Slashdot Mirror


Netflix Creates Qwikster For DVD Only Business

Frankie70 writes "Netflix CEO Reed Hastings just dropped a bombshell. In the wake of a rapid decline in Netflix's stock price last week, Hastings is taking a bold step by separating the DVD and video streaming services. The DVD-by-mail service will now be called Qwikster, and the streaming service will maintain the Netflix brand."

481 comments

  1. What an unfortunate name... by garcia · · Score: 2

    All I can keep thinking when I see that name is 'Quixtar'.

    1. Re:What an unfortunate name... by nine-times · · Score: 1

      This new business venture seems a little Quixotic.

    2. Re:What an unfortunate name... by Manuka · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Glad I'm not the only one that thought that.

      Naming your company something that sounds like a failed Amway rebranding: FAIL #1.
      Not checking to see who was using that brand name as a twitter ID: FAIL #2.

      I'm guessing that the CFO recommended spinning off the DVD business ASAP before it bled the entire company dry. I give it 9-12 months.

    3. Re:What an unfortunate name... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, not too sure I like the name myself either.

      Why not something similar to Netflix to make it easier to find?
      Qwikflix sounds much better.

    4. Re:What an unfortunate name... by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 1

      They could chose the name Q*bert and have customers choose discs on a pyramid of cubes. It would make as much sense.

    5. Re:What an unfortunate name... by yotto · · Score: 1

      @Qwikster on Twitter is not being actively used. Fro all I know, Reed Hastings owns it.

    6. Re:What an unfortunate name... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      same here like getting sold a pyramid

    7. Re:What an unfortunate name... by jitterman · · Score: 1

      Wish you hadn't posted AC - you deserve to be modded up. That's actually quite a nice name (may have be obvious to others, but it wasn't to me) - I also had a *groan* reaction when I read the new one. Perhaps you should suggest that to them (too late, I know, but still...)

      --
      For conscience is the wound, and there's naught to staunch it
    8. Re:What an unfortunate name... by SeNtM · · Score: 2

      How about NetFuqups? NeutFlaps?

      --
      "There ought to be limits to freedom." -George W. Bush
    9. Re:What an unfortunate name... by darkmeridian · · Score: 1

      The CEO is completely out of it. On the official Netflix Facebook thread on this announcement, Reed seems shocked to realize that users will now have to search two websites for the same movie. They first have to check Netflix to see if it's available on streaming, and if it's not, then go on over the Qwikster to get it on DVD. And there are no contingencies for this. How the hell do you not realize that before you go through with the plan? Did this guy find his MBA in a Crackerjack box?

      --
      A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
    10. Re:What an unfortunate name... by One+Monkey · · Score: 2

      I'd be more apt to trust someone who randomly found an MBA in a snack box than someone who actually paid to do one...

      --
      www.nodicerpg.com - Some RP stuff for free, some not so for free, but still cheap.
    11. Re:What an unfortunate name... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Qwikflix may be trademarked by someone else already.

      I think they should have called it "Rent DVDs Online and Receive Them By Mail."

    12. Re:What an unfortunate name... by nanoflower · · Score: 1

      Looks like there is a company called QuickFlix in Australia that already has the qwickflix domain name. My guess is that is why Netflix didn't go with the more obvious name.

    13. Re:What an unfortunate name... by Thorodin · · Score: 1

      It's also backwards. Qwikflix should be the name of the streaming service (as in "quick"). Of course, from a PR standpiont it makes sense. They want to people to use streaming instead of DVD's. In my case, until a lot of the old movies are streamed, I'm sticking with DVD (well, both, actually).

    14. Re:What an unfortunate name... by tripleevenfall · · Score: 1

      Using two different websites and service names is a horrible idea.

      Plus, you lose the ability for people to see that something they actually want to watch is available for streaming, and they then decide that maybe the streaming catalog is getting better or is actually worth the money, so they sign up.

      This decision is even more incomprehensible than a huge price increase. A price increase because bandwidth and content costs rise, people ultimately understand. This fragmentation and confusion is horrendous.

    15. Re:What an unfortunate name... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dear Edward,

      I messed up. I owe you an explanation.

      It is clear from the feedback over the past two months that many members felt we lacked respect and humility in the way we announced the separation of DVD and streaming and the price changes. That was certainly not our intent, and I offer my sincere apology. Let me explain what we are doing.

      For the past five years, my greatest fear at Netflix has been that we wouldn't make the leap from success in DVDs to success in streaming. Most companies that are great at something – like AOL dialup or Borders bookstores – do not become great at new things people want (streaming for us). So we moved quickly into streaming, but I should have personally given you a full explanation of why we are splitting the services and thereby increasing prices. It wouldn’t have changed the price increase, but it would have been the right thing to do.

      So here is what we are doing and why.

      Many members love our DVD service, as I do, because nearly every movie ever made is published on DVD. DVD is a great option for those who want the huge and comprehensive selection of movies.

      I also love our streaming service because it is integrated into my TV, and I can watch anytime I want. The benefits of our streaming service are really quite different from the benefits of DVD by mail. We need to focus on rapid improvement as streaming technology and the market evolves, without maintaining compatibility with our DVD by mail service.

      So we realized that streaming and DVD by mail are really becoming two different businesses, with very different cost structures, that need to be marketed differently, and we need to let each grow and operate independently.

      It’s hard to write this after over 10 years of mailing DVDs with pride, but we think it is necessary: In a few weeks, we will rename our DVD by mail service to “Qwikster”. We chose the name Qwikster because it refers to quick delivery. We will keep the name “Netflix” for streaming.

      Qwikster will be the same website and DVD service that everyone is used to. It is just a new name, and DVD members will go to qwikster.com to access their DVD queues and choose movies. One improvement we will make at launch is to add a video games upgrade option, similar to our upgrade option for Blu-ray, for those who want to rent Wii, PS3 and Xbox 360 games. Members have been asking for video games for many years, but now that DVD by mail has its own team, we are finally getting it done. Other improvements will follow. A negative of the renaming and separation is that the Qwikster.com and Netflix.com websites will not be integrated.

      There are no pricing changes (we’re done with that!). If you subscribe to both services you will have two entries on your credit card statement, one for Qwikster and one for Netflix. The total will be the same as your current charges. We will let you know in a few weeks when the Qwikster.com website is up and ready.

      For me the Netflix red envelope has always been a source of joy. The new envelope is still that lovely red, but now it will have a Qwikster logo. I know that logo will grow on me over time, but still, it is hard. I imagine it will be similar for many of you.

      I want to acknowledge and thank you for sticking with us, and to apologize again to those members, both current and former, who felt we treated them thoughtlessly.

      Both the Qwikster and Netflix teams will work hard to regain your trust. We know it will not be overnight. Actions speak louder than words. But words help people to understand actions.

      Respectfully yours,

      -Reed Hastings, Co-Founder and CEO, Netflix

      p.s. I have a slightly longer explanation along with a video posted on our blog, where you can also post comments.

    16. Re:What an unfortunate name... by fuzznutz · · Score: 1

      I'm trademarking Postflix

    17. Re:What an unfortunate name... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's unfortunate about it is that it doesn't have an unambiguous spelling. In general, it's good to avoid names where people have to remember not only the name but also the spelling. This is especially true when the spelling you use is not the one that most would guess first. Qwikster fails this test in all regards. When you say it, the natural tendency would be to spell it 'Quickster' rather than the spelling they chose. Failing that, you'd also try 'Quikster' and 'Qwickster' before you'd try the spelling they chose.

      Good naming is hard, especially when you need to be able to acquire the .com domain for it, but this kind of naming issue is something that Netflix should have known to avoid...if only because they likely ran into issues originally when they were less known and people thought that their name was spelled 'Netflicks'.

    18. Re:What an unfortunate name... by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      Why not something similar to Netflix to make it easier to find?

      Ya, like "Mailflix". Okay, perhaps not, unless they're going to specialize in ... well, you figure it out. :-)

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    19. Re:What an unfortunate name... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For those that don't know, Quixtar is the name of Amway's online presence.

    20. Re:What an unfortunate name... by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

      That would actually be a better name.

    21. Re:What an unfortunate name... by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

      Or "We're The One With The Complete Content Selection".

      Honestly, this head long drive to streaming only makes no sense when so little content can be streamed.

      Only 5% of my queue is streamable, Reed!

    22. Re:What an unfortunate name... by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

      DVD is a great option for those who want the huge and comprehensive selection of movies.

      Under what conditions would I *not* want that?

      I dig streaming to my iPad, but it's not even a major reason I bought the device, and I've gotten more than my money's worth from the Roku box. I watch so few TV shows and movies these days that it might be cost effective for me to just buy the discs and eBay them when done.

    23. Re:What an unfortunate name... by JamesP · · Score: 1

      What about TheCompanyPrevioslyKnownasNetflixButIsntAnymoreBecauseMPAASucksDonkeyBalls?

