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."

Comments

No rage, just a lost customer.

[Kenja]

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.

Re:No rage, just a lost customer.

[sneakyimp]

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.

Re:No rage, just a lost customer.

[TopSpin]

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.

Re:No rage, just a lost customer.

[shermo]

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.

Re:The update does not make sense

[Idbar]

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.

Re:Anti-competitive behavior

[xtracto]

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.

Re:The Thank You Economy... NOT!

[tverbeek]

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.