content as Netflix I'd seriously consider using them exclusively. Or, if my cable provider offered the same content as Netflix Watch Instantly, even with a $7-10/mo fixed fee, I'd probably go with them just for the sake of being able to watch on my TV w/o switching inputs from the cable box.

      I see that as the make or break for the great Netflix hype--if they can partner w/ a cable provider to provide the streaming via the cable STB and for an increased monthly fee, that will explode Netflix's potential even beyond the current hype. If they can't, well, then it's just a matter of time before someone dethrones them or they find themselves in a sea of copycats.

      What they did BEST was the mail order DVD biz and that's what allowed them to kill the Blockbuster and Walmart competitions, those other guys simply couldn't do it as efficiently as Netflix. Well, now it's just a bunch of servers and a UI. Much easier to dethrone that.

    69. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Zenaku · · Score: 2

      Until recently they had no competition. Did you mean Blockbuster? Please. A traditional video rental store is no competition for Netflix, at least not anymore than the yellow pages are competition for Google.

      They are only now facing real competition, from Hulu, amazon, google, and on-demand services offered by cable companies.

      I'm not happy about the price increase, but I am hopeful that it allows them to work out better content deals.

      --
      If fate makes you a motorcycle, you become a motorcycle.
    70. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by cayenne8 · · Score: 2

      Because you might stream 50 movies a month

      Trouble is....their selection of movies to stream is pathetic. I would find it VERY difficult to find 50 of them I'd be interested in watching from the streaming collection.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    71. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by jimbolauski · · Score: 1

      What's your point that using an equation on itself will result in any elements equating to themselves when solved for.

      --
      Knowledge = Power
      P= W/t
      t=Money
      Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
    72. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by sourcerror · · Score: 1

      You live on the wrong continent.

    73. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      Saturday delivery is going away soon.

      Got any links on this? I'd not heard any US Postal announcements to this effect....

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    74. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by sneakyimp · · Score: 1

      Yeah something is rotten about this. Why can't it just be as simple as:
      1) Whatever you want, it's in there.
      2) If you want to rent it, it has a price which you can take or leave
      3) It doesn't matter whose network it's on.

      I would obviously pay more for a decent movie. What I hate is how movies appear and disappear and the movies I really want to watch are nearly impossible to find online.

    75. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by sneakyimp · · Score: 1

      This is probably true. I read something here on /. the other day about how federal stimulus money was spent to bring broadband connectivity to rural Idaho at a cost of about $350,000 per household which is about 7 times the income of the family in it and nearly twice the cost of the home. We are geographically dispersed and suffer from exceedingly poor judgement.

    76. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Eponymous+Hero · · Score: 1

      I don't think it was a cash grab.

      Just because the content providers are doing it and Netflix has to pay their protection money to the MPAA mafia doesn't mean it's not a cash grab.

      --
      insensitive clod overlords obligatory xkcd car analogy russian reversals whoosh pedant fanbois ftfy in 3...2...1..PROFIT
    77. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by secretcurse · · Score: 1

      Umm, if you don't care about the streaming, the disc-only plans are $2 cheaper. I'm your Netflix polar opposite- I think I've checked out 3 or 4 movies in the 2 years I've been a member, but I stream constantly. So, I dropped the DVD part of the plan and I'm paying $7.99 instead of $9.99.

      --
      I'm using all of my mod points to mod ancient memes down. Please join me.
    78. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, that must by why the streaming package did not go up in price. Durrr.

    79. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 2

      Scrooge McDuck? Is it really you?

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    80. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by secretcurse · · Score: 2

      You're very misinformed. They haven't dropped the X number of DVDs at a time service. They are offering a new $4.99 service that limits the number of DVDs per month to 2 and includes 2 hours of streaming.

      --
      I'm using all of my mod points to mod ancient memes down. Please join me.
    81. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by crgrace · · Score: 1

      They can't have it both ways. One one hand, they send me bullshit, cutesy emails from "Your Friends at Netflix" and on the other hand they act like a rapacious, amoral corporation.

      They want you to think they have your best interests at heart while they reach around to your wallet.

      They have every right to be abusive to their customers and charge what the market will bear. I just wish they would spare me the hypocrisy and the lies.

      I canceled my subscription.

    82. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by sneakyimp · · Score: 1

      RE #1: Yes I suppose there are a couple of decent movies left. I recently watched Gangs of New York (meh) and I've seen that Stripes is available as well as a personal favorite: Zardoz. What's maddening is all of the garbage. Yes I know Zardoz is garbage but it's *my* kind of garbage.

      RE #2: It's these sorts of failures that make me think Netflix is doomed.

      RE #3: This is kind of interesting actually. Perhaps the 'garbage' Netflix is showing me is really the horror of the fact that my girlfriend and I share very little common ground movie-wise. This is, of course, the million-dollar recommendation engine, isn't it?

      RE #4: Yes I've reported them but a form letter doesn't help me at all. They mail the new disk out the day they receive your old disk anyway. That I've lost about a week because I couldn't watch the movie is what sucks. They could at least consider sending two disks to make up for the lost cycle. I complained about the poor streaming on one particular movie and didn't get any response at all. I expect this is likely what happens when you have such rapid subscriber growth.

      RE #5: Note that you're comparing burgers with burgers. Netflix could easily offer on-demand rentals if they wanted (and provided the studios would permit them). There's no technical reason preventing them from doing so. In fact, were they to do so then they could probably avoid such problems as Sony pulling their content due to a view cap because both Netflix and Sony would both get paid per viewing. I suspect this would also result in a much broader catalog of movies viewable on-line. In fact, if they could offer on-demand access to *good* movies via streaming and charge extra for it, they could probably squeeze the extra $6 out of me *quite* easily. That they choose not to--or that some fucked up business relationship prevents it--is what boggles my mind. I smell fail here.

    83. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by hal2814 · · Score: 2

      McDuck?! That filthy cheat is too cheap for caviar and fine cigars!

      Yours truly,
      Flintheart Glomgold

    84. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by ThanatosMinor · · Score: 3, Funny

      Wait, so competition increases prices for the consumer? Sometimes I wonder what the Invisible Hand is doing while I'm watching the other one take my money.

    85. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by jojoba_oil · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My god! The stunning arrogance of the McMansion aristocracy.

      I don't know if it's arrogance or just plain ignorance. They figure that since they drink a latte every morning, everybody does... "Right? Right guys?"

      Remember the /. story about how 'most people love our new website redesign'?

      If I was a Netflix customer, I'd drop them. If I was a Netflix shareholder, I'd drop them -- not because of the price increase, but because of the sweeping generalizations that seem completely untrue "most people this" and "most people that". There's a serious case of out-of-touch-with-consumers there. Maybe someone who runs a marketing/consumer-research firm has a jackpot just waiting for them...

    86. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by scharkalvin · · Score: 2

      They want to do that but there is a lot of outrage. And if the post office cuts back to less than 5 days a week there will be legal problems elsewhere since overdue bills that come late in the mail can't be overdue by government decree.

    87. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by muindaur · · Score: 1

      Good luck then. It's a business, they need to make money, and the studios want more in their licenses. Blame them, not Netflix. I find their response a refreshing, no bull, approach. I hate companies that try and sugarcoat things. My account won't be cancelled because of it. Hell, the amount of money they save me (World of Warcraft too) because I can put the few good cable shows in the queue is more than enough. Otherwise I would be spending more than $1,000 a year to see those shows.

      People really need to remember inflation happens, and a business needs to make money. I don't like that I will need to pay more, but it's not very much.

    88. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by gorzek · · Score: 1

      It would make no sense to eliminate Saturday anyhow, since there's already no mail service on Sunday. This would make Mondays a total mess for the USPS. I've heard it more frequently bandied about that one of the midweek days would be eliminated, though how much money this will save is debatable since what days mail is delivered has no impact on how much total mail volume there is.

    89. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by naasking · · Score: 1

      Big mistake IMO. By making Netflix bigger, they get more leverage against the studios, who are the real bad guys that are driving prices up. With more leverage, they can put more pressure on the studios to push prices down.

    90. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Merk42 · · Score: 1, Troll

      So you're putting Netflix on the same priority as food and education?

      Really?

    91. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      Canceled as soon as they sent email with their new pricing scheme.

      Did you TELL them that's why? If not, then it's not useful feedback to them.

      Plus, if you think the price is worth it now, why didn't you stick with it for ~2 months until the new price kicks in (it kicks in on your billing date on/after Sept 1).

      (I'm not sure what I will do -- I probably will cancel streaming, and lower the amount of DVDs I get.. I have been grandfathered in with 4 DVDs at the 3 DVD price for a long time.)

    92. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I called this a year ago when I read the disclosures about their licensing terms and the crap w/ the studios about "getting access" to their content.

      You gotta remember, we live in a world where powerful people like their slutty fucking whores, their coke and their booze.

      Why are they gonna give it up when you proles are just gonna pay the new fee.

    93. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by jgagnon · · Score: 1

      Or maybe they can't tell their customers that because it's in the contract. Or maybe they can't play the blame game because it will cost them more for contracts the next time. The REAL problem is that there are too few companies in control of 95% of the content.

      --
      Remember to maintain your supply of /facepalm oil to prevent chafing.
    94. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What shipping costs?? My girlfriend gets her Netfix discs via US Mail...

    95. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except- the streaming cost to the customer remains the same. Most businesses would increase, you know, the service that is costing more.

    96. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by mrxak · · Score: 1

      Yeah, they want to charge me almost double. I'm not canceling, but I am downgrading my account, so they'll be taking in half of what they did before from me. I hardly use Netflix much anymore as it is. Netflix was great in its heyday, but they've simply not kept up with technologies and the marketplace.

    97. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      Heck, NBC and Comcast have the same owners now... Why share anything?

      Because they were required to as terms for the acquisition.

      (I'm not sure if I even agree with that requirement, but a lot of people seem to think the government doesn't regulate things enough to benefit the consumer. But they made this a requirement.)

    98. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by tepples · · Score: 1

      Still less expensive to use Netflix + Amazon + PSN, rather than cable TV.

      Until you get into the kinds of shows that Netflix, Amazon, and PSN just can't provide, such as Monday Night Football or The Rachel Maddow Show. Or have they picked up news and sports lately?

    99. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Riceballsan · · Score: 1

      I believe rwven is pretty clear that he's talking about for the people who own/maintain the pipes, IE comcast/TWcable/netflix themselves are paying less to maintain their pipes, the article you are sending is just showing that rather then sending those savings as discounts to the customer, they are charging the customer more to raise the profit margins farther.

    100. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Interesting that this thread has 430 replies already. For just entertainment, it sure hits a nerve. I always wondered how people can get all worked up over a television show or a movie. If I don't like the price / service / content I just do something different.

      FWIW, I cancelled our streaming subscription. Given the wonky selection and crappy resolution, we rarely used it. It was an interesting experiment, for the $2 / month extra it was 'worth it' - for the additional cost, not so much. Turns out Gilligan's Island just isn't as funny as I thought it was when I was a kid.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    101. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Doctor+Faustus · · Score: 2

      That is, the studios thought that MOST people bought DVDs and saw movies in theaters and Netflix was just there to "mop up" the small fraction of the market that didn't pay through the other channels.

      That was true for me for a long time, but they stopped that themselves when they came out with Blu-Ray at much higher prices. I didn't want to buy Blu-Rays for twice as much, but I also didn't want to buy DVDs when there was a Blu-Ray, so I turned my NetFlix account back on.

    102. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Jim+Hall · · Score: 1

      > Until you get into the kinds of shows that Netflix, Amazon, and PSN just can't provide, such as Monday Night Football or The Rachel Maddow Show. Or have they picked up news and sports lately?

      I don't watch sports, neither does my wife, so I don't really know where to point you for sports. I think there's an option for that somewhere though, maybe even on PSN or Amazon. I just don't know.

      As for news: why would you watch news on television? I stay current on news by reading news web sites. There are a few US sites I use regularly, plus Google News for "trending news", and BBC for a "foreign" perspective.

    103. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by bickle · · Score: 1

      You are overlooking the fact that not too long ago, Blockbuster *was* the competition. They were the established king, and Netflix was the newcomer.

    104. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by ZombieBraintrust · · Score: 1

      Netflix prices have already gone up over the years. This isn't the first rate hike. So no this has nothing to do with the USPS shipping costs. In fact the dvd side of the buisness has to be getting cheaper. Their sunk costs for the distribution centers are already paid for by now. This is just about increased cost of licensing the streaming side of the buisness. They need more content and better quality content. That cost $$

    105. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by tangelogee · · Score: 1

      Blathering Blatherskite!

      ...uh-oh!

    106. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by tepples · · Score: 1

      As for news: why would you watch news on television?

      She says it's hard to read a news web site from a recliner in the living room, and it's hard to read a news web site while doing housework. She's got wireless headphones plugged into her cable box so that she can walk around the house and listen to MSNBC.

    107. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      RE #3: This is kind of interesting actually. Perhaps the 'garbage' Netflix is showing me is really the horror of the fact that my girlfriend and I share very little common ground movie-wise. This is, of course, the million-dollar recommendation engine, isn't it?

      Why do you expect a recommendation engine to work with two completely different people's input?

      garbage in, garbage out.

      A week? Wow, your mail must be bad. I usually have 2 day turnaround to get a new movie.

    108. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Over 50% increase...

    109. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by shermo · · Score: 1

      I like comments like this when most of the world hasn't even got Netflix yet :D

      You Americans aren't so behind the times as you sometimes claim!

      --
      Insanity: voting in the same two parties over and over again and expecting different results
    110. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      Until recently they had no competition. Did you mean Blockbuster? Please. A traditional video rental store is no competition for Netflix, at least not anymore than the yellow pages are competition for Google.

      I presume they meant Blockbuster's DVD-by-mail service.

      Also, $1-ish for redbox seems like reasonable competition to me (since I'm in an area where there are relatively convenient ones).

      They are only now facing real competition, from Hulu, amazon, google, and on-demand services offered by cable companies.

      Only now? Haven't cable companies had PPV for much longer than netflix has even existed? (Not all cable "On Demand" is free, right? If I'm correct, then it's at least partially renamed PPV.)

      None of the other ones are all you can eat and/or commercial free.

    111. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by shermo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      What I hate is how movies appear and disappear and the movies I really want to watch are nearly impossible to find online.

      Of course there's always other options... It's always nice when the illegal option is both cheaper, more convenient and a better product.

      --
      Insanity: voting in the same two parties over and over again and expecting different results
    112. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by metamatic · · Score: 1

      That was true for me for a long time, but they stopped that themselves when they came out with Blu-Ray at much higher prices. I didn't want to buy Blu-Rays for twice as much, but I also didn't want to buy DVDs when there was a Blu-Ray, so I turned my NetFlix account back on.

      I also didn't want to buy Blu-ray because of the content protection and region encoding. I can rip DVDs and my player is region-free, whereas I don't have software to rip Blu-ray, and my player is region locked. So I still buy DVDs, or rent Blu-ray.

      --
      GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
    113. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by demonbug · · Score: 1

      So expensive that they were able to build a huge company on it but now, suddenly, it's not profitable. Wake up and smell the cash grab.

      No kidding.

      What really irritates me about it is that while I mostly use streaming, there are a hell of a lot of movies that aren't available. I've got the 1 DVD (well, blu-ray even though the bastards charge an extra $2 a month for it; in Blockbuster's mail rental system they cost the same) at a time option, which we use for the occasional movie that we really want to watch that isn't available streaming (or for foreign movies since they seem to be incapable of offering subtitles, or movies that I want to watch with decent audio, or things I want to watch in actual HD, etc.). We might go through one or two discs a month, and there have been months at a time when we don't go through any. So no, I'm not willing to pay $8 a month for one or two movies - but I'd be happy to pay $1-$2 per if they offered such an option (they don't).
      Sadly I don't seem to have an alternative any more - the only local rental options are Redbox with their extremely limited selection, or a couple of small independent video stores that are barely hanging on and only have a slightly better selection than Redbox. The rate we've been watching movies lately it probably makes more sense just to buy one that I want to watch every other month.

    114. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Zenaku · · Score: 1

      No, I'm saying that Blockbuster wasn't _really_ competition, in the sense that it wasn't really a fight. Not from Netflix's perspective, anyway, from Blockbusters perspective it was the fight of their life. In my view, they weren't joined by a newcomer, they were just flat out replaced.

      Netflix came along and offered an alternative product that was better and achieved the same purpose. They didn't open a rental store across the street from Blockbuster and out-compete them on those terms, they replaced the entire video rental paradigm with a whole new business model.

      I admit this is a fuzzy point, and just my own opinion on what constitutes "real" competition. But I hope you get what I'm saying. They "competed" in the same way that the automobile competed with the horse and buggy. Blockbuster didn't stand a chance of holding onto the market with the traditional brick and mortar stores, and by the time they put out a copycat DVD-by-mail service they were already circling the drain.

      --
      If fate makes you a motorcycle, you become a motorcycle.
    115. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I was a 1 or 2 DVD a month only customer, I might not be upset over the changes since I could still get a 1 or 2 DVD plan. Those on a plan higher than that have no choice but to either switch to a 1 or 2 DVD only plan or accept the price increase. My $20/mon 4 DVD at a time plan goes to $30/mon for the privilege of streaming. I'd gladly drop streaming and stick to my $20 plan, but I don't have that choice. Sure a 2 DVD at a time plan would be cheaper, but it is not what I want.

    116. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by demonbug · · Score: 1

      Until recently they had no competition. Did you mean Blockbuster? Please. A traditional video rental store is no competition for Netflix, at least not anymore than the yellow pages are competition for Google.

      They are only now facing real competition, from Hulu, amazon, google, and on-demand services offered by cable companies.

      I'm not happy about the price increase, but I am hopeful that it allows them to work out better content deals.

      Actually, I greatly preferred Blockbuster's rent by mail system. For basically the same price as Netflix (plus or minus a dollar or two) you got the same unlimited rentals, blu-ray was the same price as DVD, and instead of mailing a movie back you could take it to the nearest store and exchange it for something else right there for no charge. It was pretty awesome when we lived down the street from a Blockbuster.

      Eventually we dropped Blockbuster and switched to Netflix because 1) we moved to a place where it was not convenient to get to a Blockbuster location (there used to be 2 in town; now there are none), and 2) no streaming (at the time). The availability of entire series for streaming was a big part of the reason we switched, as it was always a pain in the rear to watch a TV series by mail.

      That said, I wasn't all that upset about Blockbuster going into bankruptcy - aside from their rent-by-mail system they implemented in response to the immense pressure from Netflix, they were always WAY overpriced.

    117. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Zenaku · · Score: 1

      I agree about redbox being reasonable competion, just forgot to mention them. Although the selection with redbox is limited to fairly recent films, whereas Netflix's mail service (unlike the streaming) is pretty damn complete.

      To your other point, cable companies have had PPV for a long time, and even "free" On Demand for a while, but in my experience it has only been since the rise of Netflix that the On Demand offerings have begun to offer much selection. Just a few years ago, my cable companies On Demand menu contained a handful of new releases, and a couple dozen randomly selected older films. Now, the list of available movies is much longer, and almost all of the popular cable shows are available on demand as well.

      --
      If fate makes you a motorcycle, you become a motorcycle.
    118. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      especially with competition from Amazon and Google in the works.

      What is there to switch to NOW?
      Personally, I'd like to see a point-system/credits type of thing to make it more obvious what studios are forcing on the providers. I don't use netflix much... if I did, $10/month for unlimited dvd's through mail is a great deal (far cheaper than my local rentals), but I just don't use it enough. I'm the ideal customer for their unlimited use plan! I currently have only their streaming service, and that price isn't changing. Sadly, the content there sucks (which I'm sure is due mostly to the studios).

      The other streaming services I've seen charge WAY too much. For example, try to watch a TV series (ex. Breaking Bad or Dexter via Amazon, and it'll cost as much as just buying the DVD). The convenience is nice, but not worth a 1-time-watch (or one day rental) at equal price to buying price. It'd barely be worth it if they let you download and save it.

      I'm probably going to get a something like the HDHomeRun digital TV tuner, and fall back on Hulu and local rentals to fill in the gaps.

      I *really* don't get why TV content isn't put up by the studios themselves with ads... they would reap the ad money directly. I'd be fine with that (assuming it's accessible). Movie studios could do the same... offer a free version with ads. And why not do it all at the exact same time it airs or is released on DVD? That'd virtually eliminate pirating. They could also leverage the cable companies to put in CDN's for them, saving the world a lot of bandwidth. Seems like it's just a bunch of needless red tape delaying things.

    119. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you're pirating the Netflix DVDs?

    120. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by demonbug · · Score: 1

      In the United States, prices have not "decreased dramatically" for consumer broadband. In fact, they have remained largely stable with a mild increase.
      http://www.techpolicyinstitute.org/news/show/23252.html

      See figure 6 in the linked document which shows that the 25Mbps to 100Mbps plans have *increased* 25% from 2007 to 2009.

      The parent wasn't referring to the price we as consumers pay, but to the prices that our corporate overlords pay - which by every account I have seen has been dropping steadily since time immemorial. The most recent number I heard was something like $0.02 per gigabyte transported - which means that with the new caps implemented by AT&T you can't actually cost them more than $3 per month in raw transport cost ($5 if you are on u-verse).

      All the parent was saying was that the cost to Netflix to stream a given movie (in terms of data, not licensing) has decreased significantly since they first started and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future, while costs associated with mailing physical disks will only rise.

      I'd say it is a combination of cash grab (moving people towards the service that costs less to provide) and preparing for expected increases in licensing costs.

    121. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are aware that Netflix get's special pricing from the USPS, aren't you? What makes a huge difference in profits is raising your rate by 50 %.

    122. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by cyberstealth1024 · · Score: 1

      They've been talking about it for the last couple years... I haven't seen much press on it lately, but a bill was introduced to reduce delivery to 5 days.

      ‘(h) Nothing in this title or any other provision of law shall be considered to prevent the Postal Service from taking whatever actions may be necessary to provide for 5-day delivery of mail and a commensurate adjustment in rural delivery of mail, subject to the requirements of section 3661.’.

      Excerpt from the bill (Title I, Subtitle B, section 111(h))
      Read this as "allows USPS to move to 5-day delivery" not "mandates USPS to move to 5-day delivery"

      - Washington Post article
      - from the horse's mouth
      - the bill....112th Congress H.R. 2309 (Postal Reform Act of 2011) sponsored by Rep. Darrell Issa [R-CA]
      - Press release on Rep. Issa's page with a decent summary

    123. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by CrankyFool · · Score: 2

      (I work at Netflix)

      When I was underemployed a few years ago, I made a game of trying to get as many DVDs from Netflix as possible. I figured out at some point that the maximum possible number of DVDs you can get in an average 30-day month is 10*X, where X is the number of DVDs you can have out at a time. So the best-case scenario for a 3-at-a-time plan is 30 DVDs a month.

      (I mentioned this when I had my second interview here. The person I was talking with confirmed, and noted we had 8-at-a-time subscribers who were going through close to 80 DVDs a month).

    124. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      Streaming is absolutely fucking excellent. The ultimate potential of streaming is way better than anything the traditional cable/satellite model offers

      Except that streaming, by definition, requires a constant Internet connection. Also, it seems to me that there are fewer glitches in standard cable distribution than there are in Internet-based streaming, since each channel has guaranteed bandwidth on cable.

      Also, unless there is a (higher priced) commercial free versions, you're being forced to watch (regular) commercials.. whereas with cable/satellite/OTA, you can FF through the commercials. (Yes, I said "regular commercials", since obviously there is product placement, which usually doesn't bother me, and onscreen bugs/logos/ads, which do.)

      While I agree with the idea of PPV (or pay per show), the prices are ridiculous.. if the other services were all you can eat like netflix, I would like them.

      As it is now, having both is useful.

    125. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 2

      Of course there's always other options... It's always nice when the illegal option is both cheaper, more convenient and a better product.

      I'm a babyboomer (ie, not a kid by any means) and I have been renting NF for about 8 yrs now. I choose to rent and pay a bit of money since it seems somewhat fair. I could have chosen to not pay and download, instead.

      fastforward to today. I'm feeling less and less hospitable toward MPAA guys and everyone connected to it. push me further and my goodwill will disappear.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    126. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by sneakyimp · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the informative post -- although that .02 per GB number is shocking. TW Cable charges me $51/mo for 10Mbps cable. I literally cannot switch because no one else offers anything above 1.5Mbps.

    127. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      I have not seen my dsl bill go down.

      not once.

      what the hell are you talking about?

      cost of data NEVER goes down. not really.

      cost to the equipment vendors does go down (routers get cheaper, etc) - but this is rarely, if ever, passed to us as a savings.

      only time I get cheaper data is if I DOWNGRADE or maybe move to a different area.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    128. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by cynyr · · Score: 1

      I'm going the other way, dropping the DVDs, if there is a movie I really want to watch i guess i'll redbox it to netflix's loss.

      I understand though that this isn't really netflix's choice here. I'd bet that a bunch of the movie studios went "the prices for new stuff is (${OLDCOST} *3) take it or leave it" which is a shame for me.

      --
      All of the above was encrypted with a Quad ROT-13 method. Unauthorized decryption is in violation of the DMCA.
    129. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by cynyr · · Score: 1

      Really i think they are trying to curtail the costly part of the business, DVD rentals. I know i'll be keeping the streaming and dropping the DVDs. If i want a DVD seems like my local redbox(1/4 mile away) will work just fine.

      --
      All of the above was encrypted with a Quad ROT-13 method. Unauthorized decryption is in violation of the DMCA.
    130. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope, not even a bit. The GP is pointing out that with costs of necessities rising, if a luxury has a price increase with no appreciable benefit, the odds are that it is what will get cut in order to make that mortgage payment.

    131. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Roger+Wilcox · · Score: 1

      Amen.

      I was a little bit upset about it at first because I get on average around 2 DVDs every month and it meant I would have to drop down from my $10 streaming + 1 DVD plan to the $8 streaming only plan. At $8/mo it will be cheaper for me to buy outright the kind of content I was renting from them by mail. Observe:

      Generic 26 Episode Anime Series
      Netflix now: $6 extra to watch and return 1 DVD at a time over 3 months
      Netflix soon: $24 extra to watch and return 1 DVD at a time over 3 months
      Amazon.com: $26 to get 6 DVDs at once and keep them forever

      Stated more directly:
      400% of what I pay now to continue the same service
      433% of what I pay now to skip all the queuing & shipping bullshit and own the content myself, permanently

      The latte comment is both ignorant and arrogant and will absolutely exacerbate the already evident outrage. I am now wary about patronizing a company that has decided to mock me for being a tightwad rather than legitimately addressing the above-illustrated economic problem they have created for themselves.

    132. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by phorm · · Score: 1

      I'm fairly sure you don't have to be living in a mansion to buy a latte or two (per-month, not per-day).

      To be fair, the demographic of most net-steaming users with a computer and network connection good enough to stream is probably in line with the "latte or two" crowd, at least around here. I'm not really sure about the DVD shipment service as I don't know anyone who uses it (not even sure it's *offered* in Canada, where I live).

      Most of my friends - even those in the lower-income brackets - still stop at Starbucks every now and then for an overpriced drink. After the first two you've already passed the price of netflix in a month.

      A better comparison might have been "a movie rental" though, as even one of those at many video stores hits pretty close to the monthly cost of either netflix streaming/delivery services.

    133. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by steelfood · · Score: 1

      Yeah, let them eat cake.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    134. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by steelfood · · Score: 1

      short of piracy, don't count on finding low cost channels for content from the studios to last forever.

      I get my dose of consumption through legal means: I don't consume what I don't think is worthwhile.

      Which basically means, yeah, if I get into a free movie screening somewhere, I'll go, but if not, I'll pass. I won't even bother to watch it on TV when it comes out later. It's not that important in my social life, which is dominated more by alcohol and the consumption thereof, sports, and where to eat cheap and good food, than something in the movies or on TV.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    135. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Seumas · · Score: 0

      Frankly, I am surprised that so many of my fellow geeks who are presumably my age or even younger are throwing such a fit over fucking DVDs in 2011. I can understand your grandma using DVDs. Maybe even more mom, depending on your age. But DVDs are such a hassle. My home entertainment sees a DVD even less often than any of my computers see a CD. I think I bought the Planet Earth series on BluRay when I got my first PS3, back in 2006. That's probably the last time.

    136. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Seumas · · Score: 1

      That comment makes no sense. You're basically saying that they built their business on 1997 technology, so there's no reason it shouldn't still be profitable in 2011.

    137. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We're surrounded by fucking retards. Netflix is a corporation, and their service is a luxury. There's nothing McDuckish in maximizing profits. They know they have an elastic market. We know the content providers have decided to also rape us through netflix. Bottom line though, is that it's irrational to get angry about a luxury that got more expensive. It's a fucking luxury. It's not gasoline or corn or even fucking McDonalds.

    138. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 1

      Well,

      I stuck the McMansion label on the exec, not the customer... :-)

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    139. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes the mail delivery is more expensive than streaming, so why is streaming the same price as a DVD. Yes you can potentially watch more shows streaming, but the streaming selection is smaller and by and large 2nd tier compared to the DVD content. Streaming used to be a free add-on to their DVD plan. It seams to me they have blamed this on DVD delivery but it is really an increase in the price of streaming from them. Hulu plus is looking good.

    140. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by DougInKY · · Score: 1

      Not just for young folks either. I am retired and we cut cable tv over a year ago. We don't miss it. Get stuff from Netflixs, Amazon, or iTunes as needed. A lot cheaper than my cable tv bill used to be AND we don't watch video anywhere near as much as we used to. We get out more.

      --
      Nothing remains as constant as change.
    141. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by twistedcubic · · Score: 1

      Indeed. Netflix only recently started streaming the Star Trek series. I simply can not cancel right now.

    142. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      For customers like me they had next to no cost for the DVD portion of my account, yet they were getting the $2/mo. Now they are making $2/mo less off people like me.

      They were getting $2 per month from you for 1-DVD per 6 months or whatever, but the licensing costs you exert on them are exactly the same as someone thats doing 6 DVD's a month.

      This is one of the key issues. They are effectively paying people like you $2 to remove the DVD option that you arent using, and paying others $2 to remove the streaming option that they arent using. This makes their licensing deals more efficient, as they are no longer negotiating for your DVD service.

      They have approximately 25 million subscribers. Lets presume that 7 million go Streaming-only, 7 million go DVD-only, 7-million go Streaming+DVD, and 4 million jump ship.

      So now at the negotiation table for stream licensing, they are talking about 14 million seats instead of 25 million. They lost no more than $14 million in revenue on the streamers, lost no more than $14 million of the DVD'rs, and lost exactly $40 million from those that jump ship. But they gain at least $42 million from the dual-users.

      All-in-all the service changes are probably close to revenue-neutral, but their position is much better at the bargaining table.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    143. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Their streaming content contracts went up from $300 million to something like $2 billion. My plan went up from $23 to $27 (3 dvd + streaming). The price increase is most certainly not covering the increase in the cost of the content for Netflix. If you want to get mad at somebody then I believe the movie industry are the appropriate people.