      --
      how long until /. fixes commenting on Chrome?
    24. Re:What an unfortunate name... by SeNtM · · Score: 1

      How about we just shorten it to MPAASucksDonkeyBalls.com?

      --
      "There ought to be limits to freedom." -George W. Bush
    25. Re:What an unfortunate name... by robotchampion · · Score: 1

      or a candy bar with nougat

    26. Re:What an unfortunate name... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh come on, @qwikster has some excellent tweets. Gems such as "I hate when bitch fucken rap but they don't got the balls to swing first just waiting till he do something but he don't want it" and "Don't bother telling me who my ex is now dating ! Cuzz now I feel bad for the bitch that has my sloppy seconds :)"

    27. Re:What an unfortunate name... by jakartus · · Score: 1

      How about NotJustStraightToVideoFlix or WouldActuallyPay10DollarsToSeeInTheaterFlix or HasActorsIHaveHeardOfFlix. Bet those domain names are open too!

    28. Re:What an unfortunate name... by AlienIntelligence · · Score: 1

      Why not something similar to Netflix to make it easier to find?
      Qwikflix sounds much better.

      IANAIPL but they may have avoided having a similar
      sounding name to protect their Netflix name from any
      dilution in the event (coff) they sell Prixter I mean
      KneeJerk, I mean... what's the name again?

      -AI

      --
      For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion
    29. Re:What an unfortunate name... by AlienIntelligence · · Score: 1

      Then go on over the Qwikster to get it on DVD. And there are no contingencies for this. How the hell do you not realize that before you go through with the plan? Did this guy find his MBA in a Crackerjack box?

      I didn't smell any trollishness here so... I'm gonna go out
      on a limb and say, you do realize a sale is forthcoming?

      -AI

      --
      For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion
    30. Re:What an unfortunate name... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That never stops Apple. Pick the name you want to use, then slug it out in court if/when necessary.

    31. Re:What an unfortunate name... by Man+On+Pink+Corner · · Score: 1

      He's using tricks he picked up on the Microsoft board. Wait'll he brings in Steve Ballmer to save the business...

    32. Re:What an unfortunate name... by Fnord666 · · Score: 1

      Honestly, this head long drive to streaming only makes no sense when so little content can be streamed.

      In addition to the small amount of content that they have for streaming, there is the issue of net neutrality. Until a workable net neutrality law can be passed, I think business models based on high volume streaming are counting their chickens before they are hatched. Between being beholden to the studios for creation of content, they will be at the mercy of the ISPs for the delivery of that content to the consumer. The fact is that a lot of people only one or two choices for ISPs. Choosing a different provider isn't an option when there's only one ISP in town.

      --
      'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
    33. Re:What an unfortunate name... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah but most people don't really know what Amway even is anymore. It's not even in the spell check for Firefox or Safari to begin with.

  2. Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're going to cheapen youself with a 'ster' name? Really?

    1. Re:Really? by Kjella · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You're going to cheapen youself with a 'ster' name? Really?

      And the misspelling of Quick as Qwik... this has all the telltale signs of a 50yo CEO listening to 30yo consultants about what a 15-20yo would find "hip" and "cool". The cringe factor of doing it at least ten years too late is overwhelming.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    2. Re:Really? by Sancho · · Score: 1

      And the misspelling of Quick as Qwik... this has all the telltale signs of a 50yo CEO listening to 30yo consultants about what a 15-20yo would find "hip" and "cool".

      I gree that it smacks of that, however I don't think the DVD-by-mail business generally targets 15-20 year olds. They target 30+-something codgers who still primarily uses DVD/Bluray as their media of choice.

    3. Re:Really? by frosty_tsm · · Score: 1

      And the misspelling of Quick as Qwik... this has all the telltale signs of a 50yo CEO listening to 30yo consultants about what a 15-20yo would find "hip" and "cool".

      I gree that it smacks of that, however I don't think the DVD-by-mail business generally targets 15-20 year olds. They target 30+-something codgers who still primarily uses DVD/Bluray as their media of choice.

      I love it! DVD and Blue-ray is now grouped with "early bird specials" and "rotary phones."

    4. Re:Really? by Insightfill · · Score: 1

      And the misspelling of Quick as Qwik...

      I'm sensing a great typo-squatting opportunity...

    5. Re:Really? by tripleevenfall · · Score: 1

      Maybe they are planning some Friendster integration?

    6. Re:Really? by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

      I know. It's complete shitheadedness. I'm a codger now because I'd choose the service with 100% content coverage as opposed to 5%. Forget that fact that I currently stream to my Roku, XBox and iPad. Or I feel pay per view streaming is a rip off. No, we have to go to the old ageist stereotypes.

      I think some people would be first in line for the service that beams content right to your brain even if all it had was Lifetime movie rejects and infomercials. And they'd feel all hip and cool as they sorted their ShamWows.

      Fuck, we sure do advance and learn as a society, don't we? :-\

  3. BIG Mistake by phorest · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Nothing like killing off your brand in a hasty fashion. Although I'll be curious to see how they do this I doubt I'll be sticking around much longer.

    --
    God: When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.
    1. Re:BIG Mistake by ByOhTek · · Score: 1

      Actually, I wonder if the reason is that half of it is losing money at a horrible pace, and by splitting the two, they can hopefully allow half the ship to keep sailing.

      --
      Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
    2. Re:BIG Mistake by gatkinso · · Score: 2

      Well, if you think about it "Netflix" is more apropos for a streaming service as opposed to a mail order business that happens to be conducted over the web.

      "Diskflix" would have been much better tho. Quikster?

      --
      I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
    3. Re:BIG Mistake by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      Right and the "flix", in something like DiskFlix, would have some brand recognition, which leads me to think that the experience with the service and or expected outcome for the business is not something they *want* associated with their brand.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    4. Re:BIG Mistake by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Which half? Streaming, to me, looks like the sinking ship. Once the content producers realize how successful Netflix has been, they'll all be demanding higher rates. Then, Netflix is going to cost as much as cable, often delivered over cable Internet to make it even sillier.

    5. Re:BIG Mistake by iteyoidar · · Score: 1

      That's probably what they want, trying to get people to move away from mail to the streaming service. It's a choice between paying for something that sounds all futuristic and internety or something that sounds like a bargain-basement DVD service from Walmart. "BitTorrent" sounds way more futuristic to me though.

    6. Re:BIG Mistake by truthsearch · · Score: 1

      I think it's the opposite. Netflix is clearly putting everything down on streaming since that's what kept the household name. By showing content owners that the streaming subscriber base is much smaller than the DVD base, they'll be able to negotiate better deals for streaming content. Theoretically each service will have costs and prices that better reflect whose using them.

    7. Re:BIG Mistake by truthsearch · · Score: 1

      The newly named service includes video games, so "flix" would be a bad choice.

    8. Re:BIG Mistake by JeffSh · · Score: 1

      Why would they have to split into 2 different brands to show content providers that statistic? Doesn't make sense to me.

    9. Re:BIG Mistake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What about 'DiscShitter' then? That would open them up to everything disc-based.

    10. Re:BIG Mistake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, it is nearly impossible for this to be true. The streaming catalog is a giant pile of poo. I can only watch so many bad zombie movies and "[HIT MOVIE] #3 (direct to dvd with none of the original cast)!" Before I feel the itch to fire up the ole' dvd queue and put in something relevant to my interests.

    11. Re:BIG Mistake by omnichad · · Score: 1

      I'll freely admit that streaming is the future. It's not the present, though. Big business moving and changing faster than the market is rare, but it's just as bad as moving too slowly. They're getting way ahead of themselves, and they're going to take as much as they can from your wallet while they prove themselves wrong.

    12. Re:BIG Mistake by AngryDeuce · · Score: 1

      "Diskflix" would have been much better tho.

      Looks great on paper, but I assure you, in speaking that would end up "Dickflix" or even "Dickpics" in no time.

    13. Re:BIG Mistake by residieu · · Score: 1

      The name change is annoying, I can't see any benefit to "Qwikster" (Ok, whatever it does, it's fast. That or it makes me chocolate milk...)

      I just really see a loss of utility if they're splitting the websites. If I search for a movie, I want to see if it's available on DVD or streaming or both. If something's been sitting low and my queue, I want to be able to see quickly that it's become available on instant. I don't see what benefit to me there is to having to do all this from two different websites.

    14. Re:BIG Mistake by truthsearch · · Score: 2

      The split and renaming is clearly for the potential sell-off. I think they're getting ahead of themselves, but splitting the brands now also means completely separate negotiations and contracts with content owners.

    15. Re:BIG Mistake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Netflix may be trying to avoid having its streaming agreements from being tied to it's DVD side. So by having two separate companies they can negotiate streaming rights without having to agree to harsh terms on their DVD side (30 day waiting period after a DVD goes on sale, higher prices, stripped down DVDs).