    144. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Netflix Shares are at $300.00... And you mean to tell me that they cant make a profit with what they have. They haven't even offered anything new for the price hikes. How were tehy able to make money this whole last year with these prices? They are robbing us blind because they think they have the power to do so. If we dont stand up for whats right nothing will change. If we as people stick together things will get done. If netflix loses 25% of their customers and 75% stay and pay the increase they would have still made a profit from the increase. They are expecting people to be pissed. But there money is on the 75% not to do a damn thing about it. Cause thats what happened before. and it will happen again if we dont speak up

    145. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by jordan_robot · · Score: 2

      Frankly, I am surprised that so many of my fellow geeks who are presumably my age or even younger are throwing such a fit over fucking DVDs in 2011.

      Clue up buddy. That's probably because many people find the streaming selection to be anemic. Also note the constant swapping of available streaming content (not adding to, but swapping). Netflix knows many people will be split between an instantly available (but crappy selection) stream and slow to arrive (but great selection) dvds. They're betting on more than half keeping both services so that Netflix at least breaks even, I'm sure the goal is that more than half will keep both services.

      Myself, I'm quitting NF, partially because of the money, but mostly because they blatently lied when they announced the fee hikes. Fuck that, we've got enough to deal with in life without adding more liars to the mix.

    146. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      Netflix just started up in Canada last Septemter, and it's only available in the streaming option, for $7.99.While their selection leaves a lot to be desired, it's still the best thing going. That's less than 2 rental from blockbuster (brick and mortar) and the mail based DVD company Zip.ca has prices that are around $20. Unless you want the 1 DVD at a time option, which with mail speed here can be quite slow.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    147. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by bigdonthedj · · Score: 1

      What I hate is how movies appear and disappear and the movies I really want to watch are nearly impossible to find online.

      Of course there's always other options... It's always nice when the illegal option is both cheaper, more convenient and a better product.

      I hate to agree with the illegal option, but it unfortunately happens to be the truth.

    148. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not really... I'm pretty sure they just implied that all their users are penny-pinching, self-absorbed yuppies who drink lattes and are too tight to pay reasonable money to poor, hardworking companies like Netflix.

      They're saying that their users are like this guy: http://www.b3takit.co.uk/site/2011/05/07/smug-bastard/

    149. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Cederic · · Score: 1

      I'm paying each month around half of what I paid 17 years ago. In that time I've gone from 28kbps to 20mbps.

      My price hasn't gone up in 8 years. In that time I've gone from 2mbps to 20mbps.

      My cost per byte downloaded has gone down exponentially. Maybe I'm just lucky enough to be living in the right country?

    150. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait, so competition increases prices for the consumer? Sometimes I wonder what the Invisible Hand is doing while I'm watching the other one take my money.

      It does in this case because the pressure was being put on the suppliers to offer a cheaper price.

    151. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 1

      That is way too funny. It is Bastille Day today, July 14th. Someone has got to mark this guy up.

      --
      -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
    152. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by captjc · · Score: 1

      This is just a bunch of nerds ranting in a forum. This is nothing.

      It's a fucking luxury. It's not gasoline or corn or even fucking McDonalds.

      If it was McDonalds, I would expect looting and rioting in the street. That isn't a crappy restaurant, it is a (crappy) religion! I know quite a few people that eat it for breakfast, lunch, dinner, and midnight snack!

      --
      Slow Down Cowboy! It's been 1 hour, 47 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment
    153. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by nutrock69 · · Score: 1

      Well, this fellow geek just dropped the streaming option and lowered my fee by 4 bucks. The streaming option was added to my account for free when it came out, but I never used it. Why? DRM. I'm not going to infect my PCs with any flavor DRM, and I'm surprised anybody on Slashdot chooses to do so willingly.

      Not to mention the crap selection available for streaming. And, oh yeah, I almost forgot, our upcoming bandwidth cap overlords will be squeezing you all a bit harder to let you keep streaming your DRM-laden videos. The tiered plans they anticipate will make the $7.99 Netflix hike look paltry. Me, I'm dropping a free service I never used anyway and saving money on this price hike, and Netflix has to continue mailing me those red envelopes, something they're trying to get us to stop having them do by - um - well, instituting this price hike...

    154. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's just an assumption on your part. A few possible reasons for canceling early could include:

      1) They won't have time in the future to cancel.
      2) Ignorance. They did not know that.
      3) Other reasons that are unknown to us.

      Making correct assumptions on peoples' feelings is quite difficult.

    155. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by sharkey · · Score: 1

      So, a 60% price increase is "small"?

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
    156. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't reliably stream standard video (forget high-def) and yes I have tried. I can eat this price increase. But when they raise the price again in six months to cover the lost revenue of all the people that they have pissed off and closed their accounts, they will make it economically feasible for me to drop them and start going to the theater again.

      A company that does not care about pissing off their customer base is a company that doesn't care if they stay in business or not.

    157. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      The trouble with rich people is they don't know they're rich.

      Why in the hell do they think folks are going for netflix, anyway? To supplement their over the air TV because a hundred bucks a month for cable is stupid to normal people (excluding stupid normal people who can't really afford it but pay it anyway). Normal people don't go to Starbucks. Normal people drink Folgers of Maxwell House. Poor people drink generic coffee with that nasty filler.

    158. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by thatnerdguy · · Score: 1

      Lucky bastard...I wish Netflix Canada would catch up. I would sign up in a heartbeat if they got those!

      --
      I saw the Sign, and it opened up my eyes
    159. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Fuck that, we've got enough to deal with in life without adding more liars to the mix.

      Welcome to the 21st century.

    160. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      I thought Blockbuster was dead? The last one in my town closed down a long time ago. There's Redbox for a buck. Hell, I have a dozen movies I borrowed from a friend I haven't watched yet, and three more I checked out from the library today, all FREE.

      Stupid pricing killed Blockbuster; they were across the street from Family Video renting $4 movies when FamVid had new releases for $3 and older titles (anything older than six months) for a buck.

      I'm predicting NetFlix's demise. Gouging customers only works if you have a monopoly, for anyone else it's a sure path to bankrupcy.

    161. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by GizmoToy · · Score: 1

      If that was the sole reason, they could have just split the current $9 plan (for example) into a $4.50 disc plan and a $4.50 streaming plan, and gave you the choice to drop one or the other. That would accomplish the same effect.

      Instead, they essentially said both of those things are worth $9, so we're going to charge you nearly double. So either their costs went way up, as a market leader they think they can get away with gouging, or they're looking for additional profit.

    162. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by kimvette · · Score: 1

      I drink a latte every evening, you insensitive clods!

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    163. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course they don't comprehend that price is why Netflix is so appealing in the first place.

    164. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by _KiTA_ · · Score: 1

      I was paying for Streaming + 2 DVDs. $14.99 a month. Switching to Streaming + 1 DVD is $15.98. I can handle that, but do feel they should offer a bundle discount. Yes, it was a huge hike if you were already Streaming + 1 DVD. I have no real answer for that.

      The Studios apparently are demanding a 1200% hike in what Netflix pays them to license their films, so if anyone's to blame, it's ultimately Hollywood. Greedy bastards.

    165. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They could split off the more unreasonable studios from the rest of the streaming package and make them available as a separate package with an explanation how much is cost and how much is profit. Essentially, go neutral.

    166. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by adolf · · Score: 1

      Your scenario assumes that the movies are not immediately ripped and returned.

      I'm shocked to learn that there is somebody on Slashdot who is not doing this.

    167. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google and Hulu still have to figure out the business plan (Youtube is popular as shit, but hard to make money on).

      Shit is popular? Wow, I didn't know anyone bothered to do anything with their shit after wiping their ass when taking a dump. Except flush it down the drain. Shit's popular? When did it become big business? Scat porn? I mean, I know "Two Girls One Cup" became a popular Internet meme and joke, but seriously--it's making big bucks now?

      Please make sure your sarcasm detector is properly tuned; if it is not sensing anything here, it likely needs calibration. :)

    168. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They got some pretty sweet deals when they started the streaming thing when the studios didn't really understand the business which are now expiring... their costs are now going up and aren't done going up. Raising prices now gives them some leverage in negotiating further deals.

    169. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by forgotten_my_nick · · Score: 1

      It is the concept of "Free" that is getting people. Netflix should have read some of Dan Arielys stuff before doing the price change.

      http://danariely.com/2009/08/10/the-nuances-of-the-free-experiment/

    170. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it's due to the studios demanding more money (reports are it'll be considerably more, not a small amount more) then they need to tell their customers that.

      That's a nice idea, but their contracts with the studios might very well prohibit them from even whispering such a thing to the media. The studios are ruthless. Look at the way they've screwed indie single-screen cinemas with their policy of what I believe is called "blocking" but I forget the exact term. Basically, they govern who can show what films to maximize their profits, not those of the exhibitors. So a single screen has to show a film for 4 weeks even if the audience dribbles off after 1 week.

    171. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Patch86 · · Score: 1

      People are angry that it's an increase of about 60%. No-one really begrudges a company putting up their prices by inflation each year- and no-one would really mention it if it was inflation + a few percent. But a 60% price increase is a complete game changer for people with a tight budget.

    172. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Patch86 · · Score: 1

      Interestingly, in the UK Netflix is not a big player- Amazon's LoveFilm service is the market leader. They charge only £5.99 a month (similar to Netflix's old price- but bear in mind that everything in the UK is usually more expensive, so it's an even better deal than it seems).

      A 60% price hike is the move of a monopoly. Let's see what happens if Amazon/LoveFilm or someone else gets involved in the US market- we'll see what happens to their price then.

    173. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Arrogant little shit turd hope he goes to the wall PDQ

    174. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      You will be surprised how far they can push you. In the UK petrol (gas) is £1.35/litre which I make to be just under $10/gallon. We are the worst in Europe but seem unable to do anything about it.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    175. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by VolciMaster · · Score: 1

      Really i think they are trying to curtail the costly part of the business, DVD rentals. I know i'll be keeping the streaming and dropping the DVDs. If i want a DVD seems like my local redbox(1/4 mile away) will work just fine.

      Just don't ever return them late, and you're all set.

    176. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I could probably put up with the price increase. For me it was a split of streaming from DVD rental. Each half increased; stupid. Why have two accounts with separate billings? Idiots.

      Then the arrogance of the latte comment! THAT did it for me! CANCEL!

    177. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would normally agree with this comment but if streaming is THAT much cheaper then what additional services are coming my way for the price hike? If all I want is streaming could I pay $2 more and get new content like I can with the DVD's? In addition Sony has pulled all of their content from Netflix. So it is no longer the service it once was. If this trend continues then each of the major studios will be investing in some sort of lame streaming service and trying to charge you $7.99 monthly for each of their catalogs.

      And they wonder why people pirate their shit....

    178. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by ultranova · · Score: 1

      In the UK petrol (gas) is ã1.35/litre which I make to be just under $10/gallon.

      According to Google, that's 1.537 euros/litre. Here in Finland, it's 1.58-1.60 and rising. So no, you're not the worst in Europe, Finland is.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    179. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by AlienIntelligence · · Score: 1

      My cost of bandwidth has increased 20% in the past 3 years for the same goddamn connection. What fantasy world do you live in?

      In the United States, prices have not "decreased dramatically" for consumer broadband. In fact, they have remained largely stable with a mild increase.
      http://www.techpolicyinstitute.org/news/show/23252.html

      See figure 6 in the linked document which shows that the 25Mbps to 100Mbps plans have *increased* 25% from 2007 to 2009.

      My price has gone down and my connection speed has quadrupled.

      Maybe I'm lucky there's good competition between the leading broadband
      providers.

      -AI

      --
      For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion
    180. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by AlienIntelligence · · Score: 1

      Ironically, the net effect of all of this from Netflix's side is that that they're going to lose $2/mo from me which somebody else will probably get (Amazon VOD perhaps -- all depends on who has what I want available).

      Ironically, you're doing exactly what they want you to do.
      Cancel the lesser profitable DVD delivery for the "next to nothing" streaming.

      Good job I say... carry on!

      The writing has been on the wall for a LONG time.
      http://gigaom.com/video/netflix-the-future-is-streaming/

      That's why I cancelled my Netflix account... without rage, the LAST time
      they increased their prices.

      -AI

      --
      For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion
    181. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      Well,like I stated...aside from the dysmal choices offered for streaming, my main problem with it...is the quality of the video and audio.

      I didn't lay out over $2K for a big plasma tv...and God knows what over the years for my audio system, to not want to watch my content in the best possible format. Right now, that's bluray generally with DTS.

      When they can stream that kind of quality...and have a decent choice...call me.

      This is also the reason I've never bought a song online.....not interested till they sell it lossless and DRM free. My stereo is too good for it.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    182. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Stratus311 · · Score: 1

      Why, because it's an extra $1?

    183. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Life2Death · · Score: 0

      Always wondered why they didnt partner with redbox to return dvds and have some of your stuff moved to your local redbox for local pickup

    184. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by ncc74656 · · Score: 1

      Streaming was a fun thing for free...but when my billing time in Sept comes up, I'm dropping to the 3 at a time out for $19.99. It isn't worth the almost extra $8/mo it would cost me to add streaming back on.

      Sounds like a plan. I've been a Netflix subscriber since 2002, and in all that time, I've streamed one movie. It worked well enough (no glitches while streaming to a Wii over WiFi), but there's so much more available on DVD.

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    185. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And there it is there...I want to run knitting needles through my eyes every time the program is interrupted so they can try to sell me a car, a maxi pad or deodorant.

      I'm a big fan of fastpasstv.ms

    186. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Methuseus · · Score: 1

      To counter your points: 1. The selection seems great to me and my wife. 2. I haven't had a problem with the site redesign. I actually think it is fairly nice. Plus I do most of my watching through the Wii. No I don't care that it tops out at 480p. 3. You are probably right. But I don't have that problem as my wife and I have similar tastes. Not sure I would have married her if we were too different. 4. I stopped getting DVDs a while ago because there's so much to watch on streaming. When I did and complained about a scratched DVD, they sent one immediately. I sometimes even got it next day Oh, and I got an apology on the web site where I reported it. Also I've only had one streaming movie drop, and I only have a 3 Mbps connection. 5. Not sure what the deal is with this... You want them to have something like Amazon where you can "rent" a movie not available for regular streaming for $5? Nothing I'd want. 6. Since I dropped DVDs as soon as it was an option, there's no price increase for me.

      --
      Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, though I'm not yet sure about the universe. - A Einstein
    187. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Methuseus · · Score: 1

      Yes, but if they say that, they are telling the content companies "Charge us whatever you want and we will gouge our customers for it" instead of putting themselves in a good bargaining position. Not that they're in a great position now, but it would still make it worse.

      --
      Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, though I'm not yet sure about the universe. - A Einstein
    188. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by sneakyimp · · Score: 1

      Good points all around. I suspect that Netflix will do just fine and continue to gain subscribers and revenue. I just took another look and didn't see anything I'm dying to watch, but a lot of movies would be good for killing time. I suppose that might be worth $8. As for the DVDs, I would much prefer to just pay $3 to watch something I really want to watch when I want to watch it. High plains drifter comes to mind. They have that on Amazon for $3:
      http://www.amazon.com/High-Plains-Drifter/dp/B000IDCJK8/ref=sr_1_1?s=instant-video&ie=UTF8&qid=1310753289&sr=1-1

    189. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Methuseus · · Score: 1

      I agree with you to a point. You can get almost endless entertainment with a PS2 and a few games for fairly cheap. Netflix, however, at a minimum or $96 a year, is not all that cheap. You can also go to free movies in the park in places, read library books, watch over the air TV, etc. Or watch Youtube, Hulu, etc for free.

      --
      Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, though I'm not yet sure about the universe. - A Einstein
    190. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Maestro4k · · Score: 1

      Or maybe they can't tell their customers that because it's in the contract. Or maybe they can't play the blame game because it will cost them more for contracts the next time. The REAL problem is that there are too few companies in control of 95% of the content.

      There are still better ways to handle it from a PR standpoint. You can blame it on nebulous "increased costs of doing business" for example. Going around and channeling Marie Antoinette with that latte remark was remarkably stupid, and is going to haunt Netflix for some time. Raising prices will always upset your customers, but saying things like that infuriates them.

    191. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by oldstrat · · Score: 1

      You will be surprised how far they can push you. In the UK petrol (gas) is £1.35/litre which I make to be just under $10/gallon. We are the worst in Europe but seem unable to do anything about it.

      Get your government to subsidized the oil companies like the US does, get rid of public health, passenger rail and basic services and you too can have simply outrageous prices like the States.

    192. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by oldstrat · · Score: 1

      Few would have screamed if it (a radical price increase) had come with a service enhancement but instead it came with a service curtailment. The outrage is just, the latte excuses and kowtowing by the ignorant are inexcusable. NetFlix as others have said is a luxury - let NetFlix now learn what that means, the hard way.

    193. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by oldstrat · · Score: 1

      I drink a latte every evening, you insensitive clods!

      After you've served the rest of us and locked the door.

    194. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by oldstrat · · Score: 1

      I'm fairly sure you don't have to be living in a mansion to buy a latte or two (per-month, not per-day).

      To be fair, the demographic of most net-steaming users with a computer and network connection good enough to stream is probably in line with the "latte or two" crowd, at least around here. I'm not really sure about the DVD shipment service as I don't know anyone who uses it (not even sure it's *offered* in Canada, where I live).

      Most of my friends - even those in the lower-income brackets - still stop at Starbucks every now and then for an overpriced drink. After the first two you've already passed the price of netflix in a month.

      A better comparison might have been "a movie rental" though, as even one of those at many video stores hits pretty close to the monthly cost of either netflix streaming/delivery services.

      You have no friends in the lower income brackets - your comment screams it.

    195. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by oldstrat · · Score: 1

      YOU got it exactly right. I haven't bought a coffee from anywhere but IHOP in over a decade, a once a quarter treat. Fine coffee in our house is a small package of the flavored grocery store brand ground and brewed on Sunday at home and only if the store had it on sale. I'm not ashamed of that, I didn't mismanage this country's balance of trade and allow the regulated financial markets to go unregulated - I'm just the guy left holding the bag of generic house brand coffee making the best of the situation. Thank's to my parents and grand parents I learned young to never live like the big bucks coming one day were going to come in every day. NetFlix needs to learn that lesson. They need to get by with less so they can learn the humiliating lesson of greed gone bad. They have on reasonable expectation that the customer in general will cough up an additional premium during hard times.

    196. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by dougmc · · Score: 1

      (I work at Netflix)I figured out at some point that the maximum possible number of DVDs you can get in an average 30-day month is 10*X, where X is the number of DVDs you can have out at a time. So the best-case scenario for a 3-at-a-time plan is 30 DVDs a month.

      I think it's 2*X per week if you get movies in the mail the next day, or 3*X per week if you get them in the *same* day.

      --- Next day ---
      Netflix sends you movies (often new releases!) on monday, they arrive tuesday. You get it in the mail on wednesday, netflix gets it on thursday and sends a replacement, and you get it on friday and have it in the mail on saturday and it arrives back at Netflix on monday.

      --- Same day ---
      Netflix sends you movies on monday, they arrive tuesday. You take it to the post office by 5pm and have it postmarked that day. Netflix gets it on wednesday, and you have a new movie on thursday. You take that to the post office by 5pm and Netflix has it on friday, and they send out a new one, and you have that on saturday, and you take that to the post office on saturday by 5pm and Netflix has that on monday.

      Neither situation requires that Netflix works on Saturday (they didn't used to, but they do now.) If you fall out of sync with the week, then it does matter that they're open on Saturday, but if you want new releases, you want to get back on the schedule anyways, as Netflix won't send heavy users new releases unless they get them the very day that they're available.

      The "Next day" situation works out to 8.6*x movies/average month, and the "Same day" one works out to 12.9*x movies/average month. (An average month is 30.4 days long.)

      The "Same day" situation really screams "pirate" -- you don't even have time to watch the movies if three arrive at noon and you have to have them at the post office by 5pm. The "Next Day" scenario could be somebody who just really likes movies ... at least then there's time to watch them.

    197. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by VolciMaster · · Score: 1

      Why, because it's an extra $1?

      As soon as you exceed your $8 in movie rental time/usage, you've spent more than you would have on Netflix.

    198. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is a 60% price increase, that isn't small, douchebag.

    199. Re:No rage, just a lost customer. by anubi · · Score: 1

      DRM has been, far and away, my biggest reason not to embrace new technologies.

      When facing an uncertain future, why would I want finicky products which may not perform their intended function in my life?

      I have enough to deal with already. I have no intention of bringing yet more nuisances into my life for someone else's benefit.

      --
      "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]

  2. Marie Antoinette by naroom · · Score: 2

    And Swasey said, "Let them drink lattes..."

    1. Re:Marie Antoinette by doggo · · Score: 1

      Hey Swasey, ya want one lump, or two, with yer latte comment?

    2. Re:Marie Antoinette by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A misattributed, misunderstood literary anecdote used to draw a supposed parallel between starving peasants and Netflix users? Ah, Slashdot, you never cease to disappoint me!

    3. Re:Marie Antoinette by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 0

      Mr. Swasey, that is the sound of me dual-booting... Your arse, mate!

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    4. Re:Marie Antoinette by rvw14 · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately in this economy my family has given up all lattes, eating out, movies at the theater, and other non-essential items just to make ends meet. We cut cable a year ago and kept netflix as our only source of entertainment because I could justify the small cost. For a CEO, a couple lattes may not be much, but my budget is so tight that even $10 makes a difference.

    5. Re:Marie Antoinette by Dunbal · · Score: 0

      What do you mean "this economy"? If the government is to be listened to, everything is just peachy! The Dow is above 12,000! Recovery, right?

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    6. Re:Marie Antoinette by Nadaka · · Score: 1

      If you are in the top 0.5% or so wealthiest people in the US, this recession has been absolutely fantastic and any early losses have been more than made up by the ability to gobble up long term investments on the cheap. No one else matters.

    7. Re:Marie Antoinette by jdgeorge · · Score: 1

      A misattributed, misunderstood literary anecdote used to draw a supposed parallel between starving peasants and Netflix users? Ah, Slashdot, you never cease to disappoint me!

      And I was thinking, "Ah, Slashdot, you never disappoint me!"

    8. Re:Marie Antoinette by 0p7imu5_P2im3 · · Score: 1
      You are clearly missing the correlation. This is the last hole of entertainment that many have been able to afford for quite sometime, after having already passed up eating out, driving anywhere other than work, paying the foreclosure fees, or ever even considering purchasing over-priced burnt bean water.

      After food, clothing, and gas to get to work, there is only netflix for some people. This has just cut deeply into some people's lives and he goes and says, "It's just one or two lattés for most people." Most the people on netflix already can't afford lattés and he tells them to just give a few up. "Let them eat cake!" is about as à propos as one can get.

      --
      Resistance is futile. Your technological distinctiveness will be added to our own. You will become one with the morgue
    9. Re:Marie Antoinette by Politburo · · Score: 1

      Please point us to any government employee, elected or otherwise, who has said in any way that things are "just peachy".

    10. Re:Marie Antoinette by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shouldn't those people be celebrating? DVD costs dropped. The segment of people you reference shouldn't be able to afford $50-80/month 10Mb/s minimum broadband plans.

    11. Re:Marie Antoinette by festers · · Score: 1

      How is this insightful? Mr AC hasn't provided any evidence to demonstrate who this quote should be attributed to and under what context it was originally said. My understanding was that there is a lot of debate surrounding these issues, but that's not mentioned, either.

      I guess if you want to appear intellectual and "better than everyone else" here on /., you've done a great job.

      --


      -------
      "Every artist is a cannibal, every poet is a thief."
    12. Re:Marie Antoinette by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Leaving aside your pedantic and snidely worded questioning of the historicity of a common English phrase that everyone understands the meaning of....

      Are you really so dim a bulb that you misunderstood his comment?

      The people being compared are clueless aristocrats and clueless executives ...

  3. Meanwhile, at the MAFIAA by Ironchew · · Score: 1

    Cyberterrorist hackers are pilfering "a latte or two"...wait...that doesn't sound scary enough.

  4. Caffeine is a drug by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm not giving up my drug habit, Netflix has to go.

    1. Re:Caffeine is a drug by earls · · Score: 1

      I hear that. I feel the same way about my cocaine. This Netflix change has really pushed my budget over the edge.

  5. How to destroy your internet based business by tmosley · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Step 1: Almost double the price. Step 2: ?? Step 3: Bankruptcy!

    1. Re:How to destroy your internet based business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      step 2 would be to arrogantly brush off complaints from paying customers

    2. Re:How to destroy your internet based business by madhatter256 · · Score: 1

      They don't stand a chance against google...

      --
      Previewing comments are for sissies!
    3. Re:How to destroy your internet based business by rwven · · Score: 1

      Netflix is trying to put the DVD side with a price to adequately cover its costs (which are substantial), and trying to push as many users as it can to the streaming side. I've been expecting this for a long time, and I think it was a good decision.

    4. Re:How to destroy your internet based business by WiiVault · · Score: 1

      Are you suggesting that Netflix has been losing money on DVDs? Cuz if so how did they make it before streaming was even offered? I think you give them way to much credit. If anything word is that lots of their streaming contracts are ending soon, and guess what? Big media wants a bigger slice of the pie. Supporting what is essentially a doubling of price for many users is giving warm fuzzies to an entity that only has maximizing profits, while minimizing services as much as possible.

    5. Re:How to destroy your internet based business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then why would it make the DVD side exactly the same price as the streaming side ($7.99)?

    6. Re:How to destroy your internet based business by frosty_tsm · · Score: 2

      Netflix is trying to put the DVD side with a price to adequately cover its costs (which are substantial), and trying to push as many users as it can to the streaming side. I've been expecting this for a long time, and I think it was a good decision.

      While I knew they were going to emphasize streaming over DVD, I wish they had treaded more carefully. They won't admit it, but their PR department is (or should be) in damage control mode.

    7. Re:How to destroy your internet based business by Bobfrankly1 · · Score: 1

      Your comments highlight your ignorance of well known issues with the US Postal Service. The USPS has raised prices quite frequently over the past decade, and that cuts into netflix's profits. As you said, big media likely wants a bigger slice as well. The USPS is also looking to do away with saturday service as well. A good read is found at about the details that are pressuring Netflix. Enlighten yourself.

    8. Re:How to destroy your internet based business by malignant_minded · · Score: 1

      I think a third plan would resolve this and be a great middle ground for people. Streaming Plan + $2 a month allows you to check out a DVD then pay like $2 for each DVD shipped. This way people would have the ability to still get the occasional DVD only title but not be able to get more than 2 or 3 a month before they would be better served with both Streaming and DVD plans. Also if people didn't get any DVD's for a while (I fall into this category having a DVD on my dresser for 2 months now) Netflix would be making $2 more off me a month than they would if I only had the streaming. People would most likely rather have the option and pay a couple bucks than have both at double their current costs when most don't likely use both.

    9. Re:How to destroy your internet based business by The+Great+Pretender · · Score: 2

      I'm confused to where this double the price comes from. My old plan was 3 DVDs a month (with blu ray) and streaming was $23. The equivalent new plan would be $28, which seems to me to be a 21% increase. Now did they give me anything different, nope. In fact as we always seem to have a DVD sitting around for a month, I dropped the 3 DVDs to 2 DVDs and am going back to $23/month. When they first bought in streaming it was 1 hour for every dollar you spent on a plan, I was on the $18 plan and got 18 hours of streaming. You paid for unlimited streaming separately, I can't remember how much. Then they wrapped unlimited streaming into all packages. Now they've gone back to paying for unlimited streaming. I'm not really sure while people are getting their entitlement knickers in a twist over this. I pay for stuff on VUDU, Amazon at the moment and use Hulu plus and playon. (I dont have cable TV, haven't had for 5 years). Once the economics breakdown, Netflix will loose my business, really that simple, but the economics, given what we watch is still pretty good for us.

      --
      A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
    10. Re:How to destroy your internet based business by compro01 · · Score: 1

      Are you suggesting that Netflix has been losing money on DVDs? Cuz if so how did they make it before streaming was even offered?

      The USPS did increase their rates this April. That very well could have erased an already slim margin.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    11. Re:How to destroy your internet based business by aztracker1 · · Score: 1

      I don't think this would happen unless they are getting access to a lot more for their streaming library. I personally don't use the DVD shipping much, so dropping that service. Will use redbox when I want to see something newer "tonight".

      --
      Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
    12. Re:How to destroy your internet based business by sneakyimp · · Score: 1

      The problem is their streaming offering SUCKS for the most part. If you want a decent movie, you have to put it in your DVD queue. Can anyone explain whey they don't have on-demand video rentals?

    13. Re:How to destroy your internet based business by hedwards · · Score: 1

      Raising prices by up to 2/3 in the middle of a recession is hardly a wise idea.

      The sense I have is that the amount of outrage would have been significantly lessened if they had given the customer something for the increase. There were no promises of increased content for streaming, nor were there any subscribers being grandfathered in either. As it stands now, they're asking me to pay an additional $4 a month for my current plan without giving me any reason for accepting it.

      I'll be downgrading my plan come the end of August because paying for streaming of content which isn't of interest to me isn't reasonable.

    14. Re:How to destroy your internet based business by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 1

      You forgot step 0:

      Hire target obsessed management looking to make performance short term related bonuses.

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    15. Re:How to destroy your internet based business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Netflix is trying to put the DVD side with a price to adequately cover its costs (which are substantial), and trying to push as many users as it can to the streaming side. I've been expecting this for a long time, and I think it was a good decision.

      Please elaborate.

      Current pricing: 1x DVD at a time + Streaming = $7.99 + $2.00 for Streaming.

      Planned pricing Sept. 1: 1x DVD at a time = $7.99; Streaming = $7.99. How is this raising the price of the DVD side to cover it's costs?

    16. Re:How to destroy your internet based business by Zenaku · · Score: 1

      It comes from the other end of the price spectrum. My old plan was 1 DVD at a time, plus unlimited streaming -- 9.99 a month. To get the same service, I would now be paying for the unlimited streaming plan(7.99) and the 1 DVD at a time plan (another 7.99) for a total of 15.98. That's a fraction under a 60% increase.

      --
      If fate makes you a motorcycle, you become a motorcycle.
    17. Re:How to destroy your internet based business by ender- · · Score: 1

      The double price comes from those of us who were on a lower-tier plan. I was originally on the 1 DVD for $7.99 plan. Then they added unlimited streaming and I thought it was great. Then they raised the price in November to $9.99 [25% increase]. Now they're making it $7.99 for streaming only, and an additional $7.99, for a grand total of $15.98/mo. So that's almost a 60% increase from my current rate, and a 100% increase from what my rate was this time last year.

      I can understand some of their reasons for raising prices [Studios, postage], but I think they are doing it badly, and handling the PR for it rather poorly.

      Of course, I'd be much more understanding of a price increase if Netflix were also announcing a significant increase in the videos available for streaming...

    18. Re:How to destroy your internet based business by lgw · · Score: 1

      What do you mean by "on-demand video rentals" that's different from moving a DVD to the top of your queue? Obviously, NetFlix isn't going to open a bunch of physical stores for you to go to. The reason they use a queue in general is that they don't have every DVD at every warehouse (though I'm sure they do for the popular DVDs), so as a DVD nears the top of your queue, it gets shipped between warehouses so that it's at your local warehouse when it comes time to ship to you.

      I've had good luck with moving popular DVDs to the top of my queue, and getting them without unusual delay.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    19. Re:How to destroy your internet based business by lgw · · Score: 1

      Netflix told me

      Your current $34.99 a month membership for unlimited streaming and unlimited DVDs will be split into 2 distinct plans:

                        Plan 1: Unlimited Streaming (no DVDs) for $7.99 a month
                        Plan 2: Unlimited DVDs, 5 out at-a-time (no streaming) for $27.99 a month

              Your price for getting both of these plans will be $35.98 a month ($7.99 + $27.99).

      Nothing to get worked up about there.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    20. Re:How to destroy your internet based business by GizmoToy · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the people at the high end didn't get hammered nearly has hard as those on the low end with this price increase. Yours was just under a 3% increase, while my 1 at a time + streaming plan had a 61% increase ($9.99 to $15.98). The cost of that plan has doubled in just under 8 months, when it first went up from $8 to $10 in November.

    21. Re:How to destroy your internet based business by sneakyimp · · Score: 1

      I meant the ability to pick a movie online, pay a fee online, and watch the movie online.

    22. Re:How to destroy your internet based business by lgw · · Score: 1

      Oh, most people would call that "pay-per-view", and it's not really Netflix's model. I guess if you only watch 2 movies a month it might make sense.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    23. Re:How to destroy your internet based business by lgw · · Score: 1

      Ahh, I see, no wonder so many are droping that 1-at-a-time portion. For me it's just cheaper than cable.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  6. It is still Cheaper than Cable by Reverand+Dave · · Score: 5, Insightful

    and I don't have to sit through a lot of idiotic commercials.

    --
    I got here through a series of tubes
    1. Re:It is still Cheaper than Cable by countertrolling · · Score: 1

      It is still more expensive than bittorrent..

      What commercials?

      --
      For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
    2. Re:It is still Cheaper than Cable by iethree · · Score: 1

      I agree. With Netflix, I can watch as much as I want, whenever I want without commercials ( I don't watch sports). Where cable is $40ish/month with a 2 year commitment AND commercials, I can't really complain about the $18/month I will pay for streaming and 1-at-a-time blu-rays.

    3. Re:It is still Cheaper than Cable by operagost · · Score: 1

      Red Box is a lot cheaper, unless you watch more than 15 movies a month. You don't have to sit through commercials... unless they're at the beginning of a Disney movie, that is. If this way that Disney abuses their customers isn't justification for downloading ripped copies from the pirates, I don't know what is.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    4. Re:It is still Cheaper than Cable by game+kid · · Score: 1

      That doesn't mean much. Cable companies are vile monopolies, except when they are a couple of "competitors" in the same region competing to offer the highest price with such wildly different channel lineups and services that we can make no meaningful comparison.

      Surely we can do better than to just seek a price lower than cable.

      --
      You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
    5. Re:It is still Cheaper than Cable by Myopic · · Score: 1

      Indeed.

      I don't have cable, either, because of the price.

      When I called to cancel my basic cable, they offered to drop my price to $5 per month for basic cable, on top of what I pay for cable internet. I declined: basic cable isn't worth $5 per month.

      Netflix is worth much, much more than basic cable. Let's say basic cable is worth, oh, one cent per day -- 30c per month. Let's say Netflix is worth, uh, like 40x that much -- $12 per month. That's probably about right for me; that's about my market price. So, Netflix used to be a bargain ($10 per month for $12 of value) whereas now it's not "worth it" ($16 per month for $12 value).

      I'm not indignant. I'm not angry. I'm a little disappointed because I like Netflix, and it's always been a good deal. But now it's not a good deal anymore, so I just won't buy it anymore. I think for most people, Netflix is worth more than $16 per month, so they'll stick with it. That's fine.

    6. Re:It is still Cheaper than Cable by Auraveda · · Score: 1

      Exactly. I was upset about the price increase for maybe 5 minutes. Then I realized that I watch Netflix streaming and disc far more than I watch my cable TV. Netflix will increase to $16, cable TV was $56. So I cancelled the cable and saved myself $50/month. I have an antenna to watch local news and the occasional broadcast show. While the selection on Netflix streaming could be better I have found more things on it that I want to watch than I have time for, so it works for me.

    7. Re:It is still Cheaper than Cable by scot4875 · · Score: 1

      Red Box is a lot cheaper, unless you watch more than 15 movies a month. You don't have to sit through commercials...

      Maybe I've just been unlucky, but all 3 DVDs I've rented from Redbox have had 20 minutes worth of unskippable, un-fast-forwardable previews and advertisements. For your additional convenience they also disabled the "menu" button, and even the "stop-stop-play" trick doesn't work. With that in mind, I'm not sure I agree with your "don't have to sit through commercials" statement.

      Yes, I could get around it by ripping and removing the crap; yes, I could get around it by using a DVD player that respects its owner more than the content producers; for the few times per year that I actually watch a DVD with this garbage on it, it's not worth the effort.

      --Jeremy

      --
      Jesus was a liberal
  7. Latte Defense by Gr33nJ3ll0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why are so many things justified with the already unjustifiable cost of a Latte? Just as two wrongs don't make a right, two prices that are too high, don't make the second any cheaper.

    1. Re:Latte Defense by Jawnn · · Score: 1

      Why are so many things justified with the already unjustifiable cost of a Latte? Just as two wrongs don't make a right, two prices that are too high, don't make the second any cheaper.

      Hey! I'm way past latte's. If I don't get my daily espresso dopio, I'm jonesin' hard, you insensitive clod.

    2. Re:Latte Defense by GooberToo · · Score: 1

      Extremely true! Add to the fact that people pay stupid high prices for an inferior and literally (its a fact Starbucks openly admits and boasts about - so as to ensure the same burned flavor at all their stores) burned product makes it all the more stupid.

      People who proudly shop Starbucks are the same people who boast they ride the short bus and that their helmet is pink and brown.

    3. Re:Latte Defense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why are so many things justified with the already unjustifiable cost of a Latte? Just as two wrongs don't make a right, two prices that are too high, don't make the second any cheaper.

      I don't drink lattes. They cost too much and I really can't afford them. I make cheap coffee at home.

      It still tastes good.

    4. Re:Latte Defense by mepperpint · · Score: 1

      I think what he's trying to say is that they're now accepting payment in Lattes. I intend to take advantage of this new feature and send them a Latte or two every month rather than paying with my credit card.

    5. Re:Latte Defense by RajivSLK · · Score: 2

      Because in my little corner of the planet (Victoria BC) there is a 10 person deep line up for a latte at every single one of the hundreds of espresso shops every morning. That's why.

      Justified or not people buy lattes.

    6. Re:Latte Defense by SengirV · · Score: 1

      I"m guessing it doesn't even taste burnt when you make it at home. Well, most of the times that is

      --

      Prof. Farnsworth - "Oh a lesson in not changing history from Mr I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!"

    7. Re:Latte Defense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oblig, Chewbacca Defense, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1QI4P0YqtM&feature=related

      Ladies and Gentlemen, of our supposed customer base if a latte is overpriced we must raised rate. Think about it, it is milk and tap water and coca beans for 5 bucks, that does not make any sense. If a Yuppie lives in Starbucks you must subscribe!

    8. Re:Latte Defense by ethanms · · Score: 1

      I think the point is, if you are already paying $6/day for a latte, can you really claim to be outraged over a $6/mo increase for a service like Netflix that many people use quite extensively?

      Frankly I think it IS a good analogy... comparing something as overpriced and superfluous as a latte is the perfect thing to compare a service like Netflix to. Sure, you don't NEED either one of them, but which one provides you more enjoyment over a given period of time?

    9. Re:Latte Defense by merc · · Score: 1

      Why are so many things justified with the already unjustifiable cost of a Latte? Just as two wrongs don't make a right, two prices that are too high, don't make the second any cheaper.

      At least they didn't compare it to the cost of a monster HDMI cable.

      --
      It's true no man is an island, but if you take a bunch of dead guys and tie 'em together, they make a good raft.
    10. Re:Latte Defense by guttentag · · Score: 1

      I don't drink latte. I prefer to have companies define their pics increases in terms of how many fewer bottles of Fiji water I will be able to buy per month if I choose to continue doing business with them.

    11. Re:Latte Defense by dave562 · · Score: 1

      I look at it like this. I can do my work without NetFlix. I can't do my work without caffeine. Ergo, caffeine > NetFlix.

    12. Re:Latte Defense by ironjaw33 · · Score: 1

      Why are so many things justified with the already unjustifiable cost of a Latte? Just as two wrongs don't make a right, two prices that are too high, don't make the second any cheaper.

      The electric company says the same "oh, it's just a latte," excuse when they increase the rates. As does the cable company. As does the wireless provider. As does the landlord. All of these "latte-sized" cost increases add up to several thousand dollars per year of new expenses. Naturally, these increases aren't just a one time deal, either, so if income is limited, something's gotta go.

    13. Re:Latte Defense by ArsonSmith · · Score: 2

      Exactly, I've found that if i cancel my healthcare I can afford cable and netflix, and still get a daily latte.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    14. Re:Latte Defense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But that is precisely why the analogy works. If someone has enough disposable income to overpay for a latte, then they can afford this at very little sacrifice. The point being that many people DO pay for overpriced lattes. Things aren't priced for what they cost. They are priced for what people are willing to pay for them.

      I'd pay upto $30/month for Netflix streaming as it exists today without batting an eye. It is hugely underpriced compared to its value to me at this point. That said, I'm going to be cancelling the dvd portion of my account because I barely use it anyway.

    15. Re:Latte Defense by AmberBlackCat · · Score: 1

      Kind of like those people who expect you to feel better about your situation because they say "there are people in a worse situation".

    16. Re:Latte Defense by martin-boundary · · Score: 1

      You mean like those who mention that half of the world live on 2 dollars a day (Netflix increase = 3 days work, no food).

    17. Re:Latte Defense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      uh, I think you answered your own question? because they are comparable, both being things that are unjustifiable. the thought process is that no rational human being would sacrifice essentials to pay for Netflix or Lattes - they'd sacrifice one to pay for the other.

      that doesn't make the statement any better - as someone can't afford to waste money on Lattes, Netflix just reminded me that I can't afford to waste money on their service either, especially if it is going up in price.

    18. Re:Latte Defense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I couldn't believe the wait at the blue fox. I mean, the breakfast was good, but nothing I'd wait a half hour for (again.)

    19. Re:Latte Defense by gbutler69 · · Score: 1

      Justified or not people^H^H^H^H^H^HSNOBS buy lattes.

      There fixed that for ya'. People buy COFFEE!
      Thank you, I'm here all week!

      --
      Over-the-top Response Guy! Giving "Over-the-Top Responses" since 1970.
  8. The update does not make sense by Superken7 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Most people are probably not really angry because of the money increase, as there are few good rivals (not for long, I hope), but because nothing of value was added to the service to justify the increase.

    I bet most people would be happy if the price increase would have arrived with a 100% streaming coverage so people can stop relying on DVDs, or maybe some new cool feature.
    Instead, the UI has been somewhat degraded for some, and now the service is almost twice the price. It's not just "some people", I'm sure _most_ people are not happy with the "update".

    1. Re:The update does not make sense by wpi97 · · Score: 2

      A price increase does not have to be justified by value added at all. It only has to be justified by enough demand to keep the company profitable. This is very simple really. If enough people cancel their subscription as a result of this, Netfilx will either fold, or lower its prices. On the other hand, if enough subscribers eat the increase, so much the better for Netflix.

    2. Re:The update does not make sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I bet most people would be happy if the price increase would have arrived with a 100% streaming coverage so people can stop relying on DVDs, or maybe some new cool feature.

      If you want 100% streaming coverage, $7.99 is way too cheap. Most people are simply being irrational here. The cost of doing business is going up for Netflix, so the cost to pay for the service is going up with it. Netflix gave us all way too good a deal for way too long which has caused most consumers to turn into spoiled little brats.

    3. Re:The update does not make sense by hood8263 · · Score: 1

      I don't see the big deal with the price increase... up here in canada we are streaming only for 8 bucks a month. Mail isn't cheap and sending out all these DVD's gets expensive.

    4. Re:The update does not make sense by Baloroth · · Score: 1

      The thing is some (many?) customers are likely to use primarily either the DVD mail route OR the streaming route, and maybe occasionally the other. I know I, for instance, used exclusively the DVD route (a few years ago, lousy internet).

      Now, I haven't even looked at their pricing scheme recently, but I know from what I've read about the change people who sign up for just the DVD route or just the streaming will end up saving money (2$USD per month, 24 per year), while people who use both will have it increased 6 dollars a month... 72$ a year... wait, you're right, that's pretty bad. Looks like I'll be sticking with Hulu and other sources for now. Just as I planned on doing even before this. Seriously, the streaming selection is too small and who actually uses discs anymore?.

      Also, isn't this new plan only 1 DVD at a time? I remember ~18$ got me three + unlimited streaming had I been able to use it (could be wrong about the streaming, know there was something like that). Looks like Netflix will probably be gone in a few years. Shame, too, it was awesome there for a while.

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
    5. Re:The update does not make sense by gorzek · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah, $8 a month for unlimited streaming is a fucking steal. Assuming you watch only an hour a night, you are paying all of 26 cents an hour for your entertainment, a better deal than just about anything else out there.

    6. Re:The update does not make sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not everything is available via streaming, though.

    7. Re:The update does not make sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. I only had the DVD service to fill the holes in streaming availability.

      If they had simultaneously announced 100% streaming availability of all of their titles I would have been fine without the DVD service. I would have continued to pay $9.99 even without the DVD service.

      But a 60% price increase when they have such huge gaping holes in their streaming availability wasn't worth it.

      In a few years if Netflix is still around, they probably will have 100% of their DVD catalog available for streaming, and at that point it would definitely be worth the added price, but right now you get to choose between no lag and limited choices or unlimited choices and waiting days for your movie(if you include both the time it takes to ship a movie back and the time it takes to get the next one).

      It wasn't worth it. I cancelled.

    8. Re:The update does not make sense by Superken7 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, although I was referring more to the more expensive plan, so you can choose the DVD or streaming, for any movie. (I think streaming is cheaper for them than sending the DVDs).

      I don't think netflix is expensive, just that people frown upon price increases when there is nothing of value being added (usually at least, in my experience)

    9. Re:The update does not make sense by hood8263 · · Score: 1

      I get that, but you still have more selection then we have up here.

    10. Re:The update does not make sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a chicken and egg scenario. Studios assume online streaming leads to OMGTEHPIRACY and charge accordingly for streaming licenses, which Netflix is having a hard time affording on top of DVD distribution licenses, thus the often craptastic streaming library. They can't get more streaming offerings without more funding, and they can't get more funding without an increase in prices somewhere.

      The odd thing is this price increase is to the *DVD* options for the sake of the *streaming* options. I think if they hadn't implemented this price hike with that unnecessary disconnect people wouldn't be freaking out as much.

    11. Re:The update does not make sense by MojoRilla · · Score: 1

      If Netflix provided a good amount of streaming connect, I would agree.

      But from what I saw, it isn't very extensive. I had trouble finding stuff I wanted to watch.

    12. Re:The update does not make sense by fermion · · Score: 1

      This is the way I think of it. At $10 a month for streaming and around 8-12 DVDs a month, there is a huge barrier to a competitor entering the market. Redbox is not competitive, HULU plus is not competitive. At $8 for DVD and $8 for streaming, HULU, Amazon, and even future businesses are competitive. Paying $15 for season on iTunes even makes more sense if one is going to have to pay to stream it anyway.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    13. Re:The update does not make sense by Idbar · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I said this somewhere else, but I think is worth mention here.

      I'm a netflix subscriber, and I sincerely don't care paying more for their services. What I think motivated the rage, was rolling out a price increase as a "feature". Instead of just saying they will be increasing the prices ("The $10 plan will be now $16, BUT you have the option of going only streaming or only DVDs for half the price"), they went "Hey! Great news, we are splitting the plans so everyone is happy! Your plan will no longer exist and you'll have to pay extra! BTW, Everyone must switch over in September".

      If there's one thing you don't want to do you your customers is making them look like idiots, and tell them to pay more with ultimatums. That was sort of 3 strikes on their single blog post.

    14. Re:The update does not make sense by steveg · · Score: 1

      With the new plan, $16 a month gets me 3 DVDs at a time. No streaming, but I don't want streaming. I'm pretty happy with the new plan, it dropped my cost by $4 a month for the same thing I was actually using.

      --
      Ignorance killed the cat. Curiosity was framed.
    15. Re:The update does not make sense by nine-times · · Score: 1

      I'm not too angry because I see this as a move to increase the percentage of their income coming from streaming. That's the only way I see this as making sense to me: Netflix is hoping that, in a few years, they'll be a streaming-only service. that means that they'll need to make streaming more expensive (so they can pay more licensing fees to content-owners in order to increase their streaming library) and also dissuade people from receiving DVD purchases.

    16. Re:The update does not make sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most people are probably not really angry because of the money increase, as there are few good rivals (not for long, I hope), but because nothing of value was added to the service to justify the increase.

      I bet most people would be happy if the price increase would have arrived with a 100% streaming coverage so people can stop relying on DVDs, or maybe some new cool feature.
      Instead, the UI has been somewhat degraded for some, and now the service is almost twice the price. It's not just "some people", I'm sure _most_ people are not happy with the "update".

      It makes perfect sense. They are constantly adding new content. New content costs money. What doesn't make sense is them not making this argument and being arrogant pricks.

    17. Re:The update does not make sense by DeadCatX2 · · Score: 1

      Most people are probably not really angry because of the money increase, as there are few good rivals (not for long, I hope), but because nothing of value was added to the service to justify the increase.

      Right. Because Netflix NEVER adds anything to their streaming catalog. It's the same stuff that's been there ever since they made a streaming option.

      --
      :(){ :|:& };:
    18. Re:The update does not make sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Canada has internet?

    19. Re:The update does not make sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most people are probably not really angry because of the money increase, as there are few good rivals (not for long, I hope), but because nothing of value was added to the service to justify the increase.

      I bet most people would be happy if the price increase would have arrived with a 100% streaming coverage so people can stop relying on DVDs, or maybe some new cool feature.
      Instead, the UI has been somewhat degraded for some, and now the service is almost twice the price. It's not just "some people", I'm sure _most_ people are not happy with the "update".

      I agree with this. Give us something in return. Your streaming content is not worth the price increase especially when there's other out there that actually stream the movies the day they are release and I don't have to wait that long to see them. I also can go down the street and grab a DVD at Redbox and Blockbuster. So there is not added value, but you want us to believe the content providers are pushing you? How about you push back. Give us theater movies at home, instant release dvds, something.

    20. Re:The update does not make sense by camperdave · · Score: 1

      It might be worth doing that if Netflix had any content. No Star Trek. No Babylon 5. No StarGate. No Lost. No Gilligan's Island. No Hogan's Heroes. No Survivorman. No Corner Gas. No Simpsons. No Futurama. $8/month isn't good enough for a smattering of Doctor Who and Farscape.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    21. Re:The update does not make sense by Superken7 · · Score: 1

      Yeah of course, that's the business point of view. The user's point of view, however, is that it now costs a lot more "for no reason at all". That's usually frowned upon by users - they don't care about or want to put themselves into the business' point of view.

    22. Re:The update does not make sense by gorzek · · Score: 1

      I have not had trouble finding anything I want to watch. YMMV. I agree that, if their library is not to your taste, it isn't worth paying for.

    23. Re:The update does not make sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is why everything costs twice as much in Canada. If you want low prices, you need to fight for them (complain, comparison-shop, switch or cancel services, etc.). If you quietly accept 60% price increases, then that's what you'll get.

    24. Re:The update does not make sense by BetterSense · · Score: 1

      Many of us don't watch an hour a night. I at the old price, I could justify "having it available", but since I watch my Roku much less than 1 hour per night, my per-hour cost becomes much more than .26 per hour.

      If Netflix really charged $.26 per hour, that would be great. Heck, they should have a charge-by-the-hour or charge-by-the MB rate. Such a rate would be perfect for low-watchers like me.

    25. Re:The update does not make sense by gorzek · · Score: 1

      Well, they just got Star Trek. Can't speak to the others.

    26. Re:The update does not make sense by hedwards · · Score: 1

      That might be, but when you compare it to the cost of DVDs it's not really that good of a deal. Plus, it's not really unlimited. In addition to the limitation based upon library size, they're also adding a limitation to the number of devices that can be simultaneously viewing the streams. Then there's the limitations on ones time that tend to discourage watching too many of them in a given month.

      If $7.99 is too much for truly unlimited streaming, then they should provide the consumers with an option that is fairly priced. I don't need unlimited streaming, I don't watch that many movies in a given month via streaming. I'd be fine with an option that was for 20 movies out of the entire catalog streamed per month.

    27. Re:The update does not make sense by joocemann · · Score: 1

      Nothing of value.... except that they constantly include more and more popular and higher quality videos to the library.

      There is nothing small about having every season of the family guy available for streaming. The netflix of 2008 wouldn't have had any new movies or anything close to, for example, Iron Man 2, which I recently streamed and enjoyed.

      I pretty much stream-only, so I'll be just adapting my plan to cost the same and not include the mailing service I rarely/never use.

    28. Re:The update does not make sense by gorzek · · Score: 1

      A metered plan may actually not be a bad idea, though their current implementation would have to be modified to support such a thing and they probably prefer to keep it all simplified with flat rates.

    29. Re:The update does not make sense by Justin.Rudebaugh · · Score: 1

      You mean, 26 cents a day.. $8 * 12 months = $96 | $96 / 365 = $.26/day

    30. Re:The update does not make sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, you'd pay a dollar an hour, for eight nights, then be done with the four decent movies they've got available for streaming.

    31. Re:The update does not make sense by gorzek · · Score: 1

      I just got Netflix a few weeks ago (free trial!) and they seem to have enough stuff to keep me busy with streaming for at least a few months.

      If I reach the end of that and they haven't come up with anything compelling I want to watch, I'll cancel.

      Those complaining about the lack of selection on streaming: is it because you've been on it a while and have run out of fresh things to watch, or have you barely had it at all and you just don't like much of anything? I'm curious. :)

    32. Re:The update does not make sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You missed the part where he said assuming you watch one hour per night. If you watch one hour per day, at $0.26 per day, it's $0.26 per hour. If you watch more than one hour (which I assume most people probably do), it's still $0.26 per day, which is even less per hour.

    33. Re:The update does not make sense by Uhhhh+oh+ya! · · Score: 1

      I agree that they are looking at it from a business view, but just as its dumb for consumers to ignore the business point of view its dumb for the provider to ignore the consumer point of view.

      I really don't know what was happening behind the scenes, maybe they really couldn't sustain themselves without this price increase. Still they could have done it better. Offer some sort of silver lining, wait till you make a deal with ESPN to stream sports, make a deal with some channels to get tv series posted at the same rate as Hulu, or just save up a bunch of movies you already got the rights to stream and post them today.

      From the user point of view the price did not gradually increase to make up for costs, it doubled and they aren't getting anything new out of it. Not to mention Netflix seemed a little cocky with the announcement, they might as well have said, "Ya we know you don't like it but in the end your not going to cancel so why should we give a ****."

    34. Re:The update does not make sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you want 100% streaming coverage, $7.99 is way too cheap. Most people are simply being irrational here.

      Agreed. There is no reasonable way to have 100% coverage.

      The NetFlix DVD I watched last night was a black-and-white Japanese film from the 1940's. This is the unique service that NetFlix provides; movies that simply are not available elsewhere. Expecting them to pay for the licensing/distribution rights, disc space, and other costs associated with making that movie via streaming - for the handful of people that will watch it in a year - is completely irrational. Thankfully, their business model still allows movie buffs and film students access to these films.

    35. Re:The update does not make sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree, $8 for streaming their entire catalog is too cheap. But I'd happily continue paying the $19 I'm paying now and save them the shipping costs of DVDs if I could stream everything. It's the 25% increase to my subscription costs and getting nothing new in return that really annoys me...

    36. Re:The update does not make sense by camperdave · · Score: 1

      'Star Trek' is not available but you might enjoy these titles.
      'Star Trek: The Animated Series' is not available but you might enjoy these titles.
      'Star Trek: The Next Generation' is not available but you might enjoy these titles.
      'Star Trek: Deep Space Nine' is not available but you might enjoy these titles.
      'Star Trek: Voyager' is not available but you might enjoy these titles.
      'Star Trek: Enterprise' is not available but you might enjoy these titles.

      'Star Trek: The Motion Picture' is not available but you might enjoy these titles.
      'Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan' is not available but you might enjoy these titles.
      'Star Trek III: The Search for Spock' is not available but you might enjoy these titles.
      'Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home' is not available but you might enjoy these titles.
      'Star Trek V: The Final Frontier' is not available but you might enjoy these titles.
      'Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country' is not available but you might enjoy these titles.
      'Star Trek: Generations' is not available but you might enjoy these titles.
      'Star Trek: First Contact' is not available but you might enjoy these titles.
      'Star Trek: Insurrection' is not available but you might enjoy these titles.
      'Star Trek: Nemesis' is not available but you might enjoy these titles.

      'Star Trek: Evolutions' is not available but you might enjoy these titles.
      'Star Trek' is not available but you might enjoy these titles.

      No Trek for Me!

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    37. Re:The update does not make sense by gorzek · · Score: 1

      Interesting. The TV series (besides Deep Space 9) are available in the US. Don't know about the films. I suspect you are in another region in which case all bets are off--I have no idea what isn't and isn't available to you.

    38. Re:The update does not make sense by Zenaku · · Score: 1

      Yeah, this change is great for those who don't use one service or the other.

      But I think most people are probably like me. I use both, and tend to use them for different things. I use the streaming way more often, and mostly for television shows. Episode after episode, no waiting. But the streaming library sucks for movies. There's very little in there that I want to see and haven't already seen. So I use the DVD portion of the plan to get films I actually want to watch.

      Additionally, even for TV shows, the streaming catalog is. . . unstable. A few weeks ago a program I had been watching daily was suddenly yanked from the streaming catalog. I was in the middle of a season, dammit! So into my DVD queue it went. Where would I have been if I only had the streaming plan? Pissed off in cliffhanger-land, that's where.

      --
      If fate makes you a motorcycle, you become a motorcycle.
    39. Re:The update does not make sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, $8 a month for unlimited streaming is a fucking steal. Assuming you watch only an hour a night, you are paying all of 26 cents an hour for your entertainment, a better deal than just about anything else out there.

      Emphasis mine.

      Assuming you ONLY watch an hour a night? What? Seriously, like that's some kind of magical floor and everyone watches at least that much? Holy shit. I mean... wow.

      I average 4 hours a month.

    40. Re:The update does not make sense by wpi97 · · Score: 1

      Strange... I thought this was capitalism, where the user's point of view is "is it worth it for me to keep the service at the increased price". Since when does any business have to justify their prices? Last I checked the movie theaters in the US were still charging outrageous prices for sodas and snacks, simply because they can. Similarly, Netflix will probably get away with charging higher prices, now that they have put most video rental stores out of business. It makes no sense to complain about the price increase, and even less sense to demand there to be a reason for it. You simply decide whether or not you are willing to pay the higher price and vote with your credit card.

    41. Re:The update does not make sense by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 1

      A price increase does not have to be justified by value added at all.

      Of course not, but to sharply increase prices without adding value risks alienating your customers.

      I am a landlord, and I have mastered this art. Each year, I send out a letter that reads more or less as follows:

      Dear Mr. Tenant,

      Blah blah blah, our costs are constantly going up. Blah blah, your rent is also going up.

      I'd also like to take this opportunity to remind you of our lease renewal bonus program. Upon renewing your lease, you may select one of the following FREE bonuses: 1. a ceiling fan in a room of your choice, 2. painting a room with your choice of one of our pre-approved colors, 3. a $50 gift card to the restaurant, gardening, or home improvement store of your choice, 4. I forget if there's anything else in the letter.

      Thank you for letting us serve all of your housing needs for another year.

      Sincerely,

      Your Bastard Landlord who just raised your rent again this year

      The amount of the raise is just enough to make people complain, but not enough to make people move. And typically, the bonus (notice how each bonus cost about $50?) is generally enough to get people to stomach a $25-50/mo rent increase. If they decide not to renew, they get another letter reminding of all the cleanup they need to do, how much it costs to move, how inconvenient it is to come up with a security deposit, and how many bastard landlords there are out there who don't fix anything.

      So, anyway, yeah, I'm a huge believer in offering the customer a value-add in exchange for a price increase. It's just human nature to want to justify a negative event like a price increase, so give the damn customer his damn justification so he doesn't get pissed off and leave you out of spite. I make my $50 back in the first month, but I got the customer to stay for 12.

      I'm truly shocked that Netflix was so naive as to think that this would end well for them. They're going to have to come up with some serious sweetener by Sept or they're going to get a lot of cancellations when the new, higher bills hit. As for me, I never had the urge to try any of their competitors, but I'm going to try out Amazon Prime streaming over the next few months. Maybe it will be good enough for me to cancel netflix? Maybe not.

      But anyway, if they would have offered some sweetener right away, I probably wouldn't have bothered checking out the competition. After all, I'm human, and I'm affected by human nature, too.

      --
      They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
    42. Re:The update does not make sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      30 hours of steaming per month? Really? Hell, I barely watch a movie a month. I doubt the average Netflix user streams 1 hour per day. (Still can't get my head around this: 1/16th of your WAKING HOURS using *any* company's service?? Well, except your employer's toilet and youporn)

    43. Re:The update does not make sense by hazem · · Score: 2

      Yeah, $8 a month for unlimited streaming is a fucking steal.

      Indeed. I've been streaming for a year with Netflix and keep thinking, "I can't believe this is only $8/month."

      I'm not bothered by the increase in price, since for me it would be worth a higher price. I am, however, bothered by the change in the UI. My computer is not a TV and I expect to be able to do more with my computer (since i have more input options than just a remote control). I also don't like not being able to see the titles and ratings any more.

      And they need to work on their PR and understanding the difference between "inside voice" and "outside voice". The latte thing is the kind of thing you say in an internal meeting because... well, you can see all the comments here about it. The "outside voice" should have been something along the lines of, "The content owners are raising our costs. We still want to offer the best content possible, but to do that, we have to charge a bit more."

    44. Re:The update does not make sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hell, unless you fuck for 4 hours and buy in bulk, condoms cost more.

    45. Re:The update does not make sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am one of the people you describe. I would gladly pay a bit more each month if the entire library was available via streaming. We have teh DVD shipping option only because most really decent films are not available in the stream. It was reasonable at a buck a month month more but I don't know that its worth $5 more a month.

    46. Re:The update does not make sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is true. But what you ask for is honesty in a business environment and that just isn't allowed in the USA today. Most MBA driven business start with the assumption the customer is a mark and work down from there. Sadly this is proven by the cattle that make up the market in the USA each day so it won't be changing anytime soon.