      Likewise on their now separate streaming side they can focus on getting complete shows without agreeing to withhold certain episodes in an effort to force them to buy DVD versions of that show since they could now correctly claim during bargaining that they do not handle DVDs.

      Then again, they may be losing cash on the DVD side and are preparing to let it flounder on its own instead of having it suck up the profits off of the streaming business.

    16. Re:BIG Mistake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and by splitting the two, they can hopefully allow half the ship to keep sailing.

      Worked great for the Titanic didn't it?

    17. Re:BIG Mistake by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You are falling for the fallacy that the CEO has a clue while in fact he is a complete moron.

      A major rate hike is only done by a complete and utter moron. You do smaller less noticeable hikes over time where people do not notice it. They would not have lost HALF the people that left if Netflix's leadership had any clue at all on how to run a business.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    18. Re:BIG Mistake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right...but where do you order the DVD's??? the Net...

    19. Re:BIG Mistake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every business with a website must have 'net' in its name?

    20. Re:BIG Mistake by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      I will be cancelling my sub just as soon as my queue is empty.
      Burning through it as fast as I can, only ~150 more disks to go.
      -nB

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    21. Re:BIG Mistake by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      "DiscShatter" is better. Describes exactly what happens with half of the DVDs they send.

    22. Re:BIG Mistake by truthsearch · · Score: 2

      They estimate they are losing 4% of their subscriptions. They are easily making that money up from the price increases.

      I'm not saying it was a smart move, but it's going to make the company a lot more money.

    23. Re:BIG Mistake by Glendale2x · · Score: 1

      That's probably an issue with your local USPS route. I've had Netflix for a decade now and have yet to receive a broken disc.

      --
      this is my sig
    24. Re:BIG Mistake by OakDragon · · Score: 1

      This seems like flailing & thrashing to me...

    25. Re:BIG Mistake by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1

      You are falling for the fallacy that the CEO has a clue while in fact he is a complete moron.

      A major rate hike is only done by a complete and utter moron. You do smaller less noticeable hikes over time where people do not notice it. They would not have lost HALF the people that left if Netflix's leadership had any clue at all on how to run a business.

      So how's your your multi-billion dollar business doing these days?

    26. Re:BIG Mistake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Keep on believing the emperor has clothes.

    27. Re:BIG Mistake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SnailFlix is more like it.

    28. Re:BIG Mistake by Amouth · · Score: 2

      you mean like the cable company? that everyone hates? and only uses because it is the only option in their area?

      Netflix is what i switched to to get rid of cable, and it has worked fine.

      I can see their need to separate the two sides - and even at the current price it is worth it to us.

      if they start pulling the crap the cable companies do (say 50 cents a month per "authorized device" or the 10$ the cable charges) i will be walking away and just killing it completely.

      so far Netflix has done a good job give then world we are in - i have yet to see them actively try to screw their customer base over.

      --
      '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
    29. Re:BIG Mistake by pseudofengshui · · Score: 1

      What is this, the 1980s? Obviously it should be "Discflix"

      --
      [Text goes here]
    30. Re:BIG Mistake by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Actually quite well.

      Out of the 10 competitors that were in the market as on 2006 I am down to 2 competitors and one of them is drowning in debt and is asking for NET120 from it's suppliers.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    31. Re:BIG Mistake by gumbi+west · · Score: 1

      If they separate into two sets of books, they can share the books with the content owners so they can see how bad the economics are for streaming.

    32. Re:BIG Mistake by gumbi+west · · Score: 1

      I was thinking it was a way to pry one free from the CEO's hands.

    33. Re:BIG Mistake by Toonol · · Score: 1

      Another annoying thing the CEO did... from the story at CNN:

      Netflix customers were incensed in July when the company announced that it would stop bundling the streaming service for free with DVD-by-mail plans, effectively increasing the price for some by as much as 60%. Hastings finally offered an apology, not for the price hike but for failing to clearly communicate why the change was being made.

      "It is clear from the feedback over the past two months that many members felt we lacked respect and humility in the way we announced the separation of DVD and streaming, and the price changes," Hastings wrote. "I messed up. I owe everyone an explanation."


      I'm sick of apologies that amount to 'I'm not sorry I did it, I'm going to keep on doing it, but I'm sorry I failed to communicated clearly enough to persuade you that I'm right.". It's a tired, cowardly talking point for CEOs and politicians.

    34. Re:BIG Mistake by DrYokomohoyo · · Score: 1

      They have been wanting to kill off dvd by mail. Qwikster is a tourniquet and the next quarter they will just cut the arm off. I don't think I'll be sticking around once this change goes in.

      --
      Insert clever sig (here)
    35. Re:BIG Mistake by tripleevenfall · · Score: 1

      Long term, streaming is not going to be a good deal for consumers. Most consumers are going to end up paying extra for an uncapped home data plan, paying the same for a home data plan that is both capped and throttled, or paying more overall for TV, Cable, Cable Internet, and Netflix streaming.

      The value proposition would be long-term negative for the average consumer, even if the content libraries were the same.

    36. Re:BIG Mistake by tripleevenfall · · Score: 1

      Definitely true. They should have raised rates by $1 a year across the board every year for 3 years or 5 years or whatever.

      This company seems to be run by people who had a good idea once, and haven't had one since.

    37. Re:BIG Mistake by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 1

      What about losing potential customers? In dont think they have grown enough that, they are content with current subscribers.
       
      The DVD+streaming was a good deal to me, but now, it doesnt sound as good.

    38. Re:BIG Mistake by Fned · · Score: 1

      Doesn't sound as good compared to what? Where else will these "potential customers" be going to get a simliar service?

    39. Re:BIG Mistake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Male ..er I mean MAILflix.

    40. Re:BIG Mistake by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 1

      The free underground!

    41. Re:BIG Mistake by PRMan · · Score: 1

      No, they're not. Because the stock took a massive plunge thanks to the negative publicity which cost them more than the subscriber numbers.

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    42. Re:BIG Mistake by ShakaUVM · · Score: 1

      >>You are falling for the fallacy that the CEO has a clue while in fact he is a complete moron.

      Very true.

      I laughed this morning what I got an email from the Netflix CEO saying that he'd screwed up with the whole DVD+Streaming split thing.

      And then he went on to shove both feet in his mouth by explaining how the problem was with *communication* and not with his decision, and then proceeded to shove even more feet in his mouth by announcing that they were going to split the company in twain, with different websites and queues for each. :P

      It's like apologizing for hitting someone, saying the problem was that you didn't hit them hard enough, and then giving them two more black eyes.

      Fucking hilarious.

    43. Re:BIG Mistake by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      (BTW, I turned off streaming yesterday.)

      I would *gladly* pay more overall for TV, if (1) it had every show (including current prime time) shows, (2) without commercials, (3) with clear expiration dates (I understand the deals cannot be forever).

      I currently essentially use Tivos for #1 and #2, and do record a whole bunch and watch it later (I've even watched years old recordings).. I've also had hard drives go bad, so I would pay for someone else to essentially have the DVR for me... but it would have to be commercial free.

    44. Re:BIG Mistake by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      Shattering may be an exaggeration, but I've seen a definite increase in the number of discs that look as if someone's 2-year-old went at them for an hour. And the thing about that is, when a disc won't play, you have to send it back for a replacement. That takes a few days while the original disc and the replacement are in the mail. If this happens often enough, the net effect is that even if your Netflix plan says you can have three discs out at once, effectively you can only have two. It's as if you got a downgrade on your plan, even though you're still paying the same amount.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    45. Re:BIG Mistake by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

      Except that anyone paying attention knew they'd have to split the streaming into its own paid service. The licensing costs were just too high from the friggen studios. The rate hike was simply spiltting the streaming off from being a free addition into a separate service. The free version was simply unsustainable.

      Maybe they should have charged extra for streaming from the start to cushion the blow? I dunno. Many of my fellow Netflix subscribers were an astonishing pack of whiners, though. I was all "Oh well, knew that was coming. Life goes on. I'll keep the streaming for now."

      The split to different companies is the truly baffling event for me. Two web sites now? Two bills? Streaming only with what I estimate to be 5% of what's available by disc? What is that I don't even.

      Unless this if followed by some vast agreement with all the major studios to stream all the content, I don't get it.

    46. Re:BIG Mistake by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

      Wait, so... what are the icebergs in this analogy?

      Could you reformulate your point with cars?

    47. Re:BIG Mistake by RobinEggs · · Score: 1

      Stock prices don't cost or make companies money directly, at least not to my knowledge. Once the shares are out there, why should Netflix care about the price afterwards: they already sold it, and they don't get money when it's re-sold.

      There's certainly plenty to worry about with fiduciary responsibility and where the stock price will be if you ever want to offer shares again, but I'm not aware of any way in which stock price affects a companies finances in the moment.