      When was the last time you heard someone bragging about having listened to a description of how an industry really functions and then basing their purchase on the quality of the provider? Nope, all you ever hear is "look how cheap I got this".

    47. Re:The update does not make sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Classic bait and switch.

  9. Grammar Fayle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The company said it would Netflix raise the Internet-plus-DVDs-in-the-mail plan ..."

    So what exactly is a Netflix raise, as opposed to a traditional raise?

    1. Re:Grammar Fayle by just_another_sean · · Score: 1

      A raise of approximately 63%?

      --
      Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal
  10. They don't get it by southpolesammy · · Score: 1, Informative

    This isn't about the use of disposable income. It's about having a huge increase in cost with absolutely nothing in return. Now, if they'd said that they'd finally ripped their DVD collection to streaming, or even somewhere near it, I'd listen. Or perhaps they're finally going to get more recent titles in line with Blockbuster or Redbox. But they're not.

    This is a pure, unadulterated money grab. So I'm grabbing mine back before they get the chance. Canceled my service yesterday. And per http://www.hackingnetflix.com/2011/07/new-pricing-poll-what-are-you-going-to-do.html, I'm not the only one. Over 1/3 say they are quitting. Explain that to the shareholders, NetFlix execs.

    --
    Rule #1 -- Politics always trumps technology.
    1. Re:They don't get it by master_kaos · · Score: 2

      so a third of a poll says they are going to cancel. lets take that at face value. Double price.. third leave.. well looks like it is still worth doubling the price! Of course when push comes to shove, I am betting 1/2 of the people who say they are going to cancel, won't cancel.

    2. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the lost 1/3 of their customers, but increased their prices 60%, they're still making 6% more revenue but now there infrastructure costs have dropped by a 1/3. I'm sure the shareholders would be fine with it.

    3. Re:They don't get it by Certhas · · Score: 1

      Using your numbers only, let me explain it to the shareholders: "Revenue side: 2/3 * 16 > 10 Cost side: 2/3 1 We made a move that both increases revenue and reduces cost. We're doing our job and making you more money."

    4. Re:They don't get it by Nemyst · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If 2/3rds of the user base stays with a 50% price increase, then they've increased revenue while decreasing expenses (less bandwidth usage).

      Question is whether it'll stay at just a third leaving.

    5. Re:They don't get it by rbarreira · · Score: 1

      I doubt their infrastructure costs are proportional to the number of users.

      --

      The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
    6. Re:They don't get it by CmdrPorno · · Score: 1

      Of the 1/3 who say they are quitting, I wonder what proportion will actually quit, and whether they're representative of the subscriber base as a whole. I would gladly pay $10 or more per month for streaming only, if they offered all of their DVDs on the streaming service. There are content providers such as HBO who swear up and down that they will never, ever make their series available via streaming, so this is a pipe dream.

      I have about 30 DVDs in my queue (none of which are available via streaming), but I plan to switch to streaming only once I've watched them. If there are several DVDs I want to rent, I'll start the DVD rental plan for a month at a time.

      --
      Sent from my iPhone
    7. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My guess: 5% leaves.

    8. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When you look at the poll, 34% say they are cancelling out right, but about 42% say they are going with either just streaming or DVDs, a price decrease. That's what I'm doing. Netflix won't lose me as a customer, but I'm going to be paying a few dollars less each month. Also, if I ran Redbox, I would be all over this with a big media blitz.

    9. Re:They don't get it by Bobfrankly1 · · Score: 1

      This isn't about the use of disposable income. It's about having a huge increase in cost with absolutely nothing in return.

      Huge in percentiles, small in actual dollars. Remember that Netflix's costs have risen as well. The US Postal Service has been raising rates over the years, it's not like Netflix can just print money to cover the difference.

    10. Re:They don't get it by Duradin · · Score: 1

      This may come as shock to you, but some people, and companies like Netflix, have to pay for the content they use!

      Here's the really complex part, if their costs increase enough they may pass along that cost to their customers instead of doing the honorable thing and go out of business. How dare they!

    11. Re:They don't get it by frosty_tsm · · Score: 2

      If 2/3rds of the user base stays with a 50% price increase, then they've increased revenue while decreasing expenses (less bandwidth usage).

      Question is whether it'll stay at just a third leaving.

      At the same time they lose market share, which hurts their long-term prospects. It makes it harder for them to grow revenue and easier for their competitors (iTunes, Amazon, Hulu) to grow strong.

      Most investors would see a 1/3rd paying user-base leaving in this span of months as very bad. Revenue isn't necessarily going up; there are lot of households who will stay but go from 2 DVDs to 1.

    12. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're not looking at the real situation if we're going to assume the results of an online poll are 100% accurate.

      Looking at the results currently:

      34% say they'll quit. That's a total loss of income.

      only 20%! say they'll go with the new $15.98 combined price.

      10% say they'll go with a dvd only plan of $7.99 (and up, meaning this part may increase in price.)

      31% says they'll go with a streaming only plan of $7.99.

      I'm not sure if this $7.99 plan is an actual option or not, but if it is, that means a drop in revenue in 41% of the remaining retained customers. I'm guessing this means if that 7.99 option is not a real option but a recommendation by the poll makers, it means those customers may pack up and leave as well.

      So it's a drop of 2 dollars or 9.99 for each of those as well.

      Only 20% of the customer base will willingly accept the increase without quitting essentially. That's not exactly a growth of revenue.

    13. Re:They don't get it by truthsearch · · Score: 1

      Now, if they'd said that they'd finally ripped their DVD collection to streaming, or even somewhere near it, I'd listen. Or perhaps they're finally going to get more recent titles in line with Blockbuster or Redbox. But they're not. This is a pure, unadulterated money grab.

      You do realize that Netflix doesn't get to decide what's on streaming, right? It's the content owners that put in the restrictions. You're angry at the middle-man, not the source of the problem.

    14. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If 2/3rds of the user base stays with a 50% price increase, then they've increased revenue while decreasing expenses (less bandwidth usage).

      That doesn't take into account this being a stimulus for present and possible future competition, nor does take into account the value of lost customer good will. Some of the previously happy customers may feel like mailing back kitty-litter, hack their servers or who knows what. And those of us who aren't customers may be more reluctant to give them a try in the future.

    15. Re:They don't get it by GoatCheez · · Score: 1

      Well, actually, 1/3 are leaving, and 1/3 are going with a cheaper plan (streaming only). I'm going to go with the streaming only plan, which is cheaper than my current plan. I'd imagine that many others would do the same. I don't think this will work out well for Netflix.

    16. Re:They don't get it by southpolesammy · · Score: 1

      That's not at all true. If the URL's numbers are even somewhat close to accurate, Netflix stands to lose a huge amount of revenue.

      If 20% move to the $16/month plan, that's a net revenue increase of 12% (20% users x 60% increase = 12% revenue increase). However, if 33% quit, that's a complete revenue loss of 33% as well. When you add in those that are modifying plans, what you get is that Netflix stands to lose about 25% of their revenue inflow due to this move.

      Can they make it up in reduced bandwidth and shipping costs? Hard to say, but the sheer loss of revenue is hard to mask no matter how you look at it.

      --
      Rule #1 -- Politics always trumps technology.
    17. Re:They don't get it by patchmaster · · Score: 1

      What wasn't mentioned in the post here is that slightly over 50% of the respondents said they would drop to a streaming-only or DVD-only plan. So, assuming everyone does as they say they will (dubious, I know), that's $2/month less from half their customers and $10/month less from one-third of their customers. That leaves 60% more from only one-sixth of their customers. I think they're going to have some 'splainin' to do come shareholder meeting time.

      As for me, inertia has kept me paying for a 3-at-a-time plan for the last five years without using it at all. This price increase got me off my behind and motivated me to finally cancel. Thanks, Netflix.

    18. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2/3 user base with a 50% price increase leaves total revenues unchanged

      2/3 * 1.5 = 1

    19. Re:They don't get it by hedwards · · Score: 1

      How do you factor in those that don't cancel but just downgrade their service? That's what I'm going to do, they were getting $16 a month from me, now I'm going to drop streaming which will result in them getting $8 a month rather than $16. I doubt I'm alone as the selection of movies available by streaming isn't very good and I doubt that most folks really think that it's as good a deal as the DVD rentals are.

      Also, what about the cost in terms of bad feelings? They were sort of able to skate through previous price increases based largely on good will, but if they're going to lie to the customers and force through gigantic price hikes, that's going to get them a lot of bad press.

      It is worth noting that Netflix's stock is already starting to see some pressure. It's too soon to see if this is related to the price hike blunder or if investors are going to show any faith in the management, but given the tens of thousands of negative comments on Netflix's facebook page, I'm not so sure this is going to be water under the bridge the way that some folks think it will be.

    20. Re:They don't get it by hedwards · · Score: 1

      I think this is the bigger danger, they're losing about half the revenue that they get from me as a result of this. I won't be making the switch until next month, but I will end up paying $8 a month rather than $16 a month when I switch to a DVD only plan. A net loss of revenue.

      My bet is that this is largely a negotiating tactic on their part in dealing with the content providers. It's the only plausible explanation I can find for such willful incompetence in the announcement. I mean, learning about it from a news report before being directly informed, a huge price increase without any sort of improvement. The economy is just not strong enough to justify that sort of brazen disregard for the customer base.

    21. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1/3 responded to a poll(supposedly, I didn't check it) they'd quit over this.

      You REALLY think 1/3 or anywhere near that is actually going to quit? Among other things, this poll was not a random sample, so that 1/3 is probably totally bunk anyway. 1/3 wouldn't actually quit even if it weren't.

    22. Re:They don't get it by mmalove · · Score: 1

      Well, and the hidden intangible value of market share. See, Netflix really is a steal if their streaming content has content that appeals to you. And at 8 bucks/month for that content, very few companies can compete. I think the only reason amazon/google/hulu have any decent visitors count at all is their exclusivity to certain popular content.

      BUT - if netflix continues to wind up the price and down the number of customers, on paper it may look like more money, but within the market they are gift wrapping next generation streaming entertainment delivery for another company to take. And it doesn't really matter what you do afterwards or what you did before, when you exploit your monopoly at the expense of your customers, when they finally do get their wish and a competitor steps in they will trash your name for decades to come.

      --
      You can get 15 minutes of fame, but you can go down in history for infamy.
    23. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're assuming that the remaining 2/3rds will choose the 50% price hike. Many will not. Many (like myself) will instead choose a lower priced plan, in my case a 60% savings. Even if only HALF of those remaining 2/3rds choose a lower priced plan like me, then they've actually decreased revenue. Whether or not expenses will decrease is arguable.

      But where this will really cost them is the ill-will. 1/3 of their customer base gets pissed & leaves, 1/3 are forced to choose which half of the service they would like to keep (DVD or streaming), and 1/3 are forced to pay a huge price increase to keep they same level of service they've had all along. I've been an extremely happy Netflix customer for over 11 years now. So much so that I've never even looked into any of their competition. That all changed yesterday.

    24. Re:They don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And every customer who leaves is a potential customer for a competing service ... which now has a chance for a much larger user base and more competition for Netflix. No, I think it would be better to have 100% of the market for a smaller dollar amount as Netflix would have more power in deals with the labels.

    25. Re:They don't get it by djrosen · · Score: 1

      Except that the third that also said they would go to streaming only wont last long because the comparative selection is complete crap.

  11. 60% by John.P.Jones · · Score: 1

    A couple bucks more is exactly the wrong way for them to be looking at this. It is a 60% price increase (A little less for me on a 2 BluRay plan) but they need to be offering real improvements to service in exchange for this level of price increase, they need to be promising faster new releases on disc and better streaming options too not just now we want 60% more (they could get away with 25% more, but this is excessive.) I'll be dropping to the 1DVD (no more BluRays for a while) w/ streaming plan in response.

    1. Re:60% by naasking · · Score: 1

      Does your fruit taste better when the price of food goes up? There are two factors that naturally drive up prices: inflation, and cost of doing business. I suspect the movie studios are realizing what a good deal Netflix was getting on their content, so now they're charging more, and thus Netflix must pay more. Those costs are then transferred to customers or Netflix can't stay profitable.

      This is reality. Sometimes costs just go up. Don't blame Netflix, blame the greedy movie studios. If anything, sticking with Netflix gives them *more* bargaining power with the studios to push prices *lower* in the future. I'd say that alone is worth the 60% price increase.

    2. Re:60% by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      Agree. Too bad their timing sucks and they are increasing their combined plan fee to $16 around the same time they lose access to movies from Sony entertainment and will likely be losing Starz Online soon.

      If I drop DVD (which I plan to do anyway because Red Box is better), my rate stays the same $8, but the quantity (and quality) of movies available is lower. Whereas, HBOgo which I get free in exchange for paying for my Wife's addiction to True Blood is actually pretty damn nice and the streaming quality is much better than Netflix. Personally the few television shows I watch are on the USA network, and I've notice that episodes of some of their more popular shows are curiously missing from their video offering available on the web. So I keep the basic cable which I need anyway in order to get HBO. If Netflix isn't careful, some corporation that actually produces a lot of our media (*cough* Time Warner *cough* Comcast) may take advantage of Netflix's faux pas.

      I haven't gotten an email from Netflix explaining the rate change. I guess the CEO is too busy drinking lattes to care about notifying all their customers.

      BTW all the people who quote just $8 versus the price of cable isn't factoring the cost of a broadband connection. Nothing prevents an ISP from bundling their streaming service with their broadband service for less than what it would cost for broadband + Netflix. Especially since a certain ISP owns several television networks and some studios.

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
  12. I wanted to call to offer another plan by malignant_minded · · Score: 1

    But you couldn't get through and that is the only means of communication they have besides a forum. What I would like to propose to them is this. I'll pay a dollar or more a month for the streaming plan which puts me in the maybe a DVD category. For each DVD I rent I pay like 2 or 4 dollars. This allows me to get a DVD if I really want it but also not have a plan I never use. Currently I have the streaming and 1 DVD plan and I have had that DVD for probably 2 months so I really doubt I will opt for the DVD plan on top of the streaming at the current cost, I would just bittorrent for the occasional item. My suggestions seems fair, they get a few extra dollars a month for people that may never use the feature but if people get enough DVDs a month they would be better served just adding the DVD plan. The extra buck or two a month for streaming with possible DVD would be such a low cost that people would probably rather have the option then not, like phone insurance. :)

  13. In other news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Netflix is accepting applications for a new company spokesman. Go to Netflix.com/jobs for more information.

  14. Perception by Trillan · · Score: 1

    As a Canadian, the only deal available to me is $7.99 for streaming only. I looked over the catalog and decided there was enough there to be worth $7.99/month.

    So what's not worth $7.99 to Americans, the DVDs or the streaming? Given that your streaming library is more extensive, I assume it's the DVDs. Cancel that and enjoy the streaming.

    I plan to stream a few episodes of a series I'm watching over 3G from my hospital bed later today.

    1. Re:Perception by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a Canadian, you don't have to pay for your hospital bed. That $1,500+ savings makes up for the $15.98 Netflix charges.

    2. Re:Perception by tepples · · Score: 1

      So what's not worth $7.99 to Americans, the DVDs or the streaming?

      The streaming. I'm not a Netflix subscriber yet, but I imagine that once a subscriber has finished watching movies that his friends have recommended, he ends up with a lot of movies that aren't available on streaming. How should one watch those movies?

    3. Re:Perception by hood8263 · · Score: 1

      this exactly

    4. Re:Perception by WiiVault · · Score: 1

      Just because Netflix doesn't offer Canadians a wide range of streaming options doesn't really mean people in the US should be trilled with a 60% price increase.

    5. Re:Perception by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, we don't have to "pay" for a hospital bed in Canada. I suppose you're from the USA; your taxes are lower and write off things like mortgage interest as an individual, etc .

    6. Re:Perception by hood8263 · · Score: 1

      No, but you guys do get more for paying for the same at the same price.

    7. Re:Perception by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not very satisfied with Netflix Canada but I keep on paying because I want to support them.

      I'm ready to jump ship as soon as the price goes up or a major change I don't like comes. I just need more content!

    8. Re:Perception by DrMaurer · · Score: 1

      I don't care. I've had the same DVD at home for 2 months that I haven't had a chance to watch (maybe tomorrow). This will affect me little if at all. I just won't have to worry about moving that DVD mailer around.

      --
      Dan
    9. Re:Perception by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

      If we were to compare the selection of movies available for streaming in both USA and Canada, then compare prices, then either it should be 80 cents/month for streaming in Canada or $80/month for streaming in the USA.

      Yes, the library available to Canadians really is that pathetic. Add the stupidly low monthly caps forced on us by the ISPs (my download+upload cap is 35GB) and Netflix isn't an attractive alternative*.

      * note to any asshole reading those forums to find proof that you're killing Netflix and thus pushing more customers toward your cable/satellite services: if I'm not paying 8$/month for Netflix I'm sure as hell not paying over 50$/month for your you-watch-what-we-broadcast, not-on-demand services.

    10. Re:Perception by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's the lack of complete offerings. For instance, Dr. Who... they'll offer most of the series for streaming, but Disc 1 is DVD rental only. So, in effect, it's a carrot-and-a-stick to get you to have both plans. It doesn't work for all the series (some older ones are complete)...

      And for those of us who watch very little TV, the movie selection is not that great. It's passable if you're waxing nostalgic... but not in a "vast archive of classic movies" sort of way.

      This price increase just gave me the nudge I needed to cancel the service. It's not worth it to me anymore for the previously mentioned reasons and the lack of consistency in their catalog over time.

    11. Re:Perception by Trillan · · Score: 1

      Why not just figure out what part you want and pay less for it than you're paying now?

      You're paying $9.99 now. Pay $7.99 for what you want instead.

    12. Re:Perception by Trashman · · Score: 1

      As a subscriber, I find that the DVD/Bluray Library is more comprehensive than the Streaming library. I base that on the my own experience of searching for movies and finding that they're only available on DVD. That said, I changed to the streaming only plan since I wanted to keep the price down. (from Streaming + 1 DVD). 7.99 for 1 DVD is absurd and I would be better served by Redbox.

      I really wish that netflix would of announced that they were significantly expanding the Streaming library or at least getting new releases quicker. That would make the price hike tolerable in my opinion.

      --
      Do not read this .sig
    13. Re:Perception by Glendale2x · · Score: 1

      As a Canadian, the only deal available to me is $7.99 for streaming only. I looked over the catalog and decided there was enough there to be worth $7.99/month.

      So what's not worth $7.99 to Americans, the DVDs or the streaming? Given that your streaming library is more extensive, I assume it's the DVDs. Cancel that and enjoy the streaming.

      I plan to stream a few episodes of a series I'm watching over 3G from my hospital bed later today.

      Streaming. Their streaming library - while better than it used to be - is still nowhere near comparable to their DVD library. Most of what I want to see is only available on DVD. If I could stream it I would, but they only have it in DVD.

      --
      this is my sig
    14. Re:Perception by Trillan · · Score: 1

      You have no idea how the Canadian medical system works, do you?

      I pay on every dollar I earn, every dollar I spend, and a fee every month besides for medical services that I'll use in a significant way once or twice in my lifetime. You know what? I pay. And it's a great deal because my life isn't ruined if I get sick.

      Get your head out if your ass. Nothing's free.

    15. Re:Perception by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what's not worth $7.99 to Americans, the DVDs or the streaming?

      The streaming. I'm not a Netflix subscriber yet, but I imagine that once a subscriber has finished watching movies that his friends have recommended, he ends up with a lot of movies that aren't available on streaming. How should one watch those movies?

      You download them off of usenet like everyone one else. I spend another $20 a month of unlimited usenet with ~500 day retention. Worth more to me than netflix. There are providers that offer this, provide an encrypted connection, and don't keep download logs.

      Fag.

    16. Re:Perception by hedwards · · Score: 1

      The options for streaming are significantly worse than for DVDs.

    17. Re:Perception by trevelyon · · Score: 1

      Yep but with the download caps and overall low bandwidth of links from Bell and Rogers good luck getting decent quality and use from it. IMO, streaming is stillborn in Canada due to the duopoly of your 2 major ISPs (even worse than in the US). Both Rogers and Bell also have a firmer deathgrip on TV than the operators here so it makes streaming LOOK more attractive. I'll be curious to see what you think once you have it. As for streaming over 3G, enjoy your mobile bill (Canada has some of the highest mobile data costs in the world). I lived in the GTA for a bit and while I loved living there I was surprised at how relaxed people were when getting totally raped by government granted corporate monopolies (Roger, Bell, 407 etr). Then again the Canadian economy is in better shape than the US so maybe folks up there are not feeling the bite so bad.

    18. Re:Perception by Trillan · · Score: 1

      I've been using Netflix for months now in Metro Vancouver. I stay well within my 6GB/mo mobile on Rogers, and neither Shaw nor Telus ever complained about my bandwidth usage (I switched for Telus's TV lineup).

    19. Re:Perception by bioster · · Score: 1

      Add the stupidly low monthly caps forced on us by the ISPs (my download+upload cap is 35GB) and Netflix isn't an attractive alternative*.

      I recommend seeing if teksavvy is available in your area:

      http://teksavvy.com/en/residential.asp
      Click 'cable' then click the 'order now' link beside one of the 15Mbps packages. That'll bring you to a page where you can check availability. If the 15Mbps w. unlimited cap or 300GB cap aren't available, check the DSL packages. If you're not from southern Ontario, then you might have other options but I wouldn't be familiar with them.

      Note about teksavvy: They don't lure you in with package deals or bundles, and they seem expensive at first because you have to pay a setup fee and maybe buy a modem. But they offer good service (I usually get an actual 15Mbps on my cable modem), have good tech support, and even if you don't care about the larger bandwidth caps their per-month prices are cheaper than similar speeds from the big competitors like Rogers.

      I've been with them for 9 or 10 months now, and am quite happy with them. I didn't like Rogers or Bell. They would lure me in with cheap introductory offers, but then their service was poor and their speeds weren't as advertised.

  15. It still has no live news or live sports by tepples · · Score: 1

    Cable TV is still worth it if your household includes someone who is a fan of audiovisually presented national news (e.g. MSNBC, Fox News, HLN) or those live sports that are not on the farmer five but still blacked out online (e.g. ESPN, Versus). If there were a way to get those other than cable TV, I imagine more TV+Internet customers people would be switching from expanded-basic TV to Netflix streaming plus only enough TV to get an Internet line into the house.

    1. Re:It still has no live news or live sports by Reverand+Dave · · Score: 1

      That is a good point, but if you don't need those things then it is a very good substitute for standard cable tv. I get all of my news on-line and am not a fan of watching sports on tv.

      --
      I got here through a series of tubes
    2. Re:It still has no live news or live sports by BagOBones · · Score: 1

      Why would you pay for Cable to watch news? I have 4 local stations that I get in Digital 1080i OTA with a simple antenna? Typically better image quality than the compressed and re-encoded feeds the Cable/Sat providers have.

      --
      EA David Gardner -"... but the consumers have proven that actually what they want is fun."
    3. Re:It still has no live news or live sports by tepples · · Score: 1

      Why would you pay for Cable to watch news?

      She tells me federal politics is her favorite soap opera, and she likes being able to sit on the couch and watch progressive pundits discuss federal politics. I haven't seen that on the farmer five.

      I have 4 local stations that I get in Digital 1080i OTA with a simple antenna?

      One of our local stations used to run a 24-hour loop of local news on a subchannel, but it switched that subchannel over to an affiliate of MyNetworkTV and Fox.

    4. Re:It still has no live news or live sports by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, you realize that TV stations still broadcast over the air, right? You can get all the same national and local news shows completely for free if you plug in a $20 antenna to the back of your HDTV, if you're even remotely close to a population center.

      There's really no reason, other than sports, to subscribe to cable/satellite.

    5. Re:It still has no live news or live sports by numbsafari · · Score: 1

      Cable TV is still worth it if your household includes someone who is a fan of audiovisually presented national news (e.g. MSNBC, Fox News, HLN)

      It's called NPR (npr.org) and you can stream it for free... if you feel guilty you can even make an annual donation that is a FRACTION of what Comcast charges.

      or those live sports that are not on the farmer five but still blacked out online (e.g. ESPN, Versus).

      It's called a sports bar. Most neighborhoods have them. They usually have AC, big TVs, a few good looking waitresses, and hot wings. No dishes, no cooking, and you might actually make some new friends.

      Sure, you actually have to put some pants on in order to watch the big game. But, seriously, do you really watch a lot of sports in your underwear?

      Oh, and getting live sports through sports bar is still cheaper than getting them at home via Comcast.

      Got kids? Remember: Hooters is a family restaurant... (j/k)

    6. Re:It still has no live news or live sports by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fox News

      Why would you pay money for that though? I'd rather pay money not to have to deal with it. I'd probably pay $10/mo to have it automatically turned off whenever I entered a room where it was on. Maybe that's the next revolution.

    7. Re:It still has no live news or live sports by geek · · Score: 3, Informative

      Get some rabbit ears and get your live sports in HD for free

    8. Re:It still has no live news or live sports by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait... you watch those news chans and you're not laughing at them?

      Please learn about critical thinking; it might save you from looking like the run-of-the-mill assclowns that re-elect idiots to lead us. Then again, if you're looking for the truth about Kim Kardashians ass, then I suppose they've got the facts right....

    9. Re:It still has no live news or live sports by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Eh, there are other ways if you're old enough. I cancelled my Cable TV a while back, and I'm saving over $100 a month because of it. Sure, I had Showtime and the DVR, and loved watching ESPN, but once I actually did the cost compare and found out how much I could save, and how much entertainment I really wouldn't be losing.....it was a no brainer. I have friends with cable or dish, and can always go to a bar to catch a game if I want to. Those aren't even real news channels that you mention, so I never missed them.

      Roku with Netflix, Hulu+, and more FTW.

    10. Re:It still has no live news or live sports by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except for ESPN... That's the main thing I miss ever since I switched to using an antenna for TV. No more Monday night football.

    11. Re:It still has no live news or live sports by praxis · · Score: 1

      Most of NPR's programming is not presented audio-visually. Luck will have it though, that most of PBS's is.

    12. Re:It still has no live news or live sports by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      Get some rabbit ears and get your live sports in HD for free

      Good luck with that. Many popular sporting events are now only on cable channels. Even "Monday Night Football" moved from ABC to ESPN.

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    13. Re:It still has no live news or live sports by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GP was specifically talking live sports that were not broadcast OTA, hence requiring cable. RTFC!

    14. Re:It still has no live news or live sports by demonbug · · Score: 1

      Get some rabbit ears and get your live sports in HD for free

      90% of the sports I watch aren't available over the air, and I don't watch that many.

      Unless ESPN is broadcasting over the air these days, you wouldn't be able to watch the World Cup games going on right now, for example (though, admittedly, I think they are available on espn3.com or whatever the hell it is this week).

    15. Re:It still has no live news or live sports by cshay · · Score: 1

      Many many baseball teams have a nearly exclusive contract with cable tv.

    16. Re:It still has no live news or live sports by Sprouticus · · Score: 1

      sports OTA is 720p vs 1080p on cable.

      I did nt realize this until I upgraded from OTA and paid my cable company for HD. (Well actually I got a bundle and used the $10 a month I was saving on Hd).

      1080p makes a big difference.

    17. Re:It still has no live news or live sports by anarkhos · · Score: 1

      So-called "news" streams are found all over the place (note the heavy sarcasm that it's news and not propaganda).

      If you want sports, espn3.com is the ticket.

      Cable sucks

      --
      >80 column hard wrapped e-mail is not a sign of intelligent
      >life
    18. Re:It still has no live news or live sports by porges · · Score: 1

      I don't think that's true. No cable channel actually works in 1080p; it's 720p or 1080i. You may have your cable box set to always output at 1080p or something like that -- and for all I know it actually does look better on your TV, if the upscaler in the box is better than the upscaler in your TV.

  16. Streaming would be fine by stokessd · · Score: 1

    I'd be super happy with the streaming only if they have more than a few titles available for streaming. I'd bet there would be a whole lot less rage if they said:

    1) we are splitting the plans and raising the rates on the combination. But:
    2) we are vastly increasing your streaming offerings so many of you will save money by streaming only.

    The streaming offerings are crazy at times. For example they will have three of four disks of a series available for streaming, but they 4th is by mail only. WTF?!

    I've got news for them: all the disks are available for streaming guys. And they are available for streaming for free...

    Sheldon

    1. Re:Streaming would be fine by hood8263 · · Score: 1

      Come to Canada before you start complaining about their lack of content...

    2. Re:Streaming would be fine by shoehornjob · · Score: 1

      Streaming is good up to a point. I would gladly pay 15.99 a month for that service but they need to ditch the dvd thing and go 100% streaming. Waiting for dvd's in the mail is so 90's. Funk that. The thing that pisses me off the most is that I can't email someone for customer service. I work in a call center and the LAST thing I want to do when I get home is call someone that I can't hardly understand and have them lie to me just to get me off of their line. Ugh not to mention the hold time. Less choice+more money+lousy customer service= you're fired. Think about that while you're sipping your latte BITCH.

      --
      "We are just a war away from Amerikastan. When god vs god the undoing of man." Dave Mustaine
    3. Re:Streaming would be fine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When one disk isn't available for streaming, it's usually due to copyright licensing problems--especially on songs that were played in the show.

  17. let them drink lattes by larry+bagina · · Score: 0

    you, sir, can chug some frosty piss from tub girl's asshole.

    --
    Do you even lift?

    These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

  18. I'm cancelling... by DogDude · · Score: 1

    I'm cancelling the streaming service. There's tons of stuff available for streaming, but 99.9% of it is absolute garbage.

    --
    I don't respond to AC's.
  19. Back to Megavideo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I didn't watch streaming enough, and also never ordered any DVDs despite keeping the option at the last price change. I thought it would be nice as a just-in-case.

    So I can go from paying 10 and change to 8, or maybe back to 0. I guess this would be a good time for Hulu to get their head out of their ass and have more significant across the board offerings. It is hilarious I can watch something for free on hulu on my PC, but not be able to watch it with my TV empowered with a paid Hulu plus subscription. Netflix has been bargain bin for streaming offering for a long time. I doubt they will offer the complete catalog, most likely due to supposed user feedback and certainly they don't respect grandfathering or customer loyalty.

    I won't feedback, but I will stop feeding.

  20. I jumped ship. by mstrcat · · Score: 1

    So I'm one of those netflix subscribers that jumped ship. I felt the price increase was more than the service was worth. Netflix picked a very bad time to increase prices, and in particular picked a very very poor way to do it. They could have hiked prices slowly over time, and it would have likely not been enough to really re-evaluate the value I get from them. To raise prices 27% at once was too much to swallow. And worst of all was their assumption that I should automatically be subcribed to their new plans. Good bye, netflix. It was nice knowing you.

    1. Re:I jumped ship. by PrescriptionWarning · · Score: 1

      I'm of the opposite reaction here, and I plan on sticking with Netflix despite this. Over a year ago I cut off my DirecTV service as I was paying $85 a month, this being 2 years after the $30 a month introductory cost. So now all I get is the free over the air stuff and Netflix and a $5 a month increase isn't going to change that. People need some perspective here because at least Netflix is announcing it rather than sneakily increasing your bill over the months like DirectTV and Time Warner.

    2. Re:I jumped ship. by ironjaw33 · · Score: 1

      I'm of the opposite reaction here, and I plan on sticking with Netflix despite this. Over a year ago I cut off my DirecTV service as I was paying $85 a month, this being 2 years after the $30 a month introductory cost. So now all I get is the free over the air stuff and Netflix and a $5 a month increase isn't going to change that. People need some perspective here because at least Netflix is announcing it rather than sneakily increasing your bill over the months like DirectTV and Time Warner.

      I've never had cable at all in the five years I've lived on my own, instead sticking to OTA TV and Netflix. To me, paying $85 per month for TV and/or movies is insane, especially considering the amount of commercials and fixed programming schedule. While the marginal cost increase for entertainment might be low for you, considering you were paying so much for cable, the price increase effectively doubled the cost for me. I dropped the DVD portion of the plan as I've found myself to be using streaming much more.

  21. "Netflix raise"? by nabsltd · · Score: 1

    FTFS:

    The company said it would Netflix raise the Internet-plus-DVDs-in-the-mail plan

    What, exactly, does it meant to "Netflix raise" the price of something?

    1. Re:"Netflix raise"? by Bill+Dimm · · Score: 1

      What, exactly, does it meant to "Netflix raise" the price of something?

      It means to increase it by such a large percentage that you need dental work when your jaw hits the floor.

    2. Re:"Netflix raise"? by hercubus · · Score: 1

      What, exactly, does it meant to "Netflix raise" the price of something?

      That's a retcon for a saying from the future. This Netflix price increase is so heinous that it will be remembered for a thousand years, so that in the year 3011 when Gilbex says to Nanfred "GlarbCorp just Netflix-raised the price of nanobutter" it'll be make perfect sense when Nanfred replies "GlarbCorp're smegging smegged-up smeggers!"

      --
      -- How I want a drink, alcoholic of course, after the heavy lectures involving quantum mechanics.
  22. 2 times in a year by WiiVault · · Score: 1

    What bothers me most is that this is the second time in a year rates have gone up. My current $8.99 plan will soon be $15! I know this is mostly the studios putting the heat on Netflix, but it's still bullshit to not offer any discount for bundling DVD and streaming as the current "deal" provides. I always liked Netflix because I felt that like Steam, even though they have DRM, they provide a service (instant streaming) that helps balance the equation. Now I can't help but re-think my position as a paying customer when torrents are only marginally more difficult to acquire.

    1. Re:2 times in a year by WiiVault · · Score: 1

      I meant $9.99 and 15.99 sorry for the typos. Point still stands.

    2. Re:2 times in a year by emuls · · Score: 0

      It's 9.99 now, but late last year it was 8.99. In less than a year they have almost doubled the price without adding anything to the service.

  23. They have the right to charge what they wish . . . by Joey+Vegetables · · Score: 1

    And we have the right to cancel our service if we don't like it. That is how a free society works. I don't like it any more than the next person; I probably will cancel streaming since I rarely use it and it doesn't support my OS of choice (Linux), and I might well switch if I knew of a better value for the things I watch, but I don't, and the higher-priced Netflix is still the best option for me for now. If Amazon and Google come out with some truly competitive offering, at that point Netflix had better think carefully about pricing because a lot of folks including myself might switch . . . or might not, if the prices come back down. Again, that's how a free market works. If you like something, vote for it with your dollars; if you don't, vote for something else you like better instead.

  24. New UI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm much more enraged about the new UI, especially the new UI that has been pushed out to the PS3.

  25. already cancelled by vanyel · · Score: 1

    I cancelled netflix last winter after the prices went up 50% in a year...

  26. Inflation by Colin+Smith · · Score: 1

    That simple.

    You're going to stop being a customer all over the place.

     

    --
    Deleted
    1. Re:Inflation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A 60% increase in one go is 15-20 years worth of inflation.

    2. Re:Inflation by Dayze!Confused · · Score: 1

      Sometimes companies allow their profit margin to eat away for a while possibly hoping for costs to come down. At some point, when costs do not come down, we see a sudden spike in pricing. I recently saw a 25% spike in the price of cola products here, they could have raised the price slowly, a couple cents a year, but because of some psychological analysis companies prefer to use certain price points, usually ending in 5 or 9, to sell their products. This can lead to larger than usual spikes; they may also be anticipating not having to raise their prices for a good while afterwards and can therefore justify the slightly higher pricing.
      Would it have been different if they only raised it to $14.98? Quite possibly, although that is still nearly a 50% spike in prices.

      --
      "All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." [Thomas Jefferson]
    3. Re:Inflation by localman57 · · Score: 1

      That depends on where you live.

  27. No Competation = No Worries by jimbolauski · · Score: 1

    Even if 10% of their customers leave because of this increase they will make it back and then some with a 60% price increase. A competitor might get the suits nervous enough to decide that this was a bad idea $16 isn't exactly an ass raping either.

    --
    Knowledge = Power
    P= W/t
    t=Money
    Money = Work/Knowledge so the less you know the more you make
  28. Mailing Costs by Pinky3 · · Score: 1

    Netflix is not interested in mailing you DVDs for $2 a month. From their point of view, if you have streaming for $8, the correct price for adding mailing is $8. You may think of it as paying $8 for mailing and expect that you should be able to get streaming for an extra $2, but Netflix doesn't think of it that way. If you want them to maintain warehouses full of DVDs and mailers and pay for postage, they want you to pay for all that. Their price is $8.

    I gave up mailed DVDs months ago when the price went to $10 and they first started offering streaming only for $8. Now you have the chance to do the same.

    1. Re:Mailing Costs by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      But then you only get 1 stream at a time. It used to be you got one extra stream for each dvd. How will they handle that now?

    2. Re:Mailing Costs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So they scrap the DVD part of the library. Oops, 95% of the choices that were available are gone. Now they have bargain bin streamed movies, cheap and old TV shows from around the world.

    3. Re:Mailing Costs by mykey2k · · Score: 1

      It's odd that that is how NetFlix broke out those costs.... I always believed the less expensive cost (streaming) was the value-added service... So really the correct pricing would be 2 DVD by mail for $12, streaming $3 which is the $15 it is now that I pay. The mentality that the reverse is true is truly the definition of convoluted.

      But yes, I'm keeping the DVDs by mail; everyone else can have my streaming bandwidth that I wasn't using anyway, and my bill goes down $3 a month -- I'm off to get a latte!

      -m

    4. Re:Mailing Costs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm glad I'm not the only one with questions about this, with Gold Family and 2 XBox 360s there is often a kids show going on one and a grown up flick going on the other at the same time.

  29. The unhappiness... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For me it comes more from the fact that Netflix was such a great company with great customer service.

    This change isn't a positive for most customers. I imagine they've done the bean counting and decided that they'd make more money, at least in the short run, by doing this.

    I think it's a horrible idea because of a couple of things:
    1) There are other streaming services that they're now completing with directly. This wasn't the case before because they offered more than just streaming.
    2) If I'm not doing streaming, then Redbox is a great option for me many nights. Especially since I only pay for what I use.

    They're still a better option for me than the alternatives, but it's still a big step in the wrong direction.

  30. Not all customers are good customers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am sure they would love to lose bad customers. Pruning the tree is normally a good thing in the long run. If they bump prices by 60% but lose 30% of their customers, and probably 50% of their support fees, they will be laughing. Those of us that remain will get better service, the malcontents take their $9 ball and go home, and everyone is happy. I think it is a good move on their part.

    1. Re:Not all customers are good customers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The "bad" customers (where bad is defined as "not profitable" or "net loss") are often a service company's greatest evangelists. For every 10 profitable customers there's a certain amount that are only customers because one of their unprofitable customers pushed their friend/family to join.

  31. Only a Latte or two? Not even close. by weeboo0104 · · Score: 1

    There is a huge decrease in what is available if we go streaming only.

    Out of the 13 DVDs in my queue, only 2 are available by streaming.
    Most of those unavalable are Criterion Collection movies by Kurosawa and Ingmar Bergman.

    If they remove Babylon5 from my streaming queue before I'm done watching the whole series, I'm going Narn on someone ass.

    --
    It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men. -Frederick Douglass
  32. How to destroy a company with a near monolopy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Simple. Increase pricing at rates much higher than inflation.

    If they are profitable, they should stop trying to squeeze pennies out of their ass.People would not care if you raised prices by $1 every November for a few years, but people will walk on a 60% hike.

    We would have kept the service, but we are moving to the "need something to do in winter" plan. And when the time comes to re-activate we will price shop.

    Good Luck netflix!

  33. The real problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Isn't the cost increase itself, but that it was billed as a benefit to the customer. And they just raised prices earlier in the year. If they had come out and explained to the customers why they have to raise prices (licensing fees). The attitude they're taking is what's pissing people off.

  34. Priced by Coffee by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Considering how many products are suggesting they replace my daily coffee (or latte), I'd have to be drinking several dozen cups a day at this point to break even.

    Doesn't fly with me. Quality, unlimited Usenet is only $10 a month.

  35. Swasey's quote by HikingStick · · Score: 1

    It should be modified to read "To most people who still have good jobs, it's a latte or two."

    --
    I use irony whenever I can, but my shirts are still wrinkled...
  36. It's not that the price increase is so great... by TRACK-YOUR-POSITION · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...it's the non-uniformity of it. If you currently have a streaming-only plan, there's no price increase. If you only watch DVDs and never stream, you could even save yourself $2. But if you do both, you could be paying 60% more. It doesn't really make sense to pay double the price, because the DVDs and streams are competing uses of the customer's time--if I stream a movie this evening, I'm probably not going to also watch a DVD. Ultimately the service isn't that expensive and if they just want to charge more then it's no big deal. But the new scheme seems designed to punish people who only primarily use one half of the service but occasionally use the other. If you most just stream movies but occasionally there's a DVD not available for streaming that you really want to see (and isn't at RedBox), or if you mostly just watch DVDs but someone visits your house and you'd suddenly like to watch a movie without waiting a couple days for it to arrive, then you have to pay a lot of money (relatively) just to dip a toe into the other half of the pool.

    1. Re:It's not that the price increase is so great... by tomkost · · Score: 1

      a fair comment, but I believe you can change your plan back and forth. So at least in the scenario you gave, you could buy streaming for a day or two and then turn it off. Also, I think the streaming content Neflix has is pretty poor. I don't find a whole lot that I like to watch. The real reason for this cost increase is that Netlfix messed up on it's content contracts. They didn't plan for the high volume of customers they got. So, they are currently paying high overage fees to the content providers. Netflix may negotiate better contracts in which case they could lower the pricing again, but I'd expect them to just keep the higher pricing and make more profit. It's what I would do. Like others have said, they may/probably will still make more money with the new pricing even if many customers leave. They may have been losing money as of late due to the overage charges on their current contracts.

    2. Re:It's not that the price increase is so great... by TRACK-YOUR-POSITION · · Score: 1

      I could be wrong (if I am please correct me), but I don't think Netflix offers pro-rated pricing if you change service levels mid-month. Poking around their website I can't find confirmation one way or the other, though, so I'm not sure. If they do, I guess that would solve the problem

    3. Re:It's not that the price increase is so great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you currently stream most of your content, and only occasionally watch a DVD, what about switching to "Streaming ($7.99)" + "One Disc at a Time, limit 2 per month ($4.99)"? Total price: $12.98.

      It's still a net increase of $3 per month, but this arrangement would probably suit my needs perfectly fine.

      Oddly, however, Netflix doesn't seem to offer this bundle. To actually execute this, it looks like you'll need two separate accounts.

    4. Re:It's not that the price increase is so great... by Alamais · · Score: 1

      ...damn, actually, I wish they would allow that. I stream like crazy (love that they've been adding lots of anime--clearly Japanese studios know what's what), but I do like having the option to get a DVD occasionally if something's missing from the instant catalog. I just finally watched a DVD I'd had sitting around for like 6 months.

    5. Re:It's not that the price increase is so great... by Tim+C · · Score: 1

      if I stream a movie this evening, I'm probably not going to also watch a DVD

      No, but you might stream a film this evening while waiting for the replacement to the DVD you returned yesterday or the day before to arrive. It really just depends how often you watch films; I've certainly hit 3 or 4 times a week (or more) myself when I've not had a lot else to do of an evening.

  37. Production values of torrentable works by tepples · · Score: 1

    It's been my understanding that the works lawfully available over BitTorrent have far lower production values than the works available over Netflix. Or what am I missing?

    1. Re:Production values of torrentable works by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      If you think that's universally true, then you have clearly never seen Plan 9 From Outer Space.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    2. Re:Production values of torrentable works by tepples · · Score: 1

      I wasn't trying to say the worst film on Netflix has higher production values than the best film on BitTorrent. I just think it's true on average: films with high production values tend to be distributed by the major studios.

  38. Did anyone do any research on this...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This article is crap, do some research, they are doing this because the riaa and mpaa made 1 billion from it last year and are looking to make 10 billion this year. Netflix Grossed 2.1 billion last year but the profit was only ~201 million..Don't blame the middle man, blame the content providers..

  39. I love how by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So many people are quick to jump Netflix over the price hike, but obviously have not read any of the hundreds of news articles that explain the reasoning why the price hike happened. Netflix has to have contracts with people like Sony, Starz, etc, to do the streaming video and have a price set in them. The current contracts are either up or going to be up shortly, and the studios want more money, so they're re-negotiating the contracts with higher fees. Now, Netflix is a company, and as such they are expected to make money, so no, they are not just going to eat the cost of the increased fees that the studios are demanding, they are going to pass it on to you, the consumer, as any other company would.

    In short, do not blame Netflix solely for the price increase. This is just one more way that the MAFIAA is screwing us, the little guy over. And do not be surprised when Amazon, Google, and Apple have to raise their prices as well. Hulu probably will not, but that's because they're owned by some of the studios, so they'll of course have the lowest price and will attract customers to them, so the MAFIAA doesn't have to worry about "getting their cut" from the company, you pay them directly.

  40. Not Worth It by TheNinjaroach · · Score: 1

    When it takes 3-4 days to turn around a DVD, $8 for a DVD-only plan simply isn't worth it. The few extra bucks I was spending a month before, then sure.

    I guess Netflix would rather not have the money I was paying for that part of the service I rarely used.

    --
    I went to eat some animal crackers and the box said, "Do not eat if seal is broken." I opened the box and sure enough..
    1. Re:Not Worth It by Bobfrankly1 · · Score: 1

      Read
      Understand.
      Realize that Netflix would rather not lose money on that part of the service you rarely used and was likely costing them money.

    2. Re:Not Worth It by Daetrin · · Score: 1

      I guess Netflix would rather not have the money I was paying for that part of the service I rarely used.

      That is correct. In fact if they could convince _everyone_ to ditch the DVD plan so they could stop having to deal with physical disks and sell off all those warehouses they would probably be ecstatic. They'd certainly be happy if half the people using it stopped and the other half started paying a full $8 rather than just $2 to tack it on to the streaming service.

      Shipping DVDs was good enough to get Netflix started, but the price of shipping keeps going up (especially with gas prices fluctuating the way they have been) while broadband access keeps getting more widespread.

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
  41. IP owners have inflated view of the worth by ProfanityHead · · Score: 1

    Netflix is likely getting hammered by the IP owners who have the crazy idea that their reruns of The Munsters are worth much more than reality.

    Yes, Netflix is giving us a HUGE increase and nothing in return. So are the owners of the content. Much more so IMO.

  42. Anti-competitive behavior by digitalderbs · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What irks me about the price increase has nothing to do with the price of lattes or the fact that we're not necessarily getting anything more in return. It's the anti-competitive behavior. I suspect that the margins on their current pricing were set to be small enough to snuff out Blockbuster. Now, without real competition (incl Amazon's service), they can reap the fruits of their 'sacrifices.'

    1. Re:Anti-competitive behavior by tverbeek · · Score: 1

      The legal term for that is "predatory pricing". The federal government passed laws against it once upon a time.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    2. Re:Anti-competitive behavior by blair1q · · Score: 1

      I called my Congressman over it.

    3. Re:Anti-competitive behavior by schlachter · · Score: 1

      I think their increased margins will be used to secure more movie rights and to expand their disk inventory...and possibly to set them up for a buyout by Amazon.

      --
      My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
    4. Re:Anti-competitive behavior by Animats · · Score: 1

      I suspect that the margins on their current pricing were set to be small enough to snuff out Blockbuster.

      Right. Now that they're the dominant company, they can start screwing their customers and make some real money. At least until Comcast and AT&T start competing with them.

      Blockbuster was going to get into streaming years ago. Unfortunately, they partnered with Enron for bandwidth.

    5. Re:Anti-competitive behavior by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry - this is part of competition. By raising prices, they'll reap higher profits which will draw competitors into the market, and energize (in the form of now it's easier to raise capital) the competition.

    6. Re:Anti-competitive behavior by xtracto · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yeah, I bet you did no bitch when they introduced more movies, or the ability to stream films without increasing the price uh?

      "Why did you add more features without charging me more??!!!!11111"

      I would pay the 10 Euro without hesitating if a service like netflix (and not the joke that is LoveFIlm) was avialble here in Europe.

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    7. Re:Anti-competitive behavior by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When a businesses alienates a large chunk of its customer base by hiking prices and telling them "it's just a latte," that is about the least anti-competitive move it could make.

      They have just created a huge opportunities for competitors to swoosh in and offer both lower prices and better service.

      Your misconception of market behaviors and those of the people who modded you up worry me.

    8. Re:Anti-competitive behavior by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Haha. Oh you Free Market(tm) types are so gullible and cute :D

    9. Re:Anti-competitive behavior by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed. With this change I would love for there to be a blockbuster down the street. I could get the streaming only plan and if there's a DVD I want I just walk down the street and pick it up.

      Sleezy behavior all around.

    10. Re:Anti-competitive behavior by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or maybe they priced the free streaming with the DVD plan based on X% of users streaming per month, and now 2X% or 3X% are using it. Bandwidth is cheap but not free. What was once a cheap to offer perk may now be influencing their bottom line.

    11. Re:Anti-competitive behavior by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nailed it!

    12. Re:Anti-competitive behavior by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, nothing in return, except the service you willingly decided to pay for. If the value of their product is really the price it's at, someone else will sell it for that rate. However, everyone knows, it's worth far more than even the price they've raised it too. I suspect the market would willingly tolerate much closer (and possibly exceeding) their cable rates.

    13. Re:Anti-competitive behavior by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      $6 from netflix is bad and all... but did you ask him to raise the debt ceiling during the call?

    14. Re:Anti-competitive behavior by DaFallus · · Score: 1

      You do realize their licensing costs are set to increase by an order of magnitude, right? Blockbuster peaked in 2009 and went bankrupt almost a year ago and has since been purchased by Dish Network for a measly $300 million. If Netflix was using low prices to snuff out the competition, they would have immediately raised their prices after successfully defeating the previous market leader.

      --
      No one cares what your captcha was

      Houston TX, USA
  43. Nickle and dimed to death by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "A latte or two?" Yeah, fuck you. That's what every company is doing these days. "Oh, it's only a tiny increase" times everything you buy adds up to a shit-ton of money.

    People have less and less and are cutting budgets while companies like Netflix are increasing prices to keep the profits going up even as people cut back. It's a screwed up situation... At this rate eventually something is going to give in a very bad way.

  44. Surprised? by Gavrielkay · · Score: 1

    The blog post that was published about this price increase actually tried to sound surprised that the DVD by mail business hadn't dried up in favor of the streaming side. But with less than half the content available for streaming this should never have surprised anyone. You need both sides of Netflix to make a worthwhile service. I was looking for an actual explanation along the lines of the studios dramatically raising licensing costs for streaming content. Instead they tried to spin it as a "good thing" that they were putting out new subscription plans. The marketing double speak made this rate increase even worse. You can't tell people that paying more for the same service is good for them. You can try to convince them that it is necessary or inevitable and they may understand, but good? Not a chance.

  45. Went streaming only awhile ago.. by Roogna · · Score: 1

    But what I might cancel over is the horrible new website...
    I mean, the sorting is gone, they lost at least a thousand ratings I'd marked, and apparently no longer have any suggestions for things I should watch for Drama... except for things I specifically have marked as "Not Interested". ...

    1. Re:Went streaming only awhile ago.. by jkmartin · · Score: 1

      The changes to the website are horrible. There is a Chrome extension that puts it back and allows sorting:

      https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/ngacmlmclfopgbnmefcffgbcjiafbfpo

      There is something similar for Firefox but it requires an added plug-in to run.

    2. Re:Went streaming only awhile ago.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is probably my biggest gripe about their suggestions - when I mark something "Not Interested" it should not be suggested again for a year or so, except in search results - our opinions may change and if we marked something incorrectly, looking for it should still find it.

      The one that confuses me most though is why the full screen interface online lacks the episode control in the popup menu - why can't I skip to the next episode while in full screen mode? It should be a fairly minor thing to change, and is silly to lack.

    3. Re:Went streaming only awhile ago.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      www.instantwatcher.com

      You're welcome :D

    4. Re:Went streaming only awhile ago.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They want you to pay, but not watch anything as you can't find the things you like. I cancelled as soon as I realized that was the case...

  46. I was playing nice... by SeeSp0tRun · · Score: 1

    The only reason I had Netflix was to play civilly with the MPAA. Netflix has betrayed me, and thus, I go back to the dark reaches of the internet 100% of the time.

    What's the opposite of killing two birds with one stone? That's what just happened in this case.

    --
    Something witty.
  47. Re:They have the right to charge what they wish . by LBArrettAnderson · · Score: 1

    Agreed, though I'm going to cancel my DVD and keep streaming. I only get (got) a DVD maybe three or four times a year, and while the math may not back me up, it was worth it to be able to get one whenever I wanted. Now not so much. I'll drop that service, keep streaming, and if I need something not on "Instant," I'll rent it on Amazon's streaming service.

    I'm willing to bet that a significant number of people will drop the service that they use less often (mail or streaming).

  48. You're just a consumer ... by Anomalyst · · Score: 1

    ... suck it.
    Signed,
    Your corporate overlords

    --
    There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
    1. Re:You're just a consumer ... by royallthefourth · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Oh grow up, it's just garbage entertainment. When you're really abused is when your food prices start going up, or the bank charges a mysterious fee, or you suddenly can't find work. Or, for that matter, when your wages stagnate while the cost of living continues to increase over the course of decades.
      That's when the real overlords laugh the hardest, knowing that your children will consider it a privilege to serve them their own siblings' flesh after you're gone. Netflix is just a sideshow.

    2. Re:You're just a consumer ... by Anomalyst · · Score: 1

      Netflix is just a sideshow.

      When is Swasey scheduled to hammer a Nine Inch Nail into his nasal cavity?

      --
      There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
    3. Re:You're just a consumer ... by citylivin · · Score: 1

      Oh grow up ...
      - when your food prices start going up, or
      - the bank charges a mysterious fee,
      - you suddenly can't find work.
      -your wages stagnate while the cost of living continues to increase.

      Check, check, check and check. Oh was that not a checklist?

      So now that we have established that we are currently "abused" and that the corporations are currently "laughing the hardest", can we now start complaining about it? Or do we have to wait till we're in our 60s when we "grow up" and are too fucking old for anyone to care about our complaints anyways!

      god damnit I hate corporate apologists. I don't use netflix so this debate his little baring on me personally, but complaining is how shit gets fixed. Compliance and acceptance are what they are hoping you will do.
      A good compliant consumer.

      --
      As a potential lottery winner, I totally support tax cuts for the wealthy
  49. Latte? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That thing that I stopped buying two years ago because the economy is in the shitter?

    1. Re:Latte? by Sicily1918 · · Score: 1

      OK, it's not twice the amount... whatever :)

  50. Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Paying $15 a month to stream media is comparable to the poverty of the French revolution? Kenja said it perfectly, don't pay it if it's not worthwhile to you. Not sure why people complain about optional things.

  51. How much of this is Netflix vs.content makers? by Bloodwine77 · · Score: 1

    I know there has been a lot of outrage over Dexter disappearing from instant queue. However, that was the decision made by Showtime, not Netflix. Showtime is going to start streaming Dexter and Californication exclusively via their new streaming service, Showtime Anytime.

    I also wonder how much of this price increase will go towards extending their streaming library. I would suspect streaming licenses is more expensive than DVD rental licenses and content producers are increasing what they charge Netflix.

    I am not saying that Netflix is without fault, but a lot of the streaming availability issues and price issues may be due to content producers rather than Netflix themselves.

    1. Re:How much of this is Netflix vs.content makers? by D'Arque+Bishop · · Score: 1

      I think you hit the nail on the head. There was a story on CNN the day before the price increase where analysts were predicting that Netflix's streaming content license fees were going to go from $180 million in 2010 to $1.98 billion in 2012.

      http://money.cnn.com/2011/07/08/technology/netflix_starz_contract/index.htm

    2. Re:How much of this is Netflix vs.content makers? by SeeSp0tRun · · Score: 1

      It was just poor timing on Netflix' part. Had they done this with a major (positive) UI overhaul, it would have eased the flak. Gaining nothing here, I see the outrage. I have since cancelled my own sub, but I didn't use it all that often to begin with. I have alternatives.

      Just to add to the record, that's two weeks worth of coffees at my local shop.

      --
      Something witty.
    3. Re:How much of this is Netflix vs.content makers? by theangryswede · · Score: 1

      I feel people are overreacting to this. Yes the streaming selection does suck and doesn't support linux but now you can remove it. Yes their PR guy is a dick, but I still feel netflix is a good company.

  52. "most people" by jonotown · · Score: 1

    "most people" dont drink $3 latte's or have netflix accounts, they sure dont have a global perspective....

    1. Re:"most people" by Pope · · Score: 1

      The Netflix services in question are US-only, Why would they need a "global perspective" on anything?

      --
      It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
  53. This could be significant by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

    Lots of sibling posts are missing the fact that if 1/3 of their subscribers actually leave (unlikely), they still won't make more money because many of their remaining subscribers are likely to drop either streaming or mail, resulting in a net revenue loss of 20% (gross) per retained subscriber. Chances are, those that will be dropping one side of the service weren't using the other side, so that "extra" service was almost exclusively profit.

    I understand why they did it (specter of higher licensing fees), but they probably could have softened the blow a bit. This is the wrong way to boil a frog.

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    1. Re:This could be significant by Bobfrankly1 · · Score: 1

      I understand why they did it (specter of higher licensing fees, postal prices rising, having fine tuned their warehouse and distribution processes to lower costs as much as possible), but they probably could have softened the blow a bit. This is the wrong way to boil a frog.

      FTFY.

  54. Unlimited Streaming not really Unlimited by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just got off the phone with tech support (because they don't have email or instant chat--way to go Internet based business) and I wanted to ask them if the new unlimited streaming service is really unlimited. I wanted to stream to 2 devices, under the current plan I cannot do that unless I upgrade to 2 DVD's at a time. The new "separate" plan coming is September is the same bull. If you want to stream on 2 devices you need the 2 DVD's at a time.

    Personally all I want is to be able to stream on 2 of my 3 Netflix devices at one time. I can live without the DVD's in the mail.

  55. If it's a latte or two... by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 1

    Then why don't they pass up on that money?

    1. Re:If it's a latte or two... by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      Because for the customer it is a latte or two, for netflix it is a latte or 46 million.

  56. about the cost of a DVD by Synerg1y · · Score: 1

    So... there are still people who show up to best buy and buy $100 worth of movies. There are A LOT less of these people, but best buy is clearly still in business with a movies music games section. So... netflix at $10 or at $15 a month = 1 DVD, 1/2 a blu-ray (they sometimes stream HD). Why cancel, who cares? People have become way too spoiled with their media to be having this discussion. Blockbuster used to charge like $5 for a dvd and for many that was a weekly ritual. My thoughts: charge $30 a month, stream EVERYTHING (sports, channels, news), and let me cancel my cable subscription in peace.

  57. It went down didn't it? by chrispycreeme · · Score: 1

    The price went down didn't it? I'm just no longer paying for something I never used: 1 dvd rental a month.

  58. Netflix is going all streaming ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was on the phone yesterday with NetFlix about another issue and the customer service guy said I should cancel my by-mail option as I didn't use it much and sometime this year, the entire NetFlix library would be available for download. He said they were planning on going download only eventually. Take it for what it is worth but that is what he said.

  59. Still a bargain. by ThatsNotFunny · · Score: 1

    I'm on the streaming+4 disc plan. It's only going to be costing me another $2/month over what I'm paying now. I rip the discs and watch them at my leisure. The turnaround is pretty fast, so I can get about 32 discs a month (4 at a time, return them twice a week). Cheaper than Redbox. The new price still works for me. I can understand why it doesn't work for everybody.

    --
    "Was it a millionaire who said 'Imagine No Posessions?'" -- Elvis Costello
    1. Re:Still a bargain. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you watch 32 movies a month? that's sad.

  60. If it is only a latte or 2, by Grand+Facade · · Score: 1

    Please deposit a latte or 2 X their number of subscribers to my trading account

    --
    Rick B.
  61. Join in the Blockbuster video legacy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Greedy asses. Hope netflix ends up like blockbuster video

  62. culture of incompetence by tverbeek · · Score: 2

    Their public relations people clearly have the public relations skills of engineers.

    Hardware engineers.

    --
    http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    1. Re:culture of incompetence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's an insult to hardware engineers. I'd say they have the PR skills of a poo-flinging monkey with a masturbation fetish.

    2. Re:culture of incompetence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's wrong with hardware engineers? I thought MBA's were the new bad guys:)

      So, to bring your post to the new theme of the decade:
      Their public relations people clearly have the public relations skills of MBA's.
      Hardware MBA's.

    3. Re:culture of incompetence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      thank you very much xD (a hardware engineer)

  63. no talk of NEW subscriptions by ncohafmuta · · Score: 1

    I like how the analysts talk about churn and that the increased revenue will make up for the lost customers, but they don't talk about the potential customers the increase may scare off. What's that number like??
    I think a modest price increase would have been fine. 10% maybe. But 60%? come on.

  64. Latte? by Sicily1918 · · Score: 1

    'To most people, it's a latte or two,' he added."

    No, to most people it's twice the monthly fee for the same service...

  65. It's All Relative by WebDesignFresno · · Score: 1
    It's understandable for most people to complain when a package price increases by this percentage. However, before we cry out for the injustice of it all, we should take into consideration that normal television is slowly but surely becoming a thing of the past. A large part of normal broadcasting is available online and what isn't is probably not worth watching.

    In my neck of the woods, basic cable begins at around $80 per month and includes around 10 channels that I would be interested in viewing. That leaves approximately 130 channels that I am paying for but will never tune in to. As far as usable content goes, it's rather like buying artichokes.

    My point here is that Netflix, even with its limited "instant view" selection and its new price, is a far better value than the exorbitant and unjustifiable costs of the alternatives that the average household is saddled with. We won't even add the additional rental costs for movies.

    My choice was to terminate my $80 cable account and with the recent Netflix acquisition, cancelling my account at Blockbuster, I can live happily with the Netflix combo pack at $15.98.