      I'm probably wrong somehow, but that's the way it looks to me so far.

    48. Re:BIG Mistake by DickBreath · · Score: 1

      > Nothing like killing off your brand in a hasty fashion.

      HP has an app for that!

      And a patent.



      > Although I'll be curious to see how they do this I doubt I'll be sticking around much longer.

      I'll be curious to see if they'll be sticking around longer than HP. :-)

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    49. Re:BIG Mistake by l0kl1n · · Score: 1

      (a) Because it is a report card on you/your team. It is the summation of what everyone in the business community at large thinks of you. With a declining stock price, you are the bloke at the conference who got a very public "F". Conversely, with a rising price, you are a rock star. Purely psychological (in this context) but powerfully so.

      (b) Less intangible: If your price is low for long enough, you can be replaced as CEO.

    50. Re:BIG Mistake by Glendale2x · · Score: 1

      Yeah, unfortunately I can see that: child destroys DVD, parent doesn't give a fuck and just sends it back.

      --
      this is my sig
    51. Re:BIG Mistake by PastTense · · Score: 1

      Don't worry; they will undoubtedly do this too.

    52. Re:BIG Mistake by Rakishi · · Score: 1

      I find it amusing when people make assumptions about the decisions other make without knowing anything about what went into that decision.

      There is, for example, heavy speculation that media companies were trying to have netflix pay them royalties for all customers and not just those who streamed their media. In that sense, separating the two businesses alone would save netflix a lot of money since their royalty payments would go way down. Raising rates slowly over time would do jack shit and potentially leave them bankrupt within a couple years from royalty payments.

      But of course you now better than the CEO running the company since you have magical omniscient powers.

    53. Re:BIG Mistake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just left. We had let the mail dvds go when they jacked up the prices, but I never really got over my annoyance, and then they go and pull the DVD option entirely before they have a big enough watch instantly catalog. I just don't like the way they have been doing things. I don't think I'll miss it. Before today there was always the off chance they would backtrack on the price gouging. Now it's over. It is the last Netflix blunder that will impact me.

    54. Re:BIG Mistake by ambrandt · · Score: 1

      And... by having to negotiate two seperate contracts, which means two seperate licensing fees, that way you can double-dip, much the same way they did with the LOTR trilogy. Sure, there's probably a complete edition out there, but who wants to search that much... just buy each new set of discs that has a little more new content on it and eventually you'll have all the behind-the-scenes content.

    55. Re:BIG Mistake by ambrandt · · Score: 1

      Now... if there only was a viable alternative (DVD-by-mail AND streaming). Looks like people are just gonna have to swamp Amazon's used DVD selections.

    56. Re:BIG Mistake by fritish · · Score: 1

      I thought I was the only one that thought it sounded like a chocolate milk drink... Why is that?... Was there something similarly named that I am forgetting?

      --
      "Coffee is for closers."
    57. Re:BIG Mistake by residieu · · Score: 1

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nesquik, formerly Nestle Quick. I thought I remember it being spelled Qwik, but I guess I was wrong.

  4. Way to make the problem worse by Dr.bme · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Wow, this is corporate stupidity at its finest. How exactly will this make more people subscribe? The only reason for this is that the CEO is freaked out about a stock drop and is overreacting. If anyone deserves to be fired it is the Netflix CEO. Everyone knows that the most powerful tool in business is brand recognition, and they are just throwing it away. From what I understand most of the people that dropped the DVD service did it because they weren't using it and it was just a good reason to do so. If anything this move will force more people to drop the DVD service as they will lose they que and no one will like having to pay 2 separate bills from same company. Way to go Netflix you just make a small problem much bigger by overreacting. I have a feeling that their stock is going to tank today.

    1. Re:Way to make the problem worse by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If anyone deserves to be fired it is the Netflix CEO.

      This. Who's chairman of the board over there?

      They want me to maintain two queues, two bills, kill the functionality of auto-adding DVD queue videos to the stream, kill the prediction service, kill the history service, all because 5% of customers are complaining of the price increase?

      The shareholders need to demand new leadership immediately before all of their stock value evaporates.

      Well, there's one potential benefit - maybe Amazon will acquire Qwikster and we can be done with the boneheads who have killed the formerly great Netflix.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    2. Re:Way to make the problem worse by DocSavage64109 · · Score: 2

      As one of the people that was happy to switch to dvd-only and save a few bucks, now I can't even tell people I use Netflix. I hope they don't expect me to be mentioning watching movies from Qwikster.

    3. Re:Way to make the problem worse by omnichad · · Score: 2

      kill the functionality of auto-adding DVD queue videos to the stream, kill the prediction service, kill the history service

      That says it. I'm likely to be dropping streaming once this hits. Netflix DVD was really the only thing that mattered. I like having a one-stop place to look for all the rarer discs (or even popular movies that are never in-stock at Redbox). It was never about renting Rio or seeing the latest college comedy film. I don't really see anyone ready to take over their one-of-a-kind niche. The local video rental place sure isn't it - anything older than 2 years or made outside the USA is nowhere to be seen. And that's not even a chain rental place.

    4. Re:Way to make the problem worse by Hungus · · Score: 1

      I doubt it id ton try and get people to subscribe, more likely it is to 'develop' a seperate business line so it can be jettisoned and not as negatively affect stock prices.

      --
      Bad Panda! No Bamboo for you! In matters of importance ACs will not be responded to. Want to say something critical,OK
    5. Re:Way to make the problem worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Um, I think you got that backwards, Amazon will acquire Netflix (making Reed Hastings a lot of money - see AOL-TW Steve Case), Qwikster will die. Why would Amazon want a DVD by mail rental business when they are about to release the new color Kindle tablet?

    6. Re:Way to make the problem worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      5% have already canceled the service, many others have cut their package level down or cut out either the DVD or streaming option to reduce costs. We're still in September, meaning many people haven't received their revised Netflix charges. You can be sure more will cancel the service altogether, and others will adjust what they're paying for.

      Let's come back in December and look at their figures to see the true impact of their price hikes. And while we're at it, examine the absolute hammering they're receiving on the stock market. Maybe they'll recover after the fallout, maybe they'll dive further.

      Either way, investors are pissed off big time right now and it's not over. Netflix revenue is likely to drop month on month. Factor in their diminishing catalog and increasing costs for programming, their bottom line is starting to look very much like a classic boom and bust.

    7. Re:Way to make the problem worse by vlm · · Score: 1

      Well, there's one potential benefit - maybe Amazon will acquire Qwikster and we can be done with the boneheads who have killed the formerly great Netflix.

      Maybe not that exact deal, but I could totally see the reason to split is the intention that one side or another is about to get bought by someone who only wants half and wants a nice clean purchase of that half and/or can't afford to buy the whole enchilada. Some other CEO was just saying to the netflix CEO last month "I just wanna buy a Y company not a Y and Z company and then have to spin off Z, or Z competes with my other line of business, or I can't afford to buy a Y and Z company but I can afford a Y company."

      I'd suspect odds are over 90% there will be a takeover/purchase announcement within a month or two.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    8. Re:Way to make the problem worse by phorest · · Score: 2

      I like having a one-stop place to look for all the rarer discs

      Indeed, that is my feeling as well. They do have a lot of DVD's available which will never be on streaming AFAICT.
      To get around that I have DirectTV with a bunch of DVR's and use their DirecTV2PC software to stream to any computer in the house.
      If you spend like 20 minutes a week looking for things to watch/record it works well and I don't have to even deal with netflix's streaming.

      --
      God: When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.
    9. Re:Way to make the problem worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The CEO talking about this on the blog is probably a reaction to the stock price drop... but I doubt the concept of splitting the company in two was a heat of the moment decision. He is hoping that transparency will help.

      * This type of decision is a material change for the company and will effect shareholders. There is no doubt that this was discussed and deliberated with the board of directors. If it wasn't, we'd be reading about Reed getting fired this morning after his post.
      * The domain name for "Qwikster.com" was purchased by Netflix over a year ago. Maybe this was a twinkle in someone's eye all the way back then.

    10. Re:Way to make the problem worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IMO, Amazon isn't all that great either.

    11. Re:Way to make the problem worse by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1

      Wow, this is corporate stupidity at its finest. How exactly will this make more people subscribe?

      Do you have the full picture? Do you know what conversations have been going on for the past year (since they reserved the domain name)?

      The only reason for this is that the CEO is freaked out about a stock drop and is overreacting.

      Of course. Because the CEO who brought the company into its market-leading position suddenly just freaked out and lost his mind.

      If anything this move will force more people to drop the DVD service as they will lose they que and no one will like having to pay 2 separate bills from same company.

      Unless, of course, this is a precursor to splitting it off into a separate company. Or any of a half dozen other reasons for the move.

      ay to go Netflix you just make a small problem much bigger by overreacting

      That's a perfectly logical explanation in absence of all the facts. Thanks for that keen and insightful analysis!