    Web Design Fresno

  66. A latte or two is different by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You get a latte or two when you pay for them. This is a price increase without a tangible difference in the goods and services provided. That's the difference, mr netflix, and it is a signifcant difference, maybe not to you but I do like to, y'know... get more things when I pay more money.

  67. data caps by WiiVault · · Score: 1

    At the same time consumers are facing more and more aggressive bandwidth caps. Not saying your wrong, but streaming HD often will eat through a 100-250GB cap amazingly fast.

    1. Re:data caps by rwven · · Score: 1

      Another problem netflix will soon have to face. The worst part is that the big name ISPs are really only using a fraction of their available BW, but they sure do freak out a lot about that fraction.

    2. Re:data caps by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      They want to sell THEIR on demand services with that bandwidth... Cable has better markup that Netflix now that they have the pipe AND eyeballs!

    3. Re:data caps by Aging_Newbie · · Score: 1

      Imagine if you, like I, have 18GB per month cap for satellite service. I had no use whatever for streaming but the DVDs are wonderful. The only complaint I have is that some new stuff is available streamed well before on DVDs, so that messes stuff up a bit. On the other hand, I have a local Family Video store so I can go there and rent a new movie once in a while for less than I had to pay for streaming I couldn't use. So, I am happy with the change. But I am so far from the Information Superhighway that sometimes the crickets cover up the road noise!

    4. Re:data caps by Cutting_Crew · · Score: 1

      their job is to sell us the bandwidth - not control how the bandwidth is used. Caps on specific services should be banned and are the central part of net neutrality. How can an ISP say, "if you use our specific services your bandwidth cap isn't effected, but you go outside and use other services - then that's when we start counting how much data you consume." Shouldn't this be downright illegal and anti-competitive?

  68. It's easy to explain by publiclurker · · Score: 1

    Self important adults who act like overly entitled children tend to whine the loudest. Any good parent knows to ignore them in order to do what's right.

  69. It's not the dollar amount, it's the percentage! by BitHive · · Score: 2

    As a percentage of the old price, the new price is outrageous. This is like charging $0.75 instead of $0.15 for text messages and then defending it by saying that "to most people, it's like getting extra cheese on their burger".

  70. the economics have been inverted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    we moved to netflix because, renting our usual four movies a month, it was about half the price of our local store.
    Now they're asking the same price as our local store, with the added inconvenience of dealing with the mail.
    Think we're about to rediscover the fun of wandering the shelves and talking to Fred on our way out

  71. Hurray for price drops by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have the 3 dvds + streaming + bluray plan for 24$.

    I hardly (i.e. never) use the streaming because the quality is mediocre, and the selection is limited. Maybe my Internet connection sucks too bad, or my taste in movies is too eclectic. Whatever.

    To me, the new pricing means I can either keep streaming and pay 28$ or drop the streaming and pay 20$.

    Hurray, 17% price drop on the service that I actually use.

  72. It's a cut in price for me by steveg · · Score: 1

    I guess I'm swimming against the tide. My $19.99 plan just dropped to 15.99, for 3 DVDs out at a time. I've never streamed, and as long as it's Silverlight only, I probably never will.

    Maybe now they won't keep bringing up that page of recommendations that lists streaming links only, even though most of the titles are available both ways. Sometimes it's a good recommendation, but if I want to see it I have to remember the title and go searching for it.

    --
    Ignorance killed the cat. Curiosity was framed.
  73. Lattes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It may be be a latte or two, but dammit i want those lattes. Honestly, 10$ was a bit steep, and going up to 16$ is going to bite them in the ass. I was considering eventually switching over but not anymore.

  74. No big deal... by Sir_Eptishous · · Score: 1

    I have the 2 DVD at a time plus streaming, which is $16. I'm going to drop down to their 1 DVD at a time plus streaming plan, which should be the same price. It won't be that big of a deal to only get 1 DVD at a time. I use the streaming(SOA, foreign films, vintage Hollywood films, etc;) a lot more... Can't understand why people like Redbox so much. Anytime I look at what it has, there's rarely something I want.

    --
    We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
    1. Re:No big deal... by npsimons · · Score: 1

      Can't understand why people like Redbox so much.

      That's probably because you have this thing called "taste"; Redbox is blatantly aimed at the lowest common denominator, with the newest, flashiest garbage getting top billing; just the locations (supermarkets and drugstores) should be a tip off that they ain't gonna be pushing Kubrick.

  75. wow. by sorressean · · Score: 1

    As far as I'm concerned, they just lost a latte or four from me. I am blind, and with the new UI change my access failed--I couldn't read any of the movie titles or the links with multiple screen readers. I was told the development team would look into this, but from what I understand from other people they haven't done so. My account was canceled until it could be fixed, and it looks as if it'll stay that way, what with two price increases this year and broken accessibility.

  76. they're absolutely right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you used to pay 5 dollars for ONE movie and u have to drive to blockbuster.

    now you can stream any movies you want and get dvds in the mail for 15 a month.

    the sense of entitlement and the corresponding lack of the sense of ridicule in today's America is really baffling.

  77. The streaming is limited by publiclurker · · Score: 1

    by contract with their data providers (i.e. the studios), who somehow feel that jerking us around on the availability will somehow cause us to buy things on DVD. also, the contracts are coming up for renewal in 2012, as word has it that some of the studios will be demanding 10 times higher fees.

  78. No surprise here by bkr1_2k · · Score: 1

    Netflix has said all along they want to be a totally streaming service at some point in the future. This is no surprise to anyone who's been paying attention.

    Personally I watch about 30 movies and tv shows in the time I watch 2 or 3 DVDs. (I work from home often and netflix is on "in the background".) If I drop the DVD service, I get the majority of what I watch now for $2 less or something like that. Win win, really.

    People who are outraged about this simply haven't been paying attention or don't have broadband at home for whatever reason. For those people without broadband, the DVD service isn't going away yet, it's just being broken into a separate price plan. Again, cheaper than the "full service" option that allows DVDs and streaming.

    --
    "Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
    1. Re:No surprise here by QuickBible · · Score: 1

      Ditto

  79. Send them a message: temporarily cancel by j4ckknife · · Score: 1

    Regardless of where you are on the rage spectrum, you should consider temporarily canceling your plan (but perhaps not your account). If there's a sudden move for the doors (even if most of us were only planning on staying outside for an hour or two), it could send a powerful message. Hold out for as long as you can; if you can't stand it, reactivating your account is easy because they retain everything. But at least take the step beyond anonymous internet rage and cancel your plan, for as long as you can.

  80. Price increase by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm on the 3-at-a -time plus streaming now and I pay 19.99 plus tax per month. I don't stream anything at this point due to a crappy internet connection at home. The new price for my plan would be 23.98 per month because they are cutting the price of the DVD's to 15.99 per month plus the 7.99 for the streaming option. So the increase is only 60% if your on the 1 at a time plan. I went ahead and cancelled the streaming part of my plan as I don't use it anyway.
    But I see this as a money grab by the Movie Studios. Since I got netflix 4 years ago i have purchased fewer than 10 Dvd's as opposed to the 20+ per year I was buying before Netflix. Now if I want to rewatch something I just add it back to my queue instead of buyng it.Plus with Capped bandwidth by the major ISP's I don't see streaming taking off as much as it would have.

  81. I've been expecting this. No big deal. by Sourdough · · Score: 1

    I started as a Netflix DVD customer about six years ago. Then I was paying $20/mo for the 3-at-a-time service. At some point, they informed me they were dropping the price down to $17 a month. Cool. Then they added a streaming service for free. There wasn't much on it, there was no Mac support, quality was so-so, but I used it sometimes. Cool. Progressively, the quality of the streaming improved, support was added for tons of set-to boxes and Macs, and the amount of content has been continuously growing. At some point in there the price went back up to the $20/mo I was paying when I first signed up. Oh well. Now I watch far more on instant than on DVD. When I got the email about the latest price increases, I changed my subscription from 3-at-a-time to 2-at-a-time DVDs, and now I'm still paying $20 a month.

    I've got better service now than I did six years ago and I'm still paying the same price. I'm not complaining.

  82. next, on NBC, it's "CASHGRAB" by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    From what I've read, NF is going to get pounded by renegotiated contracts with the studios next year. So this move appears to be preparation for "paying the piper". I don't think it was a cash grab.

    A cashgrab by proxy is still a cashgrab.
    The MAFIAA's greed destroys another company.


    I really don't think you want to interfere with the bovine masses access to distratction^W entertainment at this stage in the game. You might end up with another Tahrir Square.
    let them drink latte...

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  83. Going HBO... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Changing to HBO. They stream too, for less money.

  84. Sit at a computer desk and read the news by tepples · · Score: 1

    I get all of my news on-line

    Is it presented audiovisually? That's a big sticking point for her. She doesn't want to have to sit at a computer desk and read the news. That'd be a substitute for a newspaper, not TV news. In fact, she connects an FM transmitter to the cable box so that she can listen to MSNBC on a radio in the bathroom while taking a shower.

    1. Re:Sit at a computer desk and read the news by praxis · · Score: 1

      Hour-long, in-depth, commercial-free, national news coverage presented audio-visually: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/video/

    2. Re:Sit at a computer desk and read the news by tepples · · Score: 1

      She does watch the PBS NewsHour, after which she turns over to MSNBC to hear what Chris, Lawrence, and Rachel have to say.

    3. Re:Sit at a computer desk and read the news by praxis · · Score: 1

      I see, I thought you wanted audiovisual national news not on cable, what you really want is a particular show from MSNBC with Chris, Lawrence, and Rachel. Yeah, if MSNBC don't offer it elsewhere than cable, I'm not sure what to tell you then: I guess you're stuck with cable.

  85. A couple of things... by thestudio_bob · · Score: 1

    First of all, I dropped my DVD plan and kept the streaming. I have a RedBox near me and have determined that I would be saving money in the long run. But still, there's a couple of things that bother me about NetFilx.

    • 1. The went with a "streaming only" plan, but they still don't have a "streaming only" search. It pissing me off that I try to search for something only to find that my results are mixed in with their DVD offerings. Same goes for the "Other Title's Like This". If I'm just on the streaming plan, then give me the option to filter out the DVD's
    • 2. Speaking of "Other Titles Like This". I'm not 100% sure how they figure that some of their suggestions are like the movie I might be watching. It seems so frick'n random that its a joke. And why the F**K do they keep suggesting movies I already watched. Give me an option to turn that off. (This could also apply to their front page)
    • 3. Their "New" front page. It sucks. I used to be able to easily rate and go to the movies main page (instead of click going to instantly watch that movie). I'm not sure who came up with that layout, but it is absolutely horrendous.
    • I have more gripes, but that's the main ones. I'm pretty sure, they decided to split the streaming and DVD plans, so they can eventually increase those prices down the line (Just like the jump from $8 to $9 a few months ago). Personally, I haven't had cable for 4 years or so, so I do appreciate what NetFlix could become, but they seem to have this "screw" the customer attitude as of late.

    --
    The real Sig captains the Northwestern. This one captains /.
    1. Re:A couple of things... by kimvette · · Score: 1

      The difference between RedBox and Netflix is that RedBox sucks - or, at least the selection does.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  86. This is not the first time by assantisz · · Score: 1

    This is not the first time that Netflix increases its prices and there is an outrage. And there have always been those predictions that this will be the beginning of the end. So much for that... I will stay a Netflix customer even though my 3 DVD out and streaming will go up by $5 (a 15% or so hike). It just makes good business sense to me to unbundle the mail-order and the streaming departments considering that the latter will go up in price a lot for Netflix.

  87. This is getting so overblown..... by Dega704 · · Score: 1

    I got the e-mail yesterday and it looks like I will be paying about $5 more per month. My reaction? "Wow that kind of sucks. Moving on." I use both the DVD and streaming services enough that it is still well worth it to me. Maybe I will go down to one DVD at a time instead of two. If Netflix made a mistake here, it was that they had such low prices to start with. Anyone who has ever worked in any retail or service industry knows what happens when you raise prices, regardless of how justified you are in doing so. People. Go. APESHIT. Nelflix knew this just as well as anyone else. The fact that they still raised rates tells me that there was a compelling reason for them to do so; and don't give me that anti-competitive nonsense. You could just as easily go back to your ad-saturated $70+ a month cable subscription. In any case the source of the greed is most likely the content industry, not Netflix. We are seriously barking up the wrong tree here.

  88. I cut streaming and $aved by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I cut streaming cuz I gets no luv from Netflix on the Linux for the stream. So I went to a lower cost plan to offset the costs.

  89. I don't get the rage by barra.ponto · · Score: 2

    I'm a long time Netflix costumer. I started with the 2 or 3 DVD at home plan and later moved on to the 1 DVD at home plan.
    Sometime along the line they gave me free streaming, but it is Windows (them Mac) only. I didn't ask for it
    I mostly run linux at home so I don't bother. I get the DVD, dump stream to my disk, watch it later on demand (no sharing with anyone, delete the file later).
    I get 2 to 3 DVDs per week, build a huge backog, suspend my membership, resume it later.
    They raised my monthly fee a couple of bucks, now they want to recoup the money for the streaming part, and they're given me my couple of bucks back.
    I stopped the streaming immediately and for $9.99/month I get to eventually see 8 to 12 movies a month.
    Seems reasonable.

  90. Guess I'll start ripping by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So they've changed the UI to the point that its crap, and their streaming selections get suckier and they pull series I'm in the middle of watching, and now they are jacking the cost.

    Fair enough, I have rarely used the DVD option, but starting now I'm going to get them, rip them to my Drobo, and repeat as fast as they can be turned around.

  91. The Thank You Economy... NOT! by Kamiza+Ikioi · · Score: 5, Informative

    You're damn right! Latte? Latte? Arrogant little shit, people (like me) are pinching pennies cancelling even basic cable in the tight economy already trying to keep a "normal" life going with a $10 spot to Netflix. I can go to Redbox, Steve Swasey, you little asshole and get almost 3 DVDs a week! Netflix was mostly to keep my CHILD entertained with kids shows, but fuck it, it's just a latte to you, right?

    Sorry for the cursing, but that mother... needs to read The Thank You Economy by Gary Vaynerchuk and get some goddamn manners! This is a less for how NOT to conduct business when everyone has a direct line to 500 friends on Facebook, Twitter, G+, etc! What a retard! I hope the fact that he is spokesman for Netflix will make future employers go, "Ah, so I guess I don't have to ask why you're now looking for new employment. Well, we don't find you qualified for spokesman, but we do have janitorial."

    --
    I8-D
    1. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I cancelled basic cable three years ago, cancelled my phone last month and had my slow 5 mbps cable modem downgraded to 2mbps to save even more.

      Only rich pricks can afford to waste $3 on a fucking drink in 2011. That Netflix guy is completely out of touch with reality.

    2. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by tverbeek · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Netflix is showing signs of not-quite-competence all over the place. Not-so-bright UI design on the new web site, bad usability testing on the new design, and inept PR spin "all our testers liked it, what's wrong with you?" in response to the complaints. Now there's this huge price hike that they're trying to spin as "lowest prices ever" (as if we wouldn't notice that only applies to much less service), and this "let them stop drinking latte" nonsense. If I'm ever in a position again to review job applicants, and I see a significant stint at Netflix on someone's job history, I'm going to have assume that they didn't know how to do their job, either.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    3. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by Danse · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If I'm ever in a position again to review job applicants, and I see a significant stint at Netflix on someone's job history, I'm going to have assume that they didn't know how to do their job, either.

      Just what we need, yet another retarded manager. If you can't be bothered to evaluate the person rather than jumping to conclusions based on extremely tenuous circumstantial evidence, your company would be stupid to have you reviewing any applicant.

      --
      It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
    4. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by Seumas · · Score: 1

      Redbox offers unlimited multi-device streaming?

    5. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 1

      Multi device? Sure. I found out that if I want to stream from my XBox 360, it will cost me another $10 per month for the 'gold' level whatever the fuck MS tries to gouge you for. So it is either park my PC beside the TV or buy one of the devices that doesn't charge you for the privilege of streaming movies from the net (after you have also paid the movie fees too). Anyway, multi device sure, but just leaving it at that is a tad misleading.

      --
      -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
    6. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Why do you need multi-device streaming to watch a damned movie? Are you part of NetFlix's marketing department? Sure sounds like it. In fact, you sound like the arrogant little NetFlix prick that said "it's only a couple of lattes".

      Look, all you have to do is pop the movie in your computer and you can stream the damned thing to any wi-fi enabled device in your house. WTF? This ain't rocket surgery.

    7. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What? Your post is unbelievable.

      You are pinching pennies and have a $10 spot going to Netflix? Steve Swasey is right – it is just a latte or two. You want luxury items then pay for them. You can keep your kid entertained without sticking him or her in front of the TV.

    8. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by GooberToo · · Score: 1

      Just what we need, yet another retarded manager.

      Redundant much? How do you think he qualified to be manager?

    9. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by cthulhu11 · · Score: 1

      I can go to Redbox, Steve Swasey, you little asshole and get almost 3 DVDs a week! If want a hundred titles to choose from instead of thousands, then sure, go for it.

    10. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by VolciMaster · · Score: 1

      You're damn right! Latte? Latte? Arrogant little shit, people (like me) are pinching pennies cancelling even basic cable in the tight economy already trying to keep a "normal" life going with a $10 spot to Netflix. I can go to Redbox, Steve Swasey, you little asshole and get almost 3 DVDs a week! Netflix was mostly to keep my CHILD entertained with kids shows, but fuck it, it's just a latte to you, right?

      Sorry for the cursing, but that mother... needs to read The Thank You Economy by Gary Vaynerchuk and get some goddamn manners! This is a less for how NOT to conduct business when everyone has a direct line to 500 friends on Facebook, Twitter, G+, etc! What a retard! I hope the fact that he is spokesman for Netflix will make future employers go, "Ah, so I guess I don't have to ask why you're now looking for new employment. Well, we don't find you qualified for spokesman, but we do have janitorial."

      And if you go to Redbox three days a week, you're spending at LEAST $12 a month - and that's if you *never* return them late.

    11. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by VolciMaster · · Score: 1

      I cancelled basic cable three years ago, cancelled my phone last month and had my slow 5 mbps cable modem downgraded to 2mbps to save even more.

      Only rich pricks can afford to waste $3 on a fucking drink in 2011. That Netflix guy is completely out of touch with reality.

      So - how much do you spend on eating out, drinks, etc? $3 is not that much to *anyone* I know: and none of my friends are "rich pricks".

    12. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      people (like me) are pinching pennies cancelling even basic cable in the tight economy already trying to keep a "normal" life

      Netflix is not a necessity, y'know, it's a luxury. If you can afford to waste money on things like Netflix in the first place, you're not nearly as poor as you think yourself, friend.

      Netflix was mostly to keep my CHILD entertained with kids shows, but fuck it, it's just a latte to you, right?

      Oh, my bad. Obviously it's all different then. WON'T SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN!

    13. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by Nyder · · Score: 1

      You're damn right! Latte? Latte? Arrogant little shit, people (like me) are pinching pennies cancelling even basic cable in the tight economy already trying to keep a "normal" life going with a $10 spot to Netflix. I can go to Redbox, Steve Swasey, you little asshole and get almost 3 DVDs a week! Netflix was mostly to keep my CHILD entertained with kids shows, but fuck it, it's just a latte to you, right?

      Sorry for the cursing, but that mother... needs to read The Thank You Economy by Gary Vaynerchuk and get some goddamn manners! This is a less for how NOT to conduct business when everyone has a direct line to 500 friends on Facebook, Twitter, G+, etc! What a retard! I hope the fact that he is spokesman for Netflix will make future employers go, "Ah, so I guess I don't have to ask why you're now looking for new employment. Well, we don't find you qualified for spokesman, but we do have janitorial."

      Weird, I just pay for internet, and somehow i get to watch movies and tv shows without paying netflix, or anyone else.

      Maybe people will understand the basics of Corporations.

      1. Get Customers in with decent prices.
      2. Raise Said Prices.
      3. ???
      4. Profit!!!

      Let's look at the reality of the situation. It cost netflix a lot less money to stream movies then it does to mail out dvd's of movies. So ya, times are tough, the cost of everything is up, so Netflix needs to raise the price of it's DVD operations.

      If money is tight, just download the videos from the internet for free. I don't see why having to pay corporations who like bleeding their "customers" while cheating their "employees" as much as they can is a smart way to spend your limited funds.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    14. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by ultranova · · Score: 1

      If you can't be bothered to evaluate the person rather than jumping to conclusions based on extremely tenuous circumstantial evidence, your company would be stupid to have you reviewing any applicant.

      There are so many applications for each job opening that it's impossible to evaluate them with anything but extremely tenuous circustantial evidence. Besides, does it really matter? Most people are average, and most positions can be filled just fine by the average practitioner in the field.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    15. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are the parent of a child. So am I. Please use a different word than retard. My son, who has intellectual disabilities, is hurt when he hears that word. Thanks.

    16. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by Danse · · Score: 1

      There are so many applications for each job opening that it's impossible to evaluate them with anything but extremely tenuous circustantial evidence. Besides, does it really matter? Most people are average, and most positions can be filled just fine by the average practitioner in the field.

      Keep striving for mediocrity there dude! Spoken like a true PHB!

      --
      It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
    17. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by ultranova · · Score: 1

      Keep striving for mediocrity there dude! Spoken like a true PHB!

      Spoken like someone who's seen a lot of people who's insistence that they're better than average turns what could be an okay end result into a farcical disaster. Just look our current economic mess as a very good example of what happens when people become obsessed with ever-increasing success.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    18. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by Danse · · Score: 1

      Spoken like someone who's seen a lot of people who's insistence that they're better than average turns what could be an okay end result into a farcical disaster. Just look our current economic mess as a very good example of what happens when people become obsessed with ever-increasing success.

      I've interviewed plenty of people for various positions, but I certainly don't rely on their insistence that they are better than average. I let them talk in detail about the work they've done. I ask them a lot of questions to see if they really understand the things they're saying they've done. Other important aspects are their communications skills, enthusiasm, ability to work well with others, etc. Obviously most people aren't going to be above average, but that doesn't mean I can't try to find those people who are.

      There are even places for people with average skill sets as long as they are willing to further develop their skills, and aren't expecting to be paid above the value of their skills. I certainly wouldn't make assumptions about a candidate based solely on the fact that they worked for some particular company. That doesn't tell you anything useful at all, and just makes no sense unless you have no intention of giving people any sort of fair interview. You certainly aren't doing your company a service.

      --
      It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
    19. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by Rolgar · · Score: 1

      Use the library. You're probably already paying for it with your taxes.

      We are watching TV shows on DVD as well as movies. Do we miss out on being up to date? No. Plus we have the opportunity of waiting to find out what other people consider entertaining before we spend the time and effort to watch it.

    20. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's been years since I've posted on /. but I had to give you some major props for tying this in to The Thank You Economy. We're in the process of moving back to the kind of service economy where it matters how you relate to your customers. Now our accessible personal networks provide companies an ability to have true, honest two way communication; but these intertwined personal networks also help spread feelings towards a company's strategic moves, both in praise and damnation, very quickly.

      When a company takes an approach, as Swasey does here, that demonstrates a tone deaf or worse an antagonistic view of their customer relationships, it matters. Those same environmental variables that allows for individual networks to bind together to spread viral marketing or customer discontent like wildfire is the same environment that allows companies to have real, substantive interactions with their consumers. As such, you can no longer just market away the fact that you made a decision that demonstrated a lack of concern for consumer opinion (and then worse stuck with it when the overwhelming response unequivocally demonstrated your decision's piss poor alignment with customer wants and needs!). You can't hide from a decision bad enough that it enrages your consumer base; any attempt to do so just demonstrates that you don't really care about your customers and that you aren't really passionate about doing anything more than making money. The longer that misalignment continues, the more certain your customers are that you don't care about them and the quicker they stop being your customers.

      This, more than anything else, is why there has been such a vocal and significant response to this idiotic move. Netflix has made it clear that ultimately they don't give a rat's ass what will satisfy their customers. As consumers who expected more from this company (a company that many of us used to view as the underdog and the champion of true consumer demand), our reaction has been as loud and as important as any consumer revolt we've seen. Companies that don't approach strategic decision making with more of an understanding of and sensitivity to customer needs will fall much faster in this new environment.

    21. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good employees don't stay at bad companies very long. If you're good at what you do, and you're surrounded by people who are not, you get out. The only people who stay in a job where they are surrounded by incompetent nitwits are a) other incompetent nitwits who like that they don't get judged to a higher standards, and b) people who'd kinda rather not be there, but aren't good enough to find anything within a reasonable amount of time and don't have the balls to get out and get away from the stink of the place before it rubs off on them. I wouldn't want to hire either kind of person, either.

    22. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by Danse · · Score: 1

      Good employees don't stay at bad companies very long. If you're good at what you do, and you're surrounded by people who are not, you get out. The only people who stay in a job where they are surrounded by incompetent nitwits are a) other incompetent nitwits who like that they don't get judged to a higher standards, and b) people who'd kinda rather not be there, but aren't good enough to find anything within a reasonable amount of time and don't have the balls to get out and get away from the stink of the place before it rubs off on them. I wouldn't want to hire either kind of person, either.

      That's a ridiculous over-simplification and generalization. Utterly worthless for evaluating a potential employee.

      --
      It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
    23. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by oldstrat · · Score: 1

      Who the F thinks he eats out anywhere after canceling all those services? Do you have a clue? Three buck is meaning the difference to have or not for thousands more evert day and to them if you are spending $3 on a single serving of a beverage you are indeed a "rich prick". I suggest you expand your sheltered little circle.

    24. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by oldstrat · · Score: 1

      You're damn right! Latte? Latte? Arrogant little shit, people (like me) are pinching pennies cancelling even basic cable in the tight economy already trying to keep a "normal" life going with a $10 spot to Netflix. I can go to Redbox, Steve Swasey, you little asshole and get almost 3 DVDs a week! Netflix was mostly to keep my CHILD entertained with kids shows, but fuck it, it's just a latte to you, right?

      Sorry for the cursing, but that mother... needs to read The Thank You Economy by Gary Vaynerchuk and get some goddamn manners! This is a less for how NOT to conduct business when everyone has a direct line to 500 friends on Facebook, Twitter, G+, etc! What a retard! I hope the fact that he is spokesman for Netflix will make future employers go, "Ah, so I guess I don't have to ask why you're now looking for new employment. Well, we don't find you qualified for spokesman, but we do have janitorial."

      And if you go to Redbox three days a week, you're spending at LEAST $12 a month - and that's if you *never* return them late.

      Well that makes sixty percent rate hike and 50% cut in services just fine doesn't it???

    25. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by oldstrat · · Score: 1

      "Netflix is not a necessity, y'know" You need to tell that to GougeFlix, not the vanishing customer base.

    26. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by oldstrat · · Score: 1

      Get over it. Your kid is not a Retard - you yourself just said so.

    27. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by Duradin · · Score: 1

      Anyone with just a 2mbps internet service is obviously hurting, I bet he even had to drop down a tier on his mobile data plan.

    28. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mobile data plan? If I don't even have a landline, do you really think I have a fucking expensive mobile phone, with a data plan on top of that? Are you insane?

      I HAVE NO TELEVISION AND NO PHONE. That's right, I can't even call 9-1-1 in case of an emergency.

      oldstrat was right, I haven't eaten out in about two years. And when I did it was a BK, so about $6 for the whole thing. I wasn't eating $30 steaks to begin with.

      And a note to VolciMaster... three bucks can pay for two whole meals. Think about that the next time you order a fucking $3 latte.

    29. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by Duradin · · Score: 1

      Dropping landline for mobile and cable for bittorrent is standard operating procedure for geeks around here.

    30. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that mobile is still yet another monthly fee. Granted, it's cheaper than a landline if you go with those $10/month pre-paid cards, but it's still a luxury when it costs as much as five meals.

      As for the torrents... it's less a PITA than paid services, so that switch was done five years ago. It wasn't about money then, but it is now.

    31. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by VolciMaster · · Score: 1

      Who the F thinks he eats out anywhere after canceling all those services? Do you have a clue? Three buck is meaning the difference to have or not for thousands more evert day and to them if you are spending $3 on a single serving of a beverage you are indeed a "rich prick". I suggest you expand your sheltered little circle.

      I suppose it is the case for some people. But it certainly isn't for the folks I know working minimum wage (or slightly above): they all eat out, have cable, etc. And it's not for the people I know working at about the bottom rung (economically) of the professional ladder - teachers.

    32. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by VolciMaster · · Score: 1

      Mobile data plan? If I don't even have a landline, do you really think I have a fucking expensive mobile phone, with a data plan on top of that? Are you insane?

      I HAVE NO TELEVISION AND NO PHONE. That's right, I can't even call 9-1-1 in case of an emergency.

      oldstrat was right, I haven't eaten out in about two years. And when I did it was a BK, so about $6 for the whole thing. I wasn't eating $30 steaks to begin with.

      And a note to VolciMaster... three bucks can pay for two whole meals. Think about that the next time you order a fucking $3 latte.

      And yet you can post on /. ... so *HOW*, again, are you hurting?

    33. Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT! by VolciMaster · · Score: 1

      You're damn right! Latte? Latte? Arrogant little shit, people (like me) are pinching pennies cancelling even basic cable in the tight economy already trying to keep a "normal" life going with a $10 spot to Netflix. I can go to Redbox, Steve Swasey, you little asshole and get almost 3 DVDs a week! Netflix was mostly to keep my CHILD entertained with kids shows, but fuck it, it's just a latte to you, right?

      Sorry for the cursing, but that mother... needs to read The Thank You Economy by Gary Vaynerchuk and get some goddamn manners! This is a less for how NOT to conduct business when everyone has a direct line to 500 friends on Facebook, Twitter, G+, etc! What a retard! I hope the fact that he is spokesman for Netflix will make future employers go, "Ah, so I guess I don't have to ask why you're now looking for new employment. Well, we don't find you qualified for spokesman, but we do have janitorial."

      And if you go to Redbox three days a week, you're spending at LEAST $12 a month - and that's if you *never* return them late.

      Well that makes sixty percent rate hike and 50% cut in services just fine doesn't it???

      How is this a "50% cut in services"?

  92. Streaming now available on 3DS by darkwing_bmf · · Score: 1

    $8 for streaming only. I don't think it's a bad deal. I might even get a 3DS to watch it on:

    http://www.wired.com/gamelife/2011/07/nintendo-3ds-netflix-app/

    1. Re:Streaming now available on 3DS by synapse7 · · Score: 1

      My family tried it on the Wii for a few months. While it did work well, better than I was expecting, their simply wasn't enough interesting content for us to want to keep it.

    2. Re:Streaming now available on 3DS by darkwing_bmf · · Score: 1

      Well I get at least $8 per month entertainment value from it. If you're finding a better legal value then good for you.

  93. Attitude by HikingStick · · Score: 1

    Unfortunately, that's the type of attitude for which Blockbuster was once famous, the "sure, some [meaning most] people won't like it, but we get to make the rules" attitude. I've been with Netflix from the beginning. I really like the service. Even the price increase isn't too bad (only a 20% increase over the plan I currently have). It's the attitude that really pisses me off.