      I have a feeling that their stock is going to tank today.

      Probably. And *that* will be the kneejerk reaction from stockholders with your mindset - about as well-considered as your post, though potentially much more expensive in the long term.

      What I know is that Netflix didn't get to be where it is by luck, and it didn't happen overnight. It's probably pretty logical to assume that the CEO is not in the habit of making rash, reactionary decisions.

    12. Re:Way to make the problem worse by sootman · · Score: 2

      Engadget has pretty good coverage

      Netflix's CEO also made clear that his company was "evolving rapidly," and his goal from here on out is to move "too fast," if anything. So why, might you ask, did Reed just make a 180-degree turn, slam down the pedal and throw his entire DVD business in reverse? Because that's exactly what needs to be done. Creating a completely unmemorable web address with a totally unmotivated mantra reeks of idiocy... but it all seems to make a bit more sense when you're proactively ridding your company of a business that will do nothing but nosedive in the years to come.
       
      Like it or not, physical DVD distribution isn't an area that most sane folks would categorize as "primed for growth," particularly not when bumped up against streaming. Netflix admitted in October of last year that it was now "primarily a streaming company," so the shrill sound of shock resonating around the tech universe today is a bit hard to grok. Did we all really forget the direction Netflix was already moving in? All that happened with the introduction of Qwikster was a scorching beeline towards the end result: a thriving business devoid of physical movie delivery options.

      Despite what the man on the street thinks, Netflix KNOWS what their customers are paying for, and even though we may HEAR a loud outcry about them getting out of the disk-by-mail business, it's entirely possible that 80, 90% of their customers do not care. Remember, too, that there's a LOT more cost on the mailing-physical-things side of the market, so even if they're losing, say, 20% of their customers, that might only equate to 5% of their income.

      --
      Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    13. Re:Way to make the problem worse by MikeKD · · Score: 1

      Who's chairman of the board over there?

      Let's see.

      Surprise! It's Reed Hastings.

    14. Re:Way to make the problem worse by Sepodati · · Score: 1

      I don't care, for one. 100% streaming, mostly for the kids and their shows. Ditch the DVD service so it doesn't affect streaming.

    15. Re:Way to make the problem worse by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      :headpalm:

      I guess that's all we need to know.

      Excuse me while I go divest from any company where the CEO is Chairman of the Board.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    16. Re:Way to make the problem worse by Idbar · · Score: 1

      My take on the problem, is that this also relates to studio/network mentality, and that they want to keep both business models afloat by trying to cope with the networks and studios not being happy with the price they're getting from them.

      Now, will this move work for them? I'm guessing Blockbuster is going to be gaining customers again.

    17. Re:Way to make the problem worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If anyone deserves to be fired it is the Netflix CEO.

      This. Who's chairman of the board over there?

      The CEO:
      http://ir.netflix.com/committees.cfm

      The shareholders need to demand new leadership immediately before all of their stock value evaporates.

      Ain't gonna happen, obviously.

      > The shareholders need to demand new leadership immediately before all of their stock value evaporates.

      http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=NFLX&t=1y&l=on&z=l&q=l&c=

      Oh noes! The panicked selloff has brought the stock price down to levels not seen in nearly 11 months! Fire everybody!

      Well, there's one potential benefit - maybe Amazon will acquire Qwikster and we can be done with the boneheads who have killed the formerly great Netflix.

      And again, one more thing that ain't gonna happen. The business model Qwikster represents is dying. It'll take another decade before Qwikster no longer breaks even on their operations, but it's not something Amazon is going to run right out and invest in -- not that Netflix has any interest whatsoever in selling it. The CEO founded Netflix and made it the company it is today -- he's not killing it, he's just not doing things the way you (a customer and not an investor) want him to. Get over yourself.

      Is this bad customer relations? You bet your ass. Is this a bad business move? Well, that remains to be seen.

    18. Re:Way to make the problem worse by damiangerous · · Score: 2

      This. Who's chairman of the board over there?

      Reed Hastings. You know, the guy who's also the CEO and co-founder. He's also on the Board at Microsoft. I'm willing to bet he knows a bit more about running a successful business than random schlubs on the internet.

    19. Re:Way to make the problem worse by BLKMGK · · Score: 1

      This! I seldom stream but liked to have it available for those rare times I decided to use it. Now it costs more AND it's from a separate company? I'll be dropping the streaming ASAP, it never had the new movies I wanted anyway....

      --
      Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
    20. Re:Way to make the problem worse by jafac · · Score: 1

      Basically, I think the problem is, the CEO's psychiatrist just prescribed the wrong anti-anxiety meds last week. Sometimes it takes weeks or months to find the right drug, and the right dosage, and there isn't always a quick fix - and frankly, it's probably not an anxiety disorder anyway, it's just the guy reacting to *gasp* a market drop! Oh noes!

      Frankly, this was inevitable, because Netflix's business model was; "hey, let's go fuck-over the content providers, and hope they don't come back at us and play hardball yo!"

      . . . and now that Starz is kneecapping them, they're freaking out. whatevz.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    21. Re:Way to make the problem worse by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      Since the Netflix blog doesn't let anyone in that doesn't have a Facial book account (stupid in it's own right) I'll post here...

      Mr. Hastings,

      Are you purposefully trying to kill this business? Are you tired of being CEO and don't have the courage to step down?

      I could understand the need to charge more. Do I like paying more? No, but then when I consider the rip off that is cable TV you folks were still coming out smelling like roses. However, this "unbundling" of your DVD and Streaming service is needlessly destroying the value of your product. The "one stop shop" aspect--even in its somewhat clumsy split personality incarnation--was appreciated and valuable. Since you want to present the DVD and streaming service as two separate services you will now compete for my money on two separate fronts. You had better hope that your "two" services can compete individually better than the alternatives. I am no longer compelled to keep one for the sake of the other.

      BTW. stop patronizing us with these letters. You're not engendering any favor or sympathy because of them, quite the opposite really.

      Sincerely,
      -- Your no longer loyal customer

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    22. Re:Way to make the problem worse by afabbro · · Score: 1

      Do you have the full picture? Do you know what conversations have been going on for the past year (since they reserved the domain name)?

      Yeah, you tell 'em! They reserved the domain name and the Twitter name and...oh.

      Qwikster: Home of the Pot-Smoking Elmo.

      --
      Advice: on VPS providers
    23. Re:Way to make the problem worse by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      You should send them an actual letter if you expect them (i.e. the peons) to read it.

    24. Re:Way to make the problem worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reed Hastings. You know, the guy who's also the CEO and co-founder. He's also on the Board at Microsoft. I'm willing to bet he knows a bit more about running a successful business than random schlubs on the internet.

      He also knows more about running a failing business than random schlubs on the internet. I bet his golfing buddies with cover his back and find him more jobs when he blows this one. He'd do it for them.

    25. Re:Way to make the problem worse by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1

      Nonetheless... The domain name alone makes it clear it's been something in the works for a while - not a kneejerk response as OP seems to believe.

    26. Re:Way to make the problem worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "all because 5% of customers are complaining of the price increase?"

      But how does this in any way satisfy people who were upset about the price increase? It changes NOTHING for those users.

    27. Re:Way to make the problem worse by pongo000 · · Score: 1

      That says it. I'm likely to be dropping streaming once this hits. Netflix DVD was really the only thing that mattered. I like having a one-stop place to look for all the rarer discs (or even popular movies that are never in-stock at Redbox).

      Just the opposite with me: Netflix has some hard-to-find foreign films that are made available via streaming rather quickly (apparently, foreign studios see the value of a streaming audience much more so than American studios). At any rate, my DVD service was the first to go. I'll hang on to streaming as long as its affordable, but for the DVD side of things I'll just rent locally from Blockbuster, Redbox, or Premier Video.

    28. Re:Way to make the problem worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If anyone deserves to be fired it is the Netflix CEO.

      This. Who's chairman of the board over there?

      It would appear that the chairman of the board of Netflix would be a Mr. Reed Hastings, who is also that CEO you want him to fire.

      Isn't Corporate America wonderful?

    29. Re:Way to make the problem worse by mrxak · · Score: 1

      I just canceled my account. I was pissed off enough about the fee hike, but now I am out for good. Screw these asshats.

    30. Re:Way to make the problem worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amazon bought Lovefilm, the UK equivalent (which does both postal and streaming rentals)

    31. Re:Way to make the problem worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Common Corporate strategy to rename something that has bad opinions by consumers. Look at Comcast ie Xfinity. Now they take surveys and people like Xfinity but hate Comcast. Shows how retarded the average American is...

    32. Re:Way to make the problem worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We used both. Some things weren't streamed but on dvd and vice versa. Now, we use neither. Already went down this road with Blockbuster a few years ago. Not again. What a bunch of crap eh?