    --
    I use irony whenever I can, but my shirts are still wrinkled...
    1. Re:Attitude by WynterNyght · · Score: 1

      Was wondering where to put this--so I'll hop in here... Not everyone's cost is going up. With NO change to my plan (just accepting what Netflix does to get me the equivalent under the new plans) my price goes DOWN $4 a month. Now, not everyone is on the high-level plan we use--but I have to wonder what the average price increase really is. And yes, that attitude is problematic--the latte comment is very stupid.

  94. Already upset by ads by operagost · · Score: 1

    I'm already upset by the pop-up and pop-under ads that seem to be on every site when I'm not using NoScript. Due to these, I vowed I wouldn't use them at any price some time ago.

    --

    Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  95. TFA by DaMattster · · Score: 1

    One commenter in the article mentioned that Red Box is looking "better and better these days." I would happen to agree except for the convenience factor. Let Netflix raise their prices. Competition is in the works that will make Netflix somewhat sorry they made a move like this. What might be good for stockholders is not good for Americans as a whole. We have learned this lesson a thousand times over.

  96. Unprecedented? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unprecedented? You must be new to the Internet. Welcome.

  97. Re:CHEAP MOTHERFUCKERS !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Although how poorly as the above comment was written, I agree.

  98. Easy work-around by Droog · · Score: 1

    If you still want both Streaming and DVD/BluRay mailed to you, then a little planning makes your cost only $7.99/month, thanks to Netflix letting you change your plan at the drop of a hat.

    I mainly keep the DVD mailers for the shows that are not and will not ever be streamed in the near future, such as HBO original series like The Wire and Game of Thrones. I don't really need DVDs all of the time, though, so I plan to watch The Wire for a month and cancel my streaming plan, then I plan to watch streaming for a month and switch the plan back to DVD-only.

    It's a little bit of a hassle, but it does save you $7.99/month.

  99. whats a latte? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that a french dish or something?

  100. It'll come back to them. by blair1q · · Score: 1

    Oops. I seem to have started streaming movies to every computer I own 24/7/365.

    And churning my DVD orders daily.

    Enjoy the licensing fees and postage, dudes.

  101. Reason for the price increase? by Niris · · Score: 1

    Is it purely to make more money, or is it to counter cost of shipping, and the cost of licensing what they stream/rent out? As it stands, I'll stick to the pure streaming plan since I tend to like it for just finding something random to watch. If it's DVD only, I tend to just torrent it anyway. Don't really see what the giant fuss is over on Slashdot since I'm sure a majority of you do or can do the same.

  102. Let them drink Latte... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just downgraded. I needed my latte.

  103. Simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm canceling my membership on August 31st and I'm going to start using Red Box. As for streaming, I'm awaiting Amazon and Google.

  104. Where was the love when they dropped their prices? by ph0rk · · Score: 1

    They dropped prices a few years ago. Raising them to wean people off the discs-in-the-mail is more or less inevitable. Unlimited streaming is still only $9.99, half what Netflix cost five years ago.

    I pay $7.99 and never use a disc. After the change I'll pay $9.99 for streaming only and get more or less the same service. Still less than it was five years ago.

    What's the big deal?

    --
    semantics are everything!
  105. yet piratebay is still free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and has newer movies/shows, same day delivery, and you don't have to return it

  106. You have been Mon0poliz3d by gwstuff · · Score: 1

    Unfortunately, none of the other providers have nearly as much variety or volume as Netflix, so a switch is out of the question. The question is Netflix or no movies on demand. I would love to terminate my subscription to make a point, but I also want to watch good movies at my convenience.

  107. Bring on the RedBox! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you only use two or three DVD's a month and stream video once in a while, this price scheme is too high.

  108. Linux support? by jbrandv · · Score: 1

    I dropped Netflix when they started streaming and refused to support Linux. And no, I won't run Windows for any reason.

    1. Re:Linux support? by Stradenko · · Score: 1

      Then this change is perfect for you. You now have a choice to not purchase streaming while purchasing the disc rentals that you loved in the first place.

  109. Cancelling before the increase by flimflammer · · Score: 1

    I ate the first price increase they did a few months back. This one I'm not going to eat, and definitely not after their "for most people it's a latte or two" comment.

    That arrogant asshole, it's not just about the price, but what that price means.

    1. They didn't add any value to their service, just like the last one
    2. If enough people eat this price increase, why won't they eat another one? If the price has gone up twice, surely it'll go up again.
    3. They snuffed out their competition (blockbuster) with a low pricing scheme. Now that they don't have to worry about it, they can hike the price.

    Those people who think this is the last price increase are oblivious. You can just smell the arrogance that Netflix is letting off now. How many more "latte or two"'s are you going to eat before you see what's going on?

    1. Re:Cancelling before the increase by Daetrin · · Score: 1

      What you say? Prices go up as time goes on? That's unpossible!

      Yes Netflix is going to raise their price again, and so is just about every other company. I myself can remember a time when gas cost about $1 a gallon. I've got old books that used to belong to my parents with a cover price of 25 cents. "That and a nickel will get you a cup of coffee."

      Technology has allowed us to reverse the prices of some items for various periods of period of time, but it hasn't overturned the general overall trend that over enough time inflation will make everything cost more. (Ideally of course, given a good economy, improved technology and increased wages will allow us to have a better standard of living despite the higher prices. Ideally.)

      Netflix isn't being exactly brilliant about the way in which they're raising their prices, but they're also involved in an area that seems to be getting pretty hard hit by rising prices, ie physically shipping stuff through the postal system.

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
  110. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  111. I'm quitting now.... by Lumpy · · Score: 1

    I love the arrogance here...... "Company spokesman Steve Swasey said. 'To most people, it's a latte or two,' he added.""

    I have no interest in doing business with a company that has people that are that far out of touch with reality.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:I'm quitting now.... by geek · · Score: 1

      My food prices went up 50% in the last 2 years, gas prices 30%. Rent is up, prescription meds are up. Even my pets food is up. That "latte" or two is a big effing deal to people like me right now.

    2. Re:I'm quitting now.... by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      My food prices went up 50% in the last 2 years, gas prices 30%. Rent is up, prescription meds are up. Even my pets food is up. That "latte" or two is a big effing deal to people like me right now.

      Yup, I haven't had a fancy coffee out in 3 years. Very tone-deaf PR hack.

      I'll be decreasing my Netflix membership level by the amount of the increase, over-consuming on the rest, and seeking alternatives.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  112. Content Lockers FTW by Kamiza+Ikioi · · Score: 1

    Just wait for the DVD content lockers just like the MP3 content lockers. MPAA will shit itself, then lose. Netflix will be fighting for its life then.

    --
    I8-D
  113. Studio contracts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It can't have anything to do with streaming contracts with studios expiring and the fact that the studios are wanting more money. The content creators (I know, that is questionable) are getting more money from others and realize now that people want this streamed and that they can demand more money. I know it is a little much to expect most people on here to actually read news and information about the companies they purchase services from, but I guess I just expect more from people.

    Cheers

  114. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  115. Why would you want to watch news? by DeadCatX2 · · Score: 1

    "Today, someone got shot. Someone got stabbed. Someone died in a fire."

    Yeah, that definitely sounds like what I want to watch.

    Besides, why do you want to be pushed news over a one-way connection? Pull the news that you want using the Internet. Pull from a variety of sources across the spectrum so that you're more informed. Read the news when YOU want to, not whenever the TV decides that it's time for you to watch news.

    --
    :(){ :|:& };:
    1. Re:Why would you want to watch news? by tepples · · Score: 1

      "Today, someone got shot. Someone got stabbed. Someone died in a fire."

      The channel she watches doesn't have that as much as progressively slanted analysis of federal politics.

      Besides, why do you want to be pushed news over a one-way connection?

      Because news is something she watches while unwinding in a recliner, or something she listens to while doing housework.

      Read the news when YOU want to

      She doesn't want to read the news all the time. Please see my reply to Reverand Dave.

    2. Re:Why would you want to watch news? by DeadCatX2 · · Score: 1

      Podcasts and streaming videos don't require reading, yet they are still Internet news sources that you pull information from, instead of being pushed information to.

      --
      :(){ :|:& };:
    3. Re:Why would you want to watch news? by tepples · · Score: 1
      Context: Those who switch from cable TV to Netflix VOD lose TV news. Find Internet media sources to fill the same use cases.

      Podcasts

      "What's a podcast? I don't have an iPod." I tell her she could hook her FM transmitter up to the computer, but every time I offer to teach her how, she's either too occupied with housework or in too much need of unwinding to have the time to learn.

      and streaming videos

      Streaming videos also need someone to sit up and press Next each time. And what device would she connect to her SDTV set to watch them?

    4. Re:Why would you want to watch news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Holy crap, a wife that still does housework! My good sir, you win.

  116. If they're pushing streaming then get more content by Rastl · · Score: 1

    Seems like the streaming to DVD ratio is grossly out of whack if they're pushing the streaming model as the preferred way to get content. Even though my price didn't increase since I'm on a streaming only plan I would hope they're going to use this new cash windfall to put a heck of a lot more of those DVD only movies out there for me to watch.

    I can honestly see where the price increase for a DVD would be justified given the need to maintain an inventory of media, the depreciation due to abuse and loss, and packing and shipping costs. Sadly this is going to mean a loss of jobs as the volume of DVDs shipped goes down.

    They're also competing against RedBox other cheap immediate DVD rentals. Would you rather put that new movie on your wait list and hope it shows up soon or walk to the closest RedBox and get it right away? Cable providers are also getting a clue and putting out on-demand movies a lot more quickly. Yes, they're more expensive but they're darn convenient.

    I'll repeat my original statement. I want more streaming content. Start taking that catalog of movies and putting them up for me to watching using that streaming plan you're pushing as the primary delivery method.

  117. Slashdot has changed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Am I the only one who said "Great"! Now I don't have to pay for streaming that I can't use on linux? This changes saves me $2 / month. (Yeah, I setup a virtual machine, but quality is stomach churningly bad).

    And why doesn't Netflix move to a streaming model where --- if and only if something isn't available streaming you can get it on disc? Seems the obvious solution ...

    1. Re:Slashdot has changed by reboot246 · · Score: 1

      I'm with you, but for exactly the opposite reason. I'm a streaming fan, not so much a DVD fan. It's going to cost me $2 less a month now!

      I wish people would realize that not all great movies were made just in the last year. There are tons of movies I want to watch that were made in the last fifty years that are very good, not to mention television shows I missed or want to watch again.

      Whenever I see people lined up around the block to see a movie's premiere, I always want to yell out at them, "Hey, they'll be showing the movie again tomorrow night!"

  118. Alternatives by whitelabrat · · Score: 1

    I especially liked Netflix because the Bluray rentals were a steal. I'd expect bluray fanatics to be unfazed. I don't watch enough of anything to pay for a steep increase so I'll be bumping down to streaming only. The kids use it all day, and aren't exposed to the crap advertising. For recent releases I'll use Vudu since my Bluray player supports it.

  119. Just Bizarre by pavon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    $7.99 is way too cheap.

    To me that is the most bizarre aspect of this price change. If what you want is just streaming or just DVD, the new plan is very inexpensive. AFAIK, it is the lowest price that Netflix has ever offered. But if you primarily use one and occasionally supplement it with the other, having to pay double the price isn't worth it. So the natural reaction of everyone I know personally, and the vast majority of posts I have seen on the internet is to drop one of the two. It is like Netflix is begging us to give them less money, and presenting it an a manner that is pissing everyone off.

    What is even more mind-boggling, is that this ability to supplement one with the other is the one of the biggest advantages that Netflix has over it's competitors, and they just completely threw it out the window.

    I understand that the price for streaming would have to increase over time as Netflix renegotiates deals, and the selection increases. I never expected it to be included as a freebee with the DVD service forever, just during it's teething years. But I can't believe that the average person who signs up for both DVD and streaming would use both just as much as the average person who only signs up for one or the other.

    If they really believed that the majority of people would keep both plans at the higher price, then their market research people need to be fired.

    1. Re:Just Bizarre by MHolmesIV · · Score: 1

      This. Exactly.

      Our solution will be to drop the DVD and blu-ray addon. Despite the fact that due to our lazyness, they only had to send us a few DVDs a month, which made us extremely profitable customers for them, now they lose that extra cash, and possibly even the streaming revenue, since without the discs to supplement, the streaming is a lot less useful.

      If Amazon instant streaming worked on my Tivo or XBox, I'd dump Netflix right now.

    2. Re:Just Bizarre by Jthon · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure the real goal is to force you to choose one or the other. In the long term I think they plan to drop or spin off the DVD business and become a 100% streaming company. I think they're hoping that everyone just decides that having both is too much money and choose to just stream. If everyone would just switch to the DVD only plan they'd probably rethink this strategy.

      What annoys me is that they don't have a 3 DVD out at a time plan without streaming. My ages old plan is getting a massive rate hike come Sept. They still have too much DVD only content for me to really think that their rate hike is justified.

    3. Re:Just Bizarre by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have unlimited streaming, plus 3 DVD's at a time ($19.99), plus Blu Ray option ($4), for total of $23.99

      Now it is going up to $27.98

      Here's the deal, with my usage patterns lately (not big on streaming other than for TV shows, maybe 2 hours a month, and probably watched 2 discs a month), they made a handsome profit. Now they irk me by raising the price by $4.

      Maybe they could say it is for something useful, like perhaps finally delivering on 5.1 sound with streaming for all available movies and devices that can support it? Not just for some movies on the Playstation 3.

      If I drop something, it will be the streaming, not the DVD's/Blu Rays. Plenty of streaming content out there.

    4. Re:Just Bizarre by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      $7.99 is way too cheap.

      To me that is the most bizarre aspect of this price change. If what you want is just streaming or just DVD, the new plan is very inexpensive. AFAIK, it is the lowest price that Netflix has ever offered. But if you primarily use one and occasionally supplement it with the other, having to pay double the price isn't worth it. So the natural reaction of everyone I know personally, and the vast majority of posts I have seen on the internet is to drop one of the two. It is like Netflix is begging us to give them less money, and presenting it an a manner that is pissing everyone off.

      What is even more mind-boggling, is that this ability to supplement one with the other is the one of the biggest advantages that Netflix has over it's competitors, and they just completely threw it out the window.

      I understand that the price for streaming would have to increase over time as Netflix renegotiates deals, and the selection increases. I never expected it to be included as a freebee with the DVD service forever, just during it's teething years. But I can't believe that the average person who signs up for both DVD and streaming would use both just as much as the average person who only signs up for one or the other.

      If they really believed that the majority of people would keep both plans at the higher price, then their market research people need to be fired.

      The ignorance of the MBA types knows no bounds.

    5. Re:Just Bizarre by AmigaHeretic · · Score: 1

      What annoys me is that they don't have a 3 DVD out at a time plan without streaming.

      Sure they do. They have all the way up to 8 DVDs at a time. With or without streaming.

      8 DVDs at time is $43.99 a month

      You just need to click "Show Additional all DVD Plans" option.

      (Additional all? -- Their grammar, not mine.)

    6. Re:Just Bizarre by porges · · Score: 1

      Missing hyphen on their part: should be "Show Additional all-DVD Plans".

  120. Good luck competing with Redbox, Netflix by zifn4b · · Score: 1

    Let's see... I can pay $17.98 to get 1 Blu-ray title at a time and unlimited streaming with Netflix or I can pay $7.99 for unlimited streaming with Netflix and use Redbox to rent 6 Blu-ray titles a month or 10 DVD titles a month in addition to my Netflix streaming. How is this a good business plan for Netflix to be competitive?

    --
    We'll make great pets
  121. Netflix and the DVD only option by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I remember that Netflix used to slow down or delay shipping for the heavy use customers. If someone chooses the DVD service, is that still going to be the normal practice?

  122. nearly everyone posting in this topic is a moron by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously, if you're pissed at Netflix, you're an idiot. Yes, Netflix prices have gone up. But they've gone up because big content/MPAA-types are increasing their 2012 licensing fees nearly 10x what they were in 2010. What cost Netflix roughly $200million in 2010 is now going to cost them roughly $2billion for 2012.

    Stop being tards. Stop boycotting and raging about 'evil' Netflix. Go back to raging at Sony, et al.. they're the ones causing this.

  123. Steaming only by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since I have had my one DVD sitting around for a couple of months it wasn't hard for me to decide to go streaming only (when the DVD cost all of $1/month it was harder to justify not getting it).

    For actual DVDs I guess I'll go to the corner store and get the movie at $1/pop.

  124. Don't underestimate the local library by Temujin_12 · · Score: 1

    Seems to me like they are just writing off their DVD business model (at least in the long-term)--which seems to be a good idea. With media, the money is in streaming more than it is keeping inventory and managing the logistics of physical goods.

    For my family, my wife and I turned off cable 3 years ago and have been Netflix/Hulu(+)/Redbox ever since. We have 3 little kids, so we hardly ever go to the theater except for once or twice a year. Now, we'll just get new releases from Redbox and cancel our DVD service with Netflix. I went through our DVD history and found that for DVDs that aren't available via Redbox or streaming from Hulu/Netflix (ie: foreign films & documentaries), nearly all are available through my local library system (Seattle public library). I already pay for the library (taxes), I might as well use it.

    --
    Faith is a willingness to accept something w/o complete proof and to act on it. Reason allows you to correct that faith.
    1. Re:Don't underestimate the local library by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Ironically I restarted cable because I have kids. There is content on it that doesn't not show up in any of those options. This was brought into focus when my sons friend started talking about the recent shark week and my kids couldn't relate.
      There is value in kids having common ground with some social peers, otherwise they become outcast. TV is a pretty good way to do that.

      Netflix and Hulu don't really have that much of a HD documentary selection.

      now, for some things netflix can't be beat. For example Gay and Lesbian movies.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  125. They have a huge variety by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    If Netflix provided a good amount of streaming connect, I would agree.

    They do though, it's been growing a lot. You can find a number of actually newer movies on there now, and they keep expanding the TV show section. The assortment now is huge. With the increase in fees, they can in theory expand it further... how did you think it was going to get better without Netflix spending more?

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  126. Yep by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That is why I only subscribe to the internet feed... They can keep their mail order stuff

  127. Some plans actually dropped in price by Chibi · · Score: 1

    So, I'll preface this by saying I'm probably a bit of an outlier since I'm on a more expensive plan. I was on the 6 DVD a month plan (with free unlimited). I switched to this plan a few months ago when my wife and I started watching more TV shows. We just wanted to make sure we had the next disc ready to go as we were tearing through multiple seasons of a TV series (Supernatural, in case you were curious).

    Anyway, the price for us actually dropped. It dropped by less than a dollar, but I was still pretty surprised. I was expecting a big price gouge. Perhaps they've been presenting this process incorrectly. I seem to recall they started adding "free" streaming to accounts a while back. Maybe they should have done a better job of explaining that streaming would be free for a while, and then give people the option of paying for it once it was no longer free.

    --
    If all you have are silver bullets, everything looks like a werewolf.
  128. The two plans are not same by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IF, the streaming quality and selection were the same, ok fine, choose your plan... BUT, they are not. The streaming selection is so poor in comparison. For them to equate the two services is just lame. What made this a great duo was the ability to get the movie you wanted.

    I called and informed them of my displeasure, and that I would be canceling my service one day prior to the renewal. (Because they screw you again by keeping your entire months payment if you cancel early with no refund for the unused portions. I think that just describes their whole mindset in general.)

    I love being able to vote with my dollars. Next competitor please.

  129. English please... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "it would Netflix raise the Internet-plus-DVDs-in-the-mail plan"
    Could someone explain what "Netflix raise" means?

  130. Terrible spokesperson by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'We knew there would be some people who would be upset,' company spokesman Steve Swasey said. 'To most people, it's a latte or two,' he added."

    This is what passes as a spokesperson for a product MILLIONS of us use on a daily basis?

    Netflix - HIRE ME - here is what I would say, "We understand the frustration our customers are feeling, unfortunately the huge increase in licensing fees made this decision a necessity."

  131. You people crack me up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You people crack me up. So much nerdrage. Look, it's not new news that Netflix is about to get bent over the barrel on renegotiations with the content providers. Plenty of articles out there talking about it. Did you think they were just going to absorb those costs, when the numbers being speculated are a ten fold increase reaching into the billions?

    You bitch about them pulling content, but don't acknowledge that it's the content providers calling for it to be pulled? Why aren't things being streamed at the same time they're released on DVD? Why do you think, it's because the providers don't want them to stream. It's not like Netflix particularly enjoys buying a million DVDs that its shithead customers can never seem to keep from scratching all to hell. They'd love to stream you everything, but it's just not within their abilities because content providers don't want them to.

    So quit Netflix in your nerdrage over them *gasp* increasing prices to cover the fact the content providers are trying to screw them. Do you honestly think competing services aren't going to get the same treatment when those contracts come up for renegotiation as well? Good luck with that.

  132. The hate here is from the consumer standpoint by mordred99 · · Score: 1

    The hate here is from the consumer standpoint. Something that was seen as cheap or a free add on to a previous versions/price point on a service is now costing more. Big Deal. People they have giving you more choice and your overall cost may go up, but for me it is going down.

    I would like to point out to all the people that are not looking at this from a business perspective, they have another thing coming. Do you know where 75% of the streaming library came from? A small ($10million) contract with Starz, who had a loophole in their contract that they can resell their content from their network to anyone). Guess what, for $10million and hosting, Netflix paid Starz. The major studios have said publicly (and in their annual reports) that since such a gross injustice has been perpetuated on them, they will not accept less than $150 million dollars from Netflix and are closing the Starz contract loops. So Netflix is in the process of determining how many people are out there paying for each service, so they can go to the negotiating table with numbers. Here are the people doing streaming. Here are the people doing DVD. They have valid figures and they can determine going forward if the $150 million will be a good business decision for them to continue with the streaming. This is pretty simple business 101 folks.

    Yes, my content price is going up, it is still cheaper than me going to see 1 movie in a theater if I include popcorn. I wait a few months for it to come out on streaming and I am good. Fine. I don't have to every pay to sit through an Adam Sandler flick - where I can see it at home for 8 bucks a month with 25 other movies and it does not make me angry to go see it.

    1. Re:The hate here is from the consumer standpoint by geekoid · · Score: 1

      A) as as consumer I don't give a fly fuck through a rolling doughnut about their business.

      B) So what do they think the studios will do, cut out there revenue stream? Clearly not.

      Stop comparing it to going to a theater(I presume you mean cinema). It's not the same experience. Not at all. It's almost as bad as comparing it to lattes.

      PS. I am always angry when I see and Adam Sandler film, even if it's free.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  133. No need for mail. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wish they would let you stream all there movies for like 20-25 bucks. there is no reason we need to get movies by mail.

  134. Lack of Streaming for Linux by gizmo_mathboy · · Score: 1

    I just dropped the streaming option.

    I can't use it because all of but 2 pc's are linux and those aren't anywhere I would comfortably watch a movie.

    So, I saved myself $2 and apparently costing Netflix more because DVDs, what made Netflix Netflix, is getting more expense.

    Once someone figures out a better streaming option (Linux utility and better title availability) I'll cut them off all together.

    1. Re:Lack of Streaming for Linux by ErikZ · · Score: 1

      They sell TVs with Netflix streaming built in. They've been out for two years now.

      --
      Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
  135. Priorities by adeft · · Score: 1

    I don't drink lattes, I drink the free coffee at work.....because it's free. I'm not broke either. Little savings here and there are what allow bigger purchases for me.

  136. Unprecedented? Really? by Chaos1 · · Score: 1

    "Netflix provoked an unprecedented outpouring of backlash across the Internet ..."

    Really? I'm pretty sure the Internet is a small toddler who throws fits when it doesn't get it's way. Not every backlash can be unprecedented, nor is this the first time people got vocally (in a sense) angry at a company. The loudest crowd is not always the majority.

    --
    I only need the Preview button when I haven't used the Preview button.
  137. For some customers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This price increase makes no sense. I am currently on their $9.99 plan with streaming and 1 DVD out at a time. Why pay the extra $6, when if I drop the DVD portion I can just use pay per view for the two movies I watch per month anyway, and I get them faster than I would on a Netflix DVD. So I am dropping the DVD plan, staying with the $8 streaming plan, and using pay per view (or, rent it from Apple or Amazon). Netflix loses $2 per month from me, I lose exactly nothing. And funny the content providers get the same $$$ too. So I really think this is Netflix's problem, stop blaming others for their misfortune of not knowing their market.

  138. Just move to streaming only by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I moved from the streaming + DVD package to streaming only. I'm saving $2.00/month now. What's the problem?

  139. And the "price of a latte or two".... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ....means a lot if you only have the resources to choose either Netflix *or* a latte or two. But then again, we're become a nation where conspicous consumption is a cultural norm.

  140. You are not looking at the NetFlix I am looking at by Chibi+Merrow · · Score: 2

    They're getting all Star Trek series. They have almost all of Bablylon 5. They have every episode of every Stargate series. They have Lost. They have every episode of Futurama through Season 5. They have all but the current season of Doctor Who (2005 series).

    WTF NetFlix have you been looking at?

    --
    Maxim: People cannot follow directions.
    Increases in truth directly with the length of time spent explaining them
  141. I go to Blockbuster still by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

    I never rent from them. I hit the bargain bins for $20/4 DVDs and last time even $20/4 Blu-Ray. No, I don't see movies the instant they hit the retailers, but I've got a nice collection built up of DVDs that I *own* that I can watch at any time. That plus the DVR and I can pretty much see what I want. Yeah, I don't have the instantaneous on-demand selections, but for say 1/2 the access to movies I want to see (the other 1/2 I have to wait for), I'd say I'm getting a better deal.

    Plus, I've got a stack of DVDs and 15 movies DVR'd already. If I was really excited about seeing a movie, I probably would've seen it in the theater anyway.

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
  142. I don't even have an MBA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seems to me they could have tamped down a lot of the criticism by doing this in 2 steps - say, by raising it to $11.99 a few months ago, along with a letter explaining that postage/content costs have gone up X% in the past two years and as a result, the price for streaming + DVDs will be going up to $15.98 in September. Apologize for the added financial burden, remind them that the streaming-only price is not going up, and thank them for their continued business.

    Not that people would like it, but at least this way you're easing them into the higher price tier.

  143. Latte? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can't stand when companies compare their costs in terms of coffee...."to most people it's only a couple of latte's"......c'mon!!

  144. Not really a worse deal by s4ndm4n · · Score: 1

    For myself I'm not unhappy and I'm with the people that understand their move. The fact is, we've moved from watching dvds lately anyway and although we have cable movies, Netflix has just enough streaming movies and shows to fill that out. I think if you really look at this, it's a wise move as people either now or in the future will be one type of viewer or another. DVDs for some people are very important and for another, it's streaming. That's my $.02. Also we've been spoiled in having both services and truthfully with their offering streaming they've added a new cost to their infrastructure with offering constant streaming of movies on demand, which is a whole new tier IMO. I think they have the right to charge more and it remains a fact that they still have the best selection, and their streaming offerings are growing all the time so.. Ok $.03. ;) I do understand the initial feeling of price hikes of any kind given the way a lot of companies do this -- (cable companies, telephone...) but they do that without actually offering a heck of a lot more.

  145. He meant to say 'lotta' by NicknamesAreStupid · · Score: 1

    $6 is a lotta money, $72/year, or about the monthly cable bill for many folks (but not me; I went OTA). When you figure that Netflix must lose money to any $9.99/month customer who gets more than eight movies per month by mail (postage alone would be $7.04), then they had to do something, right? Perhaps, they should have raised DVD pricing and lowered streaming.

    It is amazing how much money we spend to idly pass the time.

  146. 'To most people, it's a latte or two' by hsjones · · Score: 1

    Steve Swasey is a disconnected bastard. "Most people" can't afford a fucking latte. And like lattes, Netflix is a luxury that "most people" can live a completely full and satisfying life without. So. The bottom line is this: A sudden 60% price hike is a bad idea for any product or service in any industry, especially when it's common knowledge that your company is profitable and profits are up under existing pricing.

  147. 2011 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    mfw some people still pay to see movies

  148. Workaround to Help Bring Increase Down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Didn't do the math for the multi disc subscribers, but for those with streaming plus 1 DVD at a time, your cost will be going up from $10 to $16. Here's a way to cut that back a bit.

    1. Change your current plan to streaming only for $8/mo
    2. Create a new second account with the often unmentioned 1 DVD at a time with a 2 disc/mo limit for $5/mo (may not work for everyone but most of us do mostly streaming these days, and have that one DVD collecting dust for months at a time).

    This will limit the cost increase to $3/mo instead of $6/mo. In my case, I have the Blu Ray option, so it would bring my new price to $14/mo instead of $18/mo, and I'm currently at $12. I'm still not happy about this whole thing, but if I can do this, and only increase my cost $2/mo, I'll settle for that.

  149. Re:You are not looking at the NetFlix I am looking by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 1

    They just lost Babylon 5 about the time they added Star Trek. They have been losing a lot of content lately. I canceled before this latest price hike because a series I was watching disappeared when I was mid season. No warning, nothing. I had to find a torrent to finish. The torrent had better quality.

  150. This guy should be fired by geekoid · · Score: 1

    Why did he just make the value of Netflix the same as 2 lattes?
    Does he know the compete against bit-torrent? (ethic and morals of that fact is a different discussion)
    It's the worst thing you can say. It makes people feel like they are being talked down to, and it creates an adversarial relationship.

    How about:
    "Do to contract negotiations with the studios, we will have to raise are prices. We know that is a difficult economic time for everyone, and we certainly don't want to raise are prices right now; however since the studios own the content we have no choice. "

    Now its Netflix and their customers in league against the evil studio.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  151. Intentional saturation by tepples · · Score: 1

    The worst part is that the big name ISPs are really only using a fraction of their available BW

    I wouldn't be so quick to agree. Comcast has been intentionally saturating its TATA upstream.

  152. Keeping both, despite the (more than $) pain by BenEnglishAtHome · · Score: 1

    My old plan was streaming plus one DVD. In my household, I have a disabled sister for whom streaming movies is a godsend, both via the Roku and over her iPad. However, we MUST keep the DVD option because we keep running into situations like happened a couple of weeks ago - I got her into Babylon 5 and we streamed the first 52 episodes. She was really looking forward to each new installment.

    Then, all of a sudden, the streaming option for B5 dropped. It became DVD-only content.

    This is not the first time this has happened. It's the reason I signed up for the supplemental DVDs in the first place.

    So I kinda feel like I'm being taken for a ride, here, but I'll hang on. Even at the new price, Netflix-streamed-to-iPad is such an incredibly wonderful thing for a bedridden person that I won't give it up, nor will I give up the ability to finish out a series when Netflix decides to pull the rug out from under us.

  153. Or not. by westlake · · Score: 1

    Oh grow up, it's just garbage entertainment.

    Nothing but throw-away, "garbage entertainment," is the excuse the geek reaches out for when he pirates another movie or an mp3.

    When looked at closely, it is the miror-image of the "just another latte" argument being by used by Netflix --- and the middle class isn't buying in to either one of them.