  5. Great, yet another "-ster" brand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    They might as well have called it "iQuikster". The whole "-ster" thing is just as diluted as any of the other cutesie Web 2.0 brand conventions.

    1. Re:Great, yet another "-ster" brand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MyiQuickster2000Enet.... it's totally Rad and Gnarly dude!

  6. Did not even think this through? by LordKronos · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is just stupid, but the worst part is that, it seems to me like they didn't even think through all the implications of they way they are doing this. For example, take the following from the official netflix blog.

    User asks: " If a film I search for on Netflix is not available for streaming, will the website still tell me if the DVD is available? Or must I search twice?"
    CEO Reed Hastings responds: "ouch. You'd have to search the second place if we didn't have it in the first place."

    Ouch? Are you serious? Ouch? To me, that reads like "hmmmm, we hadn't really thought about that".

    1. Re:Did not even think this through? by spamking · · Score: 2

      Wow. Sounds like Netflix should've just stuck with DVD rentals . . . and then created a separate streaming brand in the first place. Would that have even helped?

    2. Re:Did not even think this through? by elrous0 · · Score: 2

      At least with the price increase, there was some justification for it. This move just makes it a bigger pain in the ass for customers, for no good reason.

      Unless they're planning to sell off one or the other service, I can't figure out what they're even thinking by this dumbass move.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    3. Re:Did not even think this through? by rwv · · Score: 1

      And they could call the separate streaming brand.... Mailmovies. Seriously. Netflix. Internet Flicks. Movies delivered over the Internet. Movie Streaming has been their end-goal since Day 1. Mailmovies (or Qwikster) was a means to that end.

      On the other hand, it amazes me that they haven't been able to negotiate equitable terms for their mail distribution model verses their streaming business model. The fact that you can't stream all movies in the mail system is bad form.

      And while we're at it... why the hell does Hulu Plus have a subset of "Web Only" videos? I want to watch this stuff from my Playstation without doing an end-around to plug the laptop into the TV via HDMI. I pay them money to avoid this workaround. There is enough content to keep this from being a huge issue... but I'd rather have access to the full collection as a paying customer and the freedom to consume it over all of their supported distribution streams.

    4. Re:Did not even think this through? by marcop · · Score: 1

      Does that mean separate ratings for the DVD site as well as the streaming site. Who knows what other features are now separate.

      Sounds like a stupid move.

    5. Re:Did not even think this through? by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      It's certainly possible. We're not privvy to what the studios tell them when they negotiate their fees. I wonder if they were making ridiculous demands by using one service as leverage for the other. "Well, you already have us on DVD, so if you want streaming too you gotta pay even more!"

      --

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

    6. Re:Did not even think this through? by phorest · · Score: 1

      Unless they're planning to sell off one or the other service, I can't figure out what they're even thinking by this dumbass move.

      Maybe it's not too late for Blockbuster" to be popular again by buying "Qwikster"

      --
      God: When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.
    7. Re:Did not even think this through? by lpp · · Score: 1

      No. Netflix has a lot of name recognition. Moreover, they've already sent clear signals they were ready to make streaming their major source of operations going forward. So they want to use the already present name recognition for the operations they intend to move forward with. As for the pain to the consumers, DVD rentals were dropping in big markets and were only growing marginally in outlying areas (flyover country). The big markets are where you're more likely to have a higher concentration of high bandwidth customers willing to make use of streaming. And the flyover areas are less likely to have that bandwidth, and so probably weren't making as much use of the streaming to begin with.

      So I imagine what they were seeing momentum wise was a silo effect for most customers, where they used either DVD or streaming but not always both. Yes, there was clearly an uproar for those users who used both streaming and DVD, but while the loss of 4% of their user base was significant, it clearly wasn't a death blow. And now if the DVD business starts to dry up as high speed access is made available in more areas and as more content is available for streaming, it won't suck the life out of their brand because it's off in another company altogether.

      I wrote about it on my blog, if you're interested.

    8. Re:Did not even think this through? by LordKronos · · Score: 1

      Yep, the ratings are now separate, too. Another post from the blog.

      User says: "The lack of communication between the two services regarding rating and reviews seems like a huge downfall and I would imagine will be a major complaint."
      CEO Reed Hastings responds: "It may be. At least when you start, your current rating and reviews will be in both. "

      That makes it sound like they are essentially going to clone the current system, and then they're independent from there on out.

    9. Re:Did not even think this through? by djchristensen · · Score: 1

      My first thought on reading the summary: they're splitting off the DVD service so that streaming users no longer see just how much content they don't have access to. I just switched to DVD-only, but with the prior DVD+streaming plan, I was constantly irritated that the vast majority of content I searched for was only on DVD.

      On the flip side, now that I have the DVD-only plan, I won't have to see that I could be watching that movie right now if I had streaming. That means there is no enticement for me to consider getting streaming again. Good for me, bad for Netflix/Qwikster. Another aspect of the "didn't think it through very well" supposition.

    10. Re:Did not even think this through? by Col.+Klink+(retired) · · Score: 1

      That also means that I won't get recommendations on the streaming site based on DVD ratings. Plus, if their streaming site only lists available titles, I can't even tell that site what I like...

      --

      -- Don't Tase me, bro!

    11. Re:Did not even think this through? by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      This at a time when my (and many many others') ISP (ATT) has implemented BW caps of 150 gig...
      I have not been under that cap yet, so my bill has effectively gone up $20/month based on overage charges.
      The bulk of my consumed BW, incidentally, is Netflix and Flickr. Only about 20% or so is torrents of BBC shows I can't get here in the states (or can only get mangled with inserted adds at the expense of content that was cut for running length).
      -nB

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    12. Re:Did not even think this through? by Hadlock · · Score: 1

      I think they were able to negotiate equitable terms; it's just that both TV and Movie studios want to kill Netflix as quickly as possible to stay in control. Netflix is driving a lot of people away from traditional TV, but if they manage to cut enough videos from their streaming selection, they might just be able to woo people back to cable TV again.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    13. Re:Did not even think this through? by residieu · · Score: 1

      Where is this discussion? The blog I got a link to has no comments available.

    14. Re:Did not even think this through? by Grizzley9 · · Score: 1

      Wow. Sounds like Netflix should've just stuck with DVD rentals . . . and then created a separate streaming brand in the first place. Would that have even helped?

      Not sure that would have even helped.

      http://www.netflix.com/NewWatchInstantlyRSS is what I have as a live bookmark and check it nearly daily for anything new. It only gets about 3-4 new movies/shows a day, if that, and most are ones I've never heard of, have no desire to see, or are so old as to create a negative reaction from me. Hey look, a couple of B rated movies that have been on Hulu forever!

    15. Re:Did not even think this through? by GarryFre · · Score: 1

      Yep I can see myself having to write down movie titles I might be interested in and putting two check marks by each title to show I searched both places. I do research for work - this feels like work! No thank you! They could just have a button that says Search Quickstar/Netflix) for the DVD or maybe just integrate it on one web site or better yet! I got it! Merge the two under Netflix! That makes sense!! Oops!, We've come full circle! What a great idea they killed!

      --
      www.Migrainesoft.com - Computer giving you a headache? We can fix that!
    16. Re:Did not even think this through? by ProppaT · · Score: 2

      Yeah, Hulu lost all my business because of the whole "web only" crap. Why aren't they catching more flack? So let me get this straight, I can use my laptop and watch anything I want, yet I *PAY* $8 a month for the privilege of streaming the service through a set top box and I actually lose features? No thanks. Hulu Plus isn't even worth a dollar as far as I can tell.

      --
      Wise men say, "Forgiveness is divine, but never pay full price for late pizza."
    17. Re:Did not even think this through? by rwv · · Score: 1

      You get some content on Hulu Plus that is not available on the regular website Hulu for free. I recently watched Reservoir Dogs which I doubt is available on "Hulu Free". Also, with Hulu Plus you do get the freedom of streaming to devices such as Playstation. Having this integrated solution makes more sense to me than deploying a TV/Laptop Frankenstein System. This, to me, is still worth the $8.

    18. Re:Did not even think this through? by residieu · · Score: 1

      How is that a ridiculous demand? I didn't think renting DVDs required any additional licensing, so if they want to provide a streaming service, of course that will cost additional licensing fees.

    19. Re:Did not even think this through? by LordKronos · · Score: 1

      Sorry. The link came from the email sent to netflix customers:
      http://blog.netflix.com/2011/09/explanation-and-some-reflections.html

    20. Re:Did not even think this through? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's pretty simple, they DVD shipping and maintenance is loosing money (or at least not making enough margin to satisfy growth goals). They want to kill it but they can't just discontinue the service. So they began a three step plan:

      1. Split DVD and Streaming services, change prices so that one or the other is less than you were paying for both, but both will be almost twice what you were paying.
      2. Re-brand the dying service.
      3. Sell off or quietly kill the dying service.