  154. Short NFLX @ $299, wish me luck! by krisamico · · Score: 1

    A company squeezed between pissed off customers, greedy content providers, jilted ISPs, and an insolvent postal service looking for things to cut. I was waiting for the cracks to start showing, and it happens at an all time high! What a great short -- wish me luck!

    On a more relevant note, what was so amazing about the price increase announcement was the sales pitch itself... Streaming for $8, DVDs for $8, and both for $16! What a deal! Only a Harvard MBA could think up such an insulting bargain.

    1. Re:Short NFLX @ $299, wish me luck! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, congrats!

      286.62
      Change: -12.11
      % Change: -4.05%
                                                       

    2. Re:Short NFLX @ $299, wish me luck! by krisamico · · Score: 1

      Hey, don't congratulate me yet! I got a ways to go before I cover and I could be blown out of the water any minute by a Ben Bernanke sound bite. Shorting the berserk ponzi casino always comes with plenty of risk! :)

  155. 2nd Price Increase in less than a year by guttentag · · Score: 1

    I signed up for Netflix less than a year ago. A month or so after I signed up, they raised the rates, and I justified paying more because I was using the streaming service like other people use cable. Now they've raised rates again and I never use streaming anymore because my ISP has data caps. If I blow through the data cap watching HD videos every day, I end up having to pay both of them more now. I'm just going to drop the streaming portion, and then when they raise the rates again in 6 months I'll drop Netflix all together and find something better to do with my time and money.

    I'm interested in seeing what happens as Netflix tries to convert it's userbase to streaming only, and ISPs (who are owned by the content owners) start imposing more restrictions on bandwidth. Eventually most of their userbase will leave and Netflix will die... Which is just what the cable companies an studios want.

    1. Re:2nd Price Increase in less than a year by chstwnd · · Score: 1

      I've been wondering about just that aspect of this whole thing. As Netflix tries to choke the DVD side of its business model to death (and, apparently, bidding good riddance to the loyal customers who allowed it to bloom into the business it is today), will ISPs choke Netflix to death with more stringent bandwidth caps or (more likely) port throttling?

  156. Plant a garden, go to jail by tepples · · Score: 1

    Go outside and plant some flowers.

    Go directly to jail.

    Do anything...anything!...where you're producing or growing rather than just consuming.

    Then what should one do to unwind after a day of producing?

    1. Re:Plant a garden, go to jail by Jim+Hall · · Score: 1

      >> Do anything...anything!...where you're producing or growing rather than just consuming.

      > Then what should one do to unwind after a day of producing?

      Speaking for myself, I'm not a big fan of the Big Blue Room with the Yellow Face (it burns us!) But we'll do walks, or whatever, and that's outside. When we don't want to do stuff outside, and don't want to watch a movie or television, there's also video games.

  157. Too old for Redbox by tepples · · Score: 1

    So what do you do when a friend recommends a movie that's too old for Redbox but not available for streaming on Netflix?

  158. Acceptible Loss by lionchild · · Score: 1

    I suspect that executives are banking on "some people" being upset being less than what the gain from having a 60% price hike. As long as they don't lose too many customers with the hike, they'll make more money.

    Of course my question is: Are they adding to the back end infrastructure with the increased cost, if they're not doing anything with the lack of added feature, or are they just hiking prices because they think they can?

    --
    Awk! Pieces of eight. Pieces of eight. Pieces of seven... ERROR: General Protection Fault. [Paroty Error.]
  159. Streaming is nice, but... by EvilStein · · Score: 1

    no new added value. Unless I like a bunch of anime bullshit and cartoons, and childrens programming like the Veggie Tales and stuff. Oh, and B-rated direct to video shit too.

    Who do I really blame for this? The greedy motherfuckers at the movie studios. They're the rat bastards we should be directing rage at. Netflix is simply a delivery mechanism.

  160. Re:You are not looking at the NetFlix I am looking by camperdave · · Score: 1

    Netflix Canada:

    'Babylon 5: The Lost Tales' is not available but you might enjoy these titles.
    'Babylon 5: Thirdspace' is not available but you might enjoy these titles.
    'Babylon 5: The Legend of the Rangers' is not available but you might enjoy these titles.
    'Babylon 5: In the Beginning' is not available but you might enjoy these titles.
    'Babylon 5: A Call to Arms' is not available but you might enjoy these titles.
    'Babylon 5: The Gathering' is not available but you might enjoy these titles.
    'Babylon 5: The River of Souls' is not available but you might enjoy these titles.
    'Babylon 5' is not available but you might enjoy these titles.

    The only Stargate they have is Stargate Infinity (an animated series based on the hit movie)

    As for Doctor Who, there's two and a half pages of available episodes, and ten and a half of ones they don't have (which includes the new series).

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  161. Annoyed by the egotistical arrogance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow, he's right. I certainly don't need that second latte, and you know, I don't think I really needed the first one either. Buh-bye, have fun at the bankruptcy... you dolt.

  162. Latte or two? by fishbowl · · Score: 1

    That would be fine, IF THEY GAVE YOU THE LATTE OR TWO. Instead they are charging for the lattes and not giving them to you, but saying that's okay because it's pretty much the same price.

    I cancelled my Netflix a long time ago. I started it up again at some point because I got a free month or something. It sure was hard getting them to cancel that free month (it took three paid months before I could stop it.)

    Some people are able to find value in paid-for entertainment media. Myself, not so much.

    --
    -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
  163. Re:You are not looking at the NetFlix I am looking by silly_sysiphus · · Score: 1

    Actually, as of 1 July, Babylon 5 is off again, unfortunately. Your basic point stands, though.

  164. I wonder ... by PPH · · Score: 1

    ... how often customers who are prompted to visit their account page decide that they really don't need the expensive option? Three DVDs plus unlimited streaming? Now that I'm asked to make a decision, do I really need three DVDs? Free streaming was a nice perk when I was somewhere with good broadband. But if I've got to pay for it, not only will I drop it, but maybe cut back to two DVDs.

    The marketing people who designed the bundles must be rolling over in their graves (the ones shareholders are digging for them as we speak).

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  165. Cancelled my account by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    April 2002-July 2011. Good luck Netflix.

  166. Respect your customer by adsl · · Score: 1

    Business 101 lesson is to treat your most valuable asset, your customer, with respect. Hiking rates 60% all of a suddden and then having you PR say: " 'We knew there would be some people who would be upset" is astoundingly disrespectful and followed up with with "we don't care if your upset" comment. Amazing. If Netfix wants to increase prices in this manner it's their perogative and they intrinsically accept the risk of losing some/many customers not because they can't afford you pricing, but rather because they dislike being treated as dispensible commodities instead of loyal customers. The point is they could have come out and communicated to customers that the existing rate was for a transitional period while the streaming offerings grew in range. Now that point has been reached they wish the separate products to stand alone in pricing so that Netflix is more properly remunerated in the future. You might still lose some customers, but this way you would not alienate many and suffer extremely negative PR. Whosoever signed off on Netflix's approach to this matter needs a long course in remedial learning on how to keep your customers happy and feeling respected and wanted while at the same time adjusting prices upwards. It's NOT that difficult.

  167. No lattes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't drink lattes. Heck, I'm so cheap, I don't even pay for cable television. I doubt I'm their only customer like this.

  168. Nexflix can say bye bye to some of my money. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Come September I am switching from my 2 DVD plan to streaming only. We stream more often then get DVDs. Often when we get DVDs it is a spur of the moment from Redbox.

  169. babuy netflix by gearloos · · Score: 1

    Well, the increase I saw changes my bill from 19 to over 27 a month. The Streaming movies are something I can else(any)where on the net as they suck for the most part anyway. Congrats Netflix, by first changing to not releasing DVD's for 28 days and now this, you have made the RIAA, MPAA, Sony etc... all very happy. I'm mad as hell and cancelling, but that doesn't really matter does it as long as the Movie Guys are happy.

    --
    "Computers are a lot like Air Conditioners" "They both work great until you start opening Windows"
  170. Birthday present for Redbox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For those that mostly stream, but occasionally order a DVD, Netflix just handed a potential lifesaver to Redbox. $2/month for the occasional Redbox video is a better deal than $8/month for the occasional Netflix video.

    Meanwhile, Netflix revenues will largely drop to $8/month/user. Is it just me, or did they just cut $2 off their price and hand it to Redbox?

    1. Re:Birthday present for Redbox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No one will ever read my comment, but I wholeheartedly agree. As an occasional DVD/BluRay rental, Redbox wins. Selection be damned. And with games being added, my gamefly sub is toast.

  171. NMAtv has their say by Animats · · Score: 1

    NMAtv, the animation house in Taiwan, has their say on the Netflix price increase.

    They're starting to overlap Slashdot coverage, and they're much better at it.

  172. Netflix apologist by manaway · · Score: 1

    You're aware the USPS shipping costs have increased about 25 percent in the time Netflix has been in business, aren't you? That makes a huge difference in profits, especially when you're trying to expand your market.

    Rent 4 discs from Netflix:
    1999: $15.95
    2011: $21.99 (no streaming)
    increase: 37%

    Netflix price increases are more than keeping up with shipping costs.

  173. the change is good for me by zeldor · · Score: 1

    Their changes means my plan drops by $1.01 a month. Im all for it.

    --
    If I could walk that way I wouldnt need cologne.
    1. Re:the change is good for me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even better for me as my payment, instead of going from $26 to $36 has dropped to $0!

  174. Arrogant Fucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'To most people, it's a latte or two,' he added."

    I am getting tired of these arrogant fucks running business and government in the country.

  175. I'd pay $30 for streaming by graveyhead · · Score: 1

    ... IF Netflix had at least same selection as the old video stores. Their current movie selection is terrible. Battle Los Angeles comes out on DVD, and so Battle of Los Angeles comes out on Netflix. This happens *often*, crappy rip-off D grade movies appear on streaming and the good stuff is available only on useless pieces of plastic.

    It makes zero sense to me that the industry is hanging on so tooth-and-nail (vending machines? seriously?!) to the model of renting out physical media. If the movie worth the extra quality of having a good copy (e.g. LoTR), I WILL buy a DVD from amazon.

    Renting plastic is an idea whose time has come and gone. The video stores all died but nothing has replaced them. No wonder piracy is reaching record levels...

    --
    std::disclaimer<std::legalese> sig=new std::disclaimer; sig->dump(); delete sig;
  176. Amusing and Disgusting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I find it both amusing and disgusting that most people are troubled by this nonsense.

    Paying for entertainment? What a joke. Why not invite friends around for an engaging conversation? Why not have unrestrained sex?

    But no. These pathetic commoners would rather plant themselves in front of a display screen to partake of someone else's fantasy.

    Ha, ho! WTF? Too lazy to even peep? Pony up the six bucks and go back to your feeble dreams.

  177. Latte? Back at ya! Go Greencine! by moorley · · Score: 1

    You know I was debating cancelling Netflix since between Hulu and Boxee I can find most of what I want to watch but as soon as I got the email I cancelled.

    After that stupid Latte' comment I'm never signing back up... Use Greencine, same pricing and a better choice of movies if you ask me. I can redbox whatever I want that netflix could provide. Greencine at least has some unique suggestions and offerings...

    I think this is the beginning of Netflix's end... I will hack their surplus roku's in the future with a smile...

    There was a time I used to have latte's in the morning but that's after two layoffs and being underwater in my mortgage.

    Here's to you netflix. Looking forward to looking back on your silly red envelopes with fondness...

    --
    "Don't fear death... fear not living..." -me :)
  178. They want you to drop DVD for streaming by localroger · · Score: 1

    However, I can't stream video; the only reliable ISP for me is Verizon 3G, which is capped at 5G/month and I get pretty close to that without watching any online video at all. So I took the opportunity to add two bucks to my bill and take two DVD's out at a time. It's actually a better deal. I'd rather wait for the mailman and watch a 480p DVD than crappy 360p at best and often 240p if I don't want it to stutter streaming video anyway. And I think as more ISP's start capping (though probably not at the miserly 5G offered by the wireless ISP's) Netflix will probably find its cool plan to get rid of the mail and physical disc expenses backfiring in a major way.

    --
    Brackets contain world's first nanosig, highly magnified:[.]
  179. It's not up to them by localroger · · Score: 1

    The reason movies go in and out of streaming availability is that the whole licensing practice is based on an obsolete series of tiers that went roughly theatre, cable, VHS, broadcast. A movie licensed in one stream can't be broadcast in another. Now once a videocassette, DVD, or blu-ray is pressed those disks exist and they can be rented regardless of future broadcast licensing deals. But streaming is a bastard child that is generally lumped in with cable. Thing is, when a movie drops out of cable into broadcast, it can't be put on cable any more -- and that might mean it can't be streamed any more either. This is also why some movies are available for streaming before they're on DVD. The whole arrangement is a mess and nobody seems to have any idea how to fix it, since there are thousands of contracts that would have to be rewritten for all the individual properties affected by a sea change in the system.

    --
    Brackets contain world's first nanosig, highly magnified:[.]
  180. Why so much love for physical media? by wilson_c · · Score: 1

    I'm surprised at all the incensed posters here. I've just done a sampling of about a dozen people around my office and with one exception they all fell into either "I just used the DVDs" or "I watch almost exclusively streaming" camps. I know that Netflix streaming is my primary TV viewing method (I hardly use cable/Tivo anymore at all for some reason) and all of the Netflix discs in my possession have sat untouched for 5+ months (One I've had for over a year). I know people want to have every option available, but they don't seem to actually use them all. Netflix is THE leader in DVD purchases. They drive that market the way Blockbuster used to. The only way they'll be able to pressure media companies into better streaming deals is to stop guaranteeing them huge DVD purchases. And the only way they can do that is to get people who don't care that much about DVDs to stop paying for DVD subscriptions. If you want to get to the future, sooner or later you've got to cut the cord to the past. So long DVDs, you won't be missed.

  181. Showing their true colors. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is no way to get around the fact that you are paying a lot more for nothing additional.
    I watch a lot of streaming but for most people there is no way the content on streaming is worthwhile by itself. Its too early for Netflix to do this and pretty curve to jack up prices so much all at once. In the middle of a recession no less.
    They want their customers on streaming see they penalize us for wanting DVD. Or what little Blu-Ray they offer.
    Netflix is trying to control their customers in a most Blockbusterish way and as a longtime Netflix customer its the first time I have thought of them that way.

  182. Re:You are not looking at the NetFlix I am looking by Chibi+Merrow · · Score: 1

    Dude, you live in Canada. You get the good beer and the bad NetFlix. That's the deal.

    --
    Maxim: People cannot follow directions.
    Increases in truth directly with the length of time spent explaining them
  183. Netflix greed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't get how Netflix is going to "get pounded" by the negotiations with the content providers next year. Netflix is the company with the 23 million subscribers. The content providers ought to be the ones who get pounded in the negotiations. If a provider doesn't want to tap in to the Netflix subscriber base for a fair price, then tell them to go f**k themselves. This is pure greed by Netflix, motivated by their belief that, right now, they have the market cornered; but competition is coming.

  184. blockbuster just announced.. by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

    quoting:

    Blockbuster Total Access- 1 DVD + unlimited in-store exchanges 30 day free trial, then $9.99
    www.blockbuster.com/helloblockbuster

    Blockbuster Rescues Furious Netflix Customers

    Netflix Customers Offered Blockbuster Total Access With New Everyday Pricing and Free 30-Day Trial With Proof of Netflix Account

    MCKINNEY, Texas, July 14, 2011 â" Blockbuster L.L.C. today began rescuing upset Netflix® customers by launching a limited time, nationwide promotion for all Netflix customers who switch to Blockbuster Total Accessâ.

    (trimmed)

    As part of Blockbusterâ(TM)s ongoing efforts to provide the ultimate in convenience, choice and value, Netflix customers who switch to one of Blockbusterâ(TM)s two most popular Total Access plans will receive a 30-day free trial.

    (more snippage)

    "We find it shocking that anyone would raise rates as high as 60 percent,â Kelly added. âoeIn contrast, Blockbuster has worked hard over the past few months to deliver value in entertainment to consumers in this economy and has even reduced in-store movie rentals to as low as 49 cents."

    This special offer for Netflix customers is available through Sept. 15, 2011, in participating stores and at Blockbuster's website.

    (end quote)

    I'm not sure I'm in love with BB but I do like how they're at least kicking netflix when they're down.

    --

    --
    "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
  185. even the netflix website's dvd comments are - by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

    (negative).

    I heard 'dexter' was a good show, so I wanted to see some reviews before adding to my (dvd) queue. the first few pages of user reviews were NOT about the show content but rather about the series going 'poof' and disappearing from instant-watching (er, I mean, streaming.)

    there are no dates on the reviews (netflix was 'wise' to strip dates from reviews, sigh) but all the comments refer to the new huge rate increase, so its clear these are from the last day or so.

    netflix meltdown begins.

    --

    --
    "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
  186. So, whiners... by Will_Malverson · · Score: 1

    ...would you be willing to keep your old price, in return for only being able to stream stuff that was available for streaming on January 1, 2011?

    They've been constantly adding new content (all of Star Trek!), and that ain't cheap. Netflix streaming has gone from being the last place to squeeze a few extra pennies out of old shows and movies to being the go-to place for anything but the latest entertainment.

  187. I don't drink Lattes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You insensitive clod!

  188. YOU LIE!!! by MisterSquid · · Score: 1

    Yes I know Zardoz is garbage but it's *my* kind of garbage.

    ZARDOZ IS NOT GARBAGE!!!!

    --
    blog
    1. Re:YOU LIE!!! by sneakyimp · · Score: 1

      Mod parent up!

  189. Torrents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's be honest. Anything, and I mean anything, that Netflix offers is available on torrent sites. Everyone browsing /. knows this.

    Does anyone really need to pay all that money for the recommendations? The reviews? How can you justify paying for any of it?

    If tomorrow everyone in America decided to download 1 movie, what would the studios do? What about the day after, and the day after that? The answer, is nothing. Nothing would happen. Just like nothing happens now. Sure they round up a couple hundred people a year and try to make examples of them. The odds of it being you are less likely than winning the lottery or getting struck by lightning.

    Just torrent already. What year is this that we need a corporation to deliver movies? Are we stuck in the late 80s?

  190. If only the streaming service had the full catalog by Targon · · Score: 1

    I would love to just go streaming and never bother with ordering on DVD, except the streaming catalog is so small compared to the DVD offering, no one in their right mind would do it. If you want to watch a TV series on streaming, one or two episodes per DVD are missing on the streaming offerings! I am serious, try to stream an entire season, and you miss an episode here and there, one episode or more per DVD. This forces those who go with Netflix to catch up on a TV show to go the DVD route.

    Netflix management must know the weaknesses in what is offered, and is just killing off the company rather than see it collapse by doing something so stupid, no sane person would even suggest it.

  191. Seems about right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was mad at the price hike too but 15 bucks still doesn't seem that bad. TimeWarner charges $20/mo for their DVR. No extra service, just a box to record shit. HBO and Showtime are both $15/mo.

  192. Back in my day.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why, when I was a kid, for $16 per month, you could only watch 1-2 movies at home per week. AND you had to pick them up and drop them off yourself. That's the way it was, and we liked it!

  193. Re:You are not looking at the NetFlix I am looking by Sprouticus · · Score: 1

    As of July 1 Babylon 5 was removed from streaming (I assume due to contractual issues).
    The startrek Series are there. After B5 went dark I started watching Voyager (I missed most of it due to being in college at the time).
    Looks to me like every trek series is available.
    SG-1 and all the movies are available.
    Dr Who is available.
    Buffy/Angel were available (last checked 9 or 10 months ago).

    Geek options ARE there.

    Where the seleciton has been BAD lately is movies...horrible.

  194. Capitalism? Meh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is just crazy! An American company comes out with a service that most people I know were surprised with how inexpensive it was. It was probably even a loss leader. For the stupid (or majority of people), this is when a company intentionally loses money to make more in the long term. In a capitalist economy, this is not illegal unless done via monopolistic practices. Netflix certainly did not do this - they were competing directly against Blockbuster, a company as stupid and non-forward thinking as the average person, a company that prior to Netflix had the lion's share of the market. With enough capital invested, Netflix could keep prices artificially low while they trounced Blockbuster with their new technology-based service.

    Now, here's the crazy part: THEY RAISED PRICES! They found the right time to cash in on the losses they've been accruing through a service most considered ridiculously cheap. The new price point: REASONABLE! Good lord, people, it's less than $20 to watch more crap than you've ever been able to watch before.

    And you know what, go ahead and cancel your services. They don't care. Sometimes a business NEEDS to fire their customers. You have annoying little customers that are paying you too little and demanding too much - DUMP 'EM! They can actually get some exercise walking in and out of McDonald's to get their RedBox titles from a much more limited selection, and the people that VALUE what Netflix is doing will continue to pay them a more than reasonable price.

    Lastly, to the Latte-haters: A latte is just as disposable as a movie or two. If you're saying that you're trying to scrape by with basic cable and can't afford a latte, so why should you have to pay Netflix more, then maybe you need to re-align your fiscal priorities. If this price increase is breaking you, then you already watch too many movies. Maybe cancelling Netflix is for the best. You can finally go outside and experience the real world AND save some dough!

  195. Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some might remember the close of the HD-DVD and Blue-Ray war. At the end of the War netflix jacked the price on Blueray discs by another 3 bones or so on the basic 7.99 plan. The price increase was clearly a consequence of the lack of format competition. Instead of somehow pushing back on this increase they passed it along hoping that the "added value" of HD would get the up sell.

    I didn't buy it - so I canceled. I'd suggest everyone that's even remotely pissed about this just take a netflix break and cancel or suspend their plan for two months.

  196. Price increase? I save $2/month now! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My wife and I have had Netflix for years and in that time have watched only a handful of movies on disc. 99% of our viewing is through streaming especially after it was offered through the XBOX and Wii so when we got the email saying that the streaming-only package was $7.99/month instead of $9.99 we just said "Whoo-hoo!" It's about time they decoupled the two services, we save $2 a month now!

  197. Kill your tv by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    or die in front of it.

  198. Netflix Increase by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People don't seem to understand how a business works. Netflix is expanding its service to South America. Since customers in those countries would not subscribe if they had to pay $9.99 US, netflix will have to charge less for their services. Just as CD's or DVD's in other countries are priced by what will sell, Netflix will charge only what they can get. As usual the US customer will pay a higher price to cover the difference.

  199. Netflixed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I get 250 stations + local + HBO + Showtime + +
    I only occasionally stream a movie from Netflix & often forget about the mailed movie sometimes for months before returning it.
    To suddenly increase the price 60% is ridiculous.
    As soon as I got their E-Mail, I cancelled the service.
    It's certainly not worth it, especially since my broadband company now have a cap on bandwidth use.

  200. Less customers is a Win-Win for with new pricing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even if the 65K comments on Netflix's Facebook announcement represented 1:1 of people dropping the service, it is a mere drop in the bucket of 23 million subscribers that will now be paying about $70 more per year each. Also the decreased demand will put less strain on Netflix. If I did my math correctly, Netflix would have to loose more than 1/3 of their customers before they would even consider this a bad move.

  201. Bunch of whiners, Netflix is spot on. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Know what I did? Cancelled my DVD's because I only ever use streaming anyway. Netflix saved me two bucks. Netflix had to increase to stay in business because HOllywood and Big Content are charging them more, not because they're fleecing you. Good luck getting you douches to listen though.

  202. When I can chill in my lair by Roachie · · Score: 1

    and watch movies and documentaries all day for what amounts to chump change I think to myself, "how do they make money". I never use the DVD option so I'll probably cut that out.

    But really it sucks to wait a day or two for a disk thats probably scratched any way. Screw it, physical media is so last decade.

    Netflix is still a good deal -it just sucks when you put the increase in percentage terms.

    --
    This sig is not paradoxical or ironic.
  203. No one put a gun to your head by Ranger · · Score: 1

    to buy Netflix. I'm not happy about it either. My Netflix viewing habits have changed where I mostly watch streaming. When the raised prices back in December 2010 I dropped from the 3 DVDs at a time to 2. So my price point stayed the same. I'll drop to 1 DVD now because there are still things that aren't streaming.

    --
    "You'll get nothing, and you'll like it!"
  204. Re:It's not the dollar amount, it's the percentage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And in the case of text messages, where you likely send more than one a month, that should hopefully cause the proper rage of "I CAN'T HAVE ANY MORE EXTRA CHEESE EVER?!?!!?" ... and then they realize "Wait... at this rate I can't even get the fucking burger."

  205. Well, they can take their toys and go home by Whuffo · · Score: 1

    I was a loyal Netflix subscriber for years. They offered good value and even though they were secretly throttling shipments it didn't affect me.

    I purchased a Blu-Ray player and enjoyed seeing movies in (sorta) high-definition. Most of the Blu-Ray selections were no more hi-def than the DVD version was.

    When they decided to charge an extra fee for Blu-Ray, it changed the relationship. Now they want to charge extra but provide nothing more. Sure, it's not their fault that the studios release DVDs on Blu-Ray disk without remastering.

    Now, they want to essentially raise their rates 400% and provide nothing more. That's just plain greedy and after their previous actions, I've decided that they're not worth wasting my time on. Account cancelled, I'll get my entertainment elsewhere..

    Of course, enough sheeple will just pay the additional cost and the beancounters at netflix will say "see, it increased our revenue". So they'll be back again in a while to get even more.

  206. Math fail by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    Why are we complaining about such a small price increase?

    If you think a 78% price increase is small, you better not be doing your own taxes. On second thought; please do.

    1. Re:Math fail by tbannist · · Score: 1

      If doing his own taxes increases his tax burden increases from $10 to $16 then I think he'll be ok.

      He's right, the rage over the price increase is overblown. If the service isn't worth it, cancel it. If it is worth it, pay it.

      --
      Fanatically anti-fanatical
  207. Have fun with Redbox / On-demand etc? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you want the DVD's and streaming, why should you pay less of a price?? I only want to stream and I DON'T want my prices to go up. If you think about it logically, it's only fair to the consumers who only use 1 side or the other. (Streaming vs Renting). Otherwise, get out of your house and stand in line for Redbox / etc =] Yea their profits are soaring it's because they are revolutionizing the industry and providing stable streaming at a low enough price for consumers to jump on it.. The bottom line is the only way companies can make any money (which is their only motivation for continuing their business obviously). If you don't like it,

    1) It's really the same as always
    2) Yes the new design sucks.. Whatever it doesn't change the content or performance of streaming
    3) Get a new girlfriend with better taste? =]
    4) I've NEVER had a streaming movie drop out (besides leeching / torrents on another pc) on my 6meg DSL. Change providers to a small outfit if you can, otherwise, that's what you get for dealing with AT&T, Comcast, etc... they suck and this is known..
    5) Who really rents DVD's anymore?? I used to when I beta'd netflix back in '98 or 99.. anymore I don't really care about it..
    6) It's the same price for me since I don't care about getting physical / scratched DVD's anyway.
    7) Netflix streaming / torrents are the only thing I watch, I haven't had cable in 6 years! (Haven't watched a commercial in 6 years)

  208. Price IS the issue by mtbgtr · · Score: 1

    Now that the service costs twice as much I have canceled and will spend less for a Fileserve account and back to Torrents on public wifi. I was willing to buy into the system at a low price, but now the MPAA/RIAA/XXAA has screwed up again by trying to screw the consumer, again.

  209. Going, Going ... by DrChandra · · Score: 1

    'To most people, it's a latte or two,'

    I don't drink latte, and that's two per month, not just once. This could have been done gradually. Sixty percent is too much on one step.

    I cut back from three disks to one to make up for the last price hike. Now they leave me no alternative but to cut off streaming or DVDs. I think I'll just cancel the whole thing, since I've found that I have a hard time being interested in their content, lately."New Releases" is full of yawn most of the time.

    --
    Words, words, words ... Buz, buz! - Hamlet, Act II, Scene II
  210. what do you expect.... by hesaigo999ca · · Score: 1

    they have for the longest time never been up to date in choices because of the pricing they offered, now they seem to be getting more selections, and needing som e more money to get their library current, and no one seems to understand....if this is to replace movie going and rentals, they need to actually pay more to get more selection, a catch 22 if you will....but all in all i prefer torrent movies!

  211. I just want a bundle discount by Ethanol · · Score: 1

    I totally recognize that this is a stupid reaction, but if service #1 costs X dollars and service #2 costs Y dollars, I want a little lagniappe if I purchase both--the bundle of services #1 and #2 should cost an amount less than X+Y.

    If they'd announced that streaming was $9 and DVD's were $9 and the combination would be discounted to only $16, I would have been sad about the price increase but a lot less irked, even though it still would've been $16. At least it isn't $18, I'd think, and I'd pay up. But they made each service $8, and didn't discount the bundle at all, and so it grates on me.

    Marketing fail on their part. Rationality fail on mine.

  212. Not necessarily them by tepples · · Score: 1

    It's not that she necessarily wants Hardball with Chris Matthews, The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell, and The Rachel Maddow Show in particular. She just wants progressively slanted discussion of recent events in U.S. federal politics.

  213. Thank you, Netflix! by NikeHerc · · Score: 1

    The wife has been after me to sign up for Netflix. Thank you, Netflix, for giving me an excellent reason to avoid your services!

    --
    Circle the wagons and fire inward. Entropy increases without bounds.
  214. Not just the latte arrogance! by doodaddy · · Score: 1

    "Let them drink Latte... My god! The stunning arrogance of the McMansion aristocracy."

    Exactly what I picked up on. Also notice the wording of the email one receives about the cost increase:

    We are separating unlimited DVDs by mail and unlimited streaming into two separate plans to better reflect the costs of each. Now our members have a choice: a streaming only plan, a DVD only plan, or both.

    I detected a little bit of "consumers are sheep" in there. I have a choice? This is good marketing copywrite? It gets my ire up when it needn't. Of course I have less choices now, because the one I had, I liked... and it is gone.

    The email goes on to tell me everything except how my current bill is broken down. So I can't easily compare the new "option."

    I used to get a bundle and now I don't have a choice. Streaming doesn't have the same options as DVD so both were part of their two-pronged strategy. I use to pay less and now I can't. I have to have both to get the same service.

    Look, well played Netflix. You can increase the price. You are the best game in town. We are only talking low $20 for meeting almost all of my movie and tv interest. That's way lower than Comcast. And you know I don't have a very good option and you know you have limited my options so that I must buy two things now. Again, well played. Perfect chess. ... But to phrase it like I'm a child who will find it in my best interest has pissed me off enough that I'm willing to look for lesser services and work harder to work around Netflix. Do they not realize why America gave a big "f* you" to Blockbuster and seated Netflix as the new king? Well I'll tell them here. It isn't just because Blockbuster drained every nick and dime they could in nefarious ways. It's because they gloated about it and told us to drink less lattes. There's no reason Blockbusters shipping and new plans shouldn't have killed Netflix. Well, except that consumers aren't actually children after all.

    I'll probably keep Netflix for the convenience of the service and the price, but now, unnecessarily, they are on watch with me! And this latte crap didn't help at all. As soon as I see any reasonable option, I'll be more than happy to read up and take a chance.

    Why didn't they whine about their