      The streaming service is the one they want people using because it has low operating costs, and thus better profit. That's the one that's getting to keep the recognized brand, and the one they're putting effort into improving.

    21. Re:Did not even think this through? by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      I dont mean that licensing both is ridiculous. I mean that some studios may be using the other service as leverage to make ridiculous demands.

      --

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

    22. Re:Did not even think this through? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I don't think it's going to have the impact that you think it's going to have. Time will tell, but I think most users will fall out as DVD or streaming users anyway, especially as more titles become available to stream. Those who can stream do. Those who can't, can't. Since the price has gone up, I've seen a lot of other people (not just me) drop DVDs entirely. In this house we've been having trouble finding DVDs either of us want to watch, and our tastes are pretty diverse.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    23. Re:Did not even think this through? by Xacid · · Score: 1

      Same thing I thought. This guy is thinking too much like a businessman and not enough like a customer. The price hikes I can understand. Content isn't free and we as consumers are demanding newer releases. Ok, fine, I get that.

      But we're not getting that. Not yet anyway. Plus there's the recent news that Starz was pulling their content. DVD was pretty much our way of patching up the holes in what Netflix has to offer via streaming (which is a lot).

      And for adding a game rental portion - fine. But leave it all with Netflix. Having to jump around different sites and maintain different queues is a waste of time. The advantage Netflix had is being removed with this latest maneuver from Reed.

    24. Re:Did not even think this through? by ProppaT · · Score: 1

      The thing is, the amount of bonus content given by Hulu plus is dwarfed by the amount of content Hulu DOESNT let you watch because you're streaming it to your tv. Hulu does give you the freedom of streaming to a Playstation, but they also take away the freedom of streaming new television content that free PC users get to watch, which is the biggest draw of Hulu...current tv content. They also make you sit through advertisements, even though you're paying. It just doesn't make sense and it's a flawed system.

      --
      Wise men say, "Forgiveness is divine, but never pay full price for late pizza."
    25. Re:Did not even think this through? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Another thing is that you won't find a movie if it disappears from streaming. There are lots of things that suddenly go -poof- but are still around on disc form. The old saying 'out of sight out of mind' holds true - if it isn't showing up at all, the majority of people won't remember it was available for streaming before.

    26. Re:Did not even think this through? by spamking · · Score: 1

      I'd rather sit through 2 minutes of advertisements than 5 or 6 minutes . . . but I agree, if I'm paying for Hulu+ I should have NO advertisements.

      Can't you remedy much of your content limitation issues by using a Roku?

    27. Re:Did not even think this through? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think this amounts to a refocusing of their software development effort.

      Sure, they're eliminating some useful DVD/streaming integration features. This is unfortunate for now. But in a few years, it will mean that the Netflix Web site will have evolved in a direction that would have otherwise been constantly bogged down in backwards compatibility.

      You can see this problem in the current software: their implementation of a watch queue works great for the mail service, but fails horribly in the streaming world -- sure, it's nice to have a "watch this sometime" list, but it's manually ordered, doesn't automatically remove watched things, can't be searched, has an ugly interface, wasn't designed for TV shows, etc. One would hope that if developers are no longer burdened with supporting an integrated DVD/streaming interface, features like this can be redesigned, leading to a much better experience.

      In other words, yes, they're putting a lot less effort into integration for combined streaming/DVD users. Yes, this is unfortunate if you are one of these users. But they don't think that market is the future, so they're focusing their efforts somewhere else.

    28. Re:Did not even think this through? by residieu · · Score: 1

      This could be true for obscure features that no one ever used. They thought this was true of the feature allowing multiple queues on one account, but generated quite a lot of complaints when they got rid rid of it. But I don't see how maintaining a link to "add to DVD Queue/add to instant Queue" would bog them down.

      I absolutely DO want them to keep the "watch this sometime" list. It has its problems, yes. They should FIX them. But being able to put things aside for later is essential for their streaming service, not just a "nice to have." The Watch queue is already on a different page, there's no reason it can't be rewritten without breaking integration with the DVD queue page.

      I fear that the others are right, the only explanation for this that makes sense is they want to sell the DVD-renting service. Which will result in the death of both services because they don't have enough streaming content yet.

    29. Re:Did not even think this through? by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      The streaming service is the one they want people using because it has low operating costs, and thus better profit. That's the one that's getting to keep the recognized brand, and the one they're putting effort into improving.

      Too bad they can't get the studios to go along with that plan.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    30. Re:Did not even think this through? by jtara · · Score: 1

      What an idiot. Out of the frying pan and into the fire. He just compounded the damage to customer relations.

      If they split the company, will they at least stop the idiot practice of putting some moves up on streaming only for a limited period? What sense does it make to put some old, black-and-white foreign film on streaming only for a couple of months? What does it cost them to keep it online once it is encoded?

      I want exactly the service they are currently offering. The ability to stream in so-so quality if I want to watch something now, and the ability to order a Bluray if I want to take advantage of the thousands I have in AV equipment (why bother with all that if you're going to watch streaming?) or a DVD if I want to watch something old or rare. And I definitely want an integrated queue, search, etc.

      Reed Hastings just took ANY value out of Netflix for me.

    31. Re:Did not even think this through? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Netflix leadership greatly overvalue their streaming service. Without integration with the DVD component it is just another streaming service with limited content. I don't care how profitable "streaming only" looks on paper, it's just not there in reality. Streaming also made the DVD component more valuable. So, basically, they are taking one service, turning it into two services, and make it more expensive and less useful.

      Selling the service in order to afford content for streaming is about the only thing that makes sense to me and the only reason I'm not selling all my stock right this second. If they can get the content, they may be able to increase membership for streaming, at which point they can raise prices and possibly run a profitable streaming-only service.

      But as a subscriber? I'm just canceling. Maybe I'll come back to streaming if the content shows up.

    32. Re:Did not even think this through? by ProppaT · · Score: 1

      Maybe I was unclear? If you stream Hulu to your tv via a Roku box or a games console, they limit the content you can stream. Many items are "web view only." In other words, if you want to watch the newest season of Louie, tough luck if you have a Roku or a game console. Instead, they force you to watch it on your computer. Seeing that you have to pay for the privilege of using Hulu on your Roku, it's a bit absurd.

      --
      Wise men say, "Forgiveness is divine, but never pay full price for late pizza."
    33. Re:Did not even think this through? by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      Renting DVDs does not need any licensing (see "First Sale Doctrine").

      Netflix *voluntarily* went into agreements with the movie companies, presumably to get cheaper DVDs (including "rental only" ones that don't have extra features, grrr). I'm not positive about this part, but I think it was reported previously that at least sometimes, they didn't pay for the DVDs at all, but paid fees for the number of rentals the discs had.

    34. Re:Did not even think this through? by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      How the heck can you find things you want to stream, but NOT DVDs you want to watch, since the DVD selection is very close to a proper superset of the streaming collection?

      (I think many of the items that made me put in "very close" are older DVDs that broke, and they didn't/couldn't buy replacements.)

    35. Re:Did not even think this through? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I don't want to rent series because I blow through them too fast. I want to stream them. I also only rent things I'm pretty sure I want to watch, whereas I will try streaming anything since I can decide it's crap and watch something else without waiting for the post office to do its thing.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    36. Re:Did not even think this through? by mattack2 · · Score: 1

      Even if you don't watch any other TV/movies, that still is kind of incredible to me. A TV show DVD usually has 3-4 episodes (at least) of an hour long show. I guess you never watch the extras/commentaries/etc. Even with that though, 2 DVDs at a time would seem to allow one to be in transit while you watch the current one.

    37. Re:Did not even think this through? by stephanruby · · Score: 1

      Are there any tax advantages to Netflix for doing this?

      This doesn't make much sense. I'm really having a hard time believing the official reasons given for this change.

    38. Re:Did not even think this through? by ambrandt · · Score: 1

      As far as the TV/Laptop Frankenstein System... that would be why nerds have regular HTPCs... mine plays Blu-Rays, YouTube, regular DVDs (upconverted to dang near Blu-Ray), has full access to the entire media catalog on this computer (and on the laptop over wireless) over gigabit, crunches SETI, and outputs all that over 720P (1080I makes the letters too small for my 20/400 eyesight to read). No funky PSN or proprietary hardware... if I need RAM or a HDD added, I drop some coin, slap the bugger in and that's that... if I lose media connectivity, it's not because my PSN account was hacked while I was sleeping.

    39. Re:Did not even think this through? by ambrandt · · Score: 1

      Yeah... I always liked that I could just add stuff to my DVD queue regardless and if I logged in and saw that it had a 'Play' button, could just watch it instantly. Plus, you could search for a movie/show (let's say 'Lost') and see without going to two sites that all seasons are available on DVD and Seasons 1-5 are available on streaming... that way, you could watch the streaming stuff and queue the 6th season in the meantime (and, if you play your cards right, have the first disc of season 6 in your hands when you get done with season 5). Now, it's going to be: check Netflix, search for whatever, it's not there, check Qwikster, search for same thing, queue it, lost interest in same thing but gain interest in some random anime on Netflix that you want to copy, go mad from all the switching of windows that this all causes, forget that the first thing is in your Qwikster queue and has now arrived even though you don't want it, and in the turnaround time you develop a branched-off interest in some random Indie movie that's available on both... you get the point. It's safe to assume that people will eventually figure out how to use copy-paste and Notepad to look up stuff on both, but the hassle that the whole shmeer becomes is going to become too much. What damage would they incur if they integrated both while having seperate websites? Sure, it might take ten lines of code, but then people will stop whining and then searches on one site will return crosslinked results on both. Win-win situation there. Now, if only they would listen to what they bill-payers are saying... that would really be something there.

    40. Re:Did not even think this through? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Even if you don't watch any other TV/movies, that still is kind of incredible to me. A TV show DVD usually has 3-4 episodes (at least) of an hour long show.

      Uh, you mean, a twenty-two minute long show. And if it's Anime, it might have two episodes of a forty-seven minute show, if you're lucky.

      I guess you never watch the extras/commentaries/etc.

      Usually not, because a) I am not alone in the house and getting most women to watch most commentaries is a fucking nightmare. I had the devil's own time getting her to watch the additionals for Tron and she's an artist and it was actually of interest once I got her sat down in front of it. And b) most of that stuff is fucking boring anyway. I only watch commentaries with two or more stars, as in the people, not the reviews.

      Even with that though, 2 DVDs at a time would seem to allow one to be in transit while you watch the current one.

      It takes minimum three days turnaround and I live in bumfuck so it might be four, which means that while most weeks I get two discs, some weeks I only get one. So no, it is nowhere near fast enough, not even vaguely close. I can easily watch four episodes of something like Top Gear in one sitting — if I had more bandwidth and I could reasonably seek in the stream, I could probably make it five or six.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  7. trade up netflix for apple TV by alen · · Score: 2

    i only have netflix streaming because my older kid always likes one or two shows on it that makes it worth it over buying the dvd. otherwise the selection is so bad there is nothing to watch.

    with apple's new rules i can just buy and stream from the apple tv and dump my cable DVR as well

    1. Re:trade up netflix for apple TV by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Except nothing even comes close to Netflix streaming. Apple's is more akin to pay-per-view than Netflix streaming, and is ill-suited for TV series (Netflix's strong suite). Hulu is the closest thing out their to Netflix, and their selection is weak by comparison (and you have to put up with ads on top of that).

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    2. Re:trade up netflix for apple TV by jandrese · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The worst part is that EVERY legit streaming service has weak selection, Netflix is just a little less weak than the competitors (although if they lose Starz content we'll have to see). The major studios have been pretty hostile to streaming (even the original outrageous $8/movie streaming sites) and really we only have it so good now thanks to some rather fancy footwork by Netflix in the early days before the studios really took notice of them.

      The DVD-by-mail service is the only sure thing Netflix has. It costs them more, but they're not beholden to studio assholes with it. They just buy disks retail and stick them in envelopes. The streaming business model puts way too much power in the hands of the studios and lets them dick over any competitors at will.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    3. Re:trade up netflix for apple TV by alen · · Score: 1

      netflix is geared to geeks not real people. my wife likes 90210 which is not on netflix last i saw

    4. Re:trade up netflix for apple TV by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      I think what they put on streaming is more dependent on the studios than any overall content philosophy. If it were geared toward geeks, they would probably have the Adult Swim/Star Wars content from Cartoon Network. Though they do get serious geek kudos for having the entire run of Battlestar Galactica in HD.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    5. Re:trade up netflix for apple TV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amazon have streaming more like Netflix than Hulu, as well as the buy/rental options like Apple. Their streaming library is limited, but growing. Netflix streaming library is much larger, but full of cheap foreign shows of limited interest to most people, and the increasing costs coming from program owners is causing the Netflix library to shrink.

      It's a shame, but it looks like on demand streaming of what you like is going to have its head cut off by the cable buddies to protect their TV advertising revenues, something we all hate, and are thwarted at every turn to get away from, even though we're paying for access to the content regardless of delivery method.

    6. Re:trade up netflix for apple TV by Grizzley9 · · Score: 1

      I use Hulu (via PlayOn) for "current" episodes [or record it myself for things not online] and Netflix for streaming series or movies they have (few and far between) and kids shows. Redbox for DVD's. Sadly all that can't be under one roof or the studios would kill it based upon usage fees. Though for as much as we watch (less and less) it's really not too bad. Thank you studios for making me watch less tv!

    7. Re:trade up netflix for apple TV by Skreems · · Score: 1

      netflix is geared to real people not vapid idiots. my wife likes 90210 which is not on netflix last i saw

      Fixed that for you.

      --
      Slashdot needs a "-1, Wrong" moderation option.
      The Urban Hippie
    8. Re:trade up netflix for apple TV by alen · · Score: 1

      amazon is on a few select TV's and blu ray players. not on the PS3 and x-box

      like most people i watch tv on the tv, not on the computer

    9. Re:trade up netflix for apple TV by ProppaT · · Score: 1

      I watch a few tv shows or a movie every evening on Netflix Streaming. That would probably end up costing me $100-150 to do that via iTunes. At that point, I might as well just get my cable back for $70/m. Instead, I'll just stick to Netflix streaming. It's a great service and, despite what people claim, it does have a lot of quality stuff on it. It might not be for people with mainstream tastes who just want to watch the newest blockbuster films and the newest tv shows, but for those with a more broad range of interests there's always something to watch.

      --
      Wise men say, "Forgiveness is divine, but never pay full price for late pizza."
    10. Re:trade up netflix for apple TV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure they don't just buy discs and rent them. All rental places have to either buy a higher cost disc or pay some sort of royalties, all via licensing. Libraries may be an exception, but I doubt it.

    11. Re:trade up netflix for apple TV by jandrese · · Score: 2

      Nope, that's exactly what they do, thanks to the magic of the first sale doctrine. They're not "broadcasting" anything, so they don't have to pay royalties. Video stores don't either, those high price VHS tapes you remember were from back in the days when studios didn't sell most movies retail and charged outrageous prices to the video stores for every copy.

      The studios hate the DVD by mail service with a firey burning passion, but their hands are tied unless they can bribe enough congressmen to sneak a new law through, and that's not as easy as people make it sound.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    12. Re:trade up netflix for apple TV by jandrese · · Score: 1

      Or to put it another way: Do you think Disney would allow Netflix to let people simply get copies of their movies by mail if they had any say at all in the matter?

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    13. Re:trade up netflix for apple TV by DeckardJK · · Score: 1

      The problem is that Netflix/Qwikster is the worst of both worlds.

      Netflix was originally worth it because of their low prices compared to Blockbuster on a per rental basis as long as you turned your rentals over quick. Netflix's DVD back catalog is great but now due to their recently negotiated contracts they're getting a lot of new releases 30 days later than retail, Blockbuster, and cable video on demand. Maybe they can buy a retail new release but they can't stick it in an envelope and send it to me for a month.

      The streaming quality isn't all that great right now and the selection is poor. Streaming was the thing that kept me subscribed to Netflix when I wasn't able to get new release DVDs on time. It was a good value add. Neither service is worth full price to me now. If they're able to get new releases back or greatly expand their streaming catalog I'll consider coming back.

    14. Re:trade up netflix for apple TV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AppleTV, or iTunes to be more accurate, is expensive.

    15. Re:trade up netflix for apple TV by sixsixtysix · · Score: 1

      i was parent, at work so was anonymous. i never knew this. thanks for the info. i guess they consider streaming to be broadcasting then, huh? i always imagined that renting was some sort of distribution. oh well.

      --
      ...
  8. Also by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They're going to start renting out xbox 360, ps3 and wii games. FTEM (From the Email):

    "One improvement we will make at launch is to add a video games upgrade option, similar to our upgrade option for Blu-ray, for those who want to rent Wii, PS3 and Xbox 360 games."

    'Other Improvements will follow' for qwikster, although who knows what other disc-like products they will add, or what the pricing on renting video games will be. Since they're a little late to the video game side of things I would hope that they undercut Game Fly.

    1. Re:Also by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      One improvement we will make at launch is to add a video games upgrade option

      Only it's going to cost you extra. Knowing how stupid Netflix has been of late, they'll probably make that extra charge equal to (or even more than) what a Gamefly subscription costs.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    2. Re:Also by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      They don't have to undercut GameFly. They just have to match them and deliver in the one day that Netflix normally ships in instead of the 3 or more days that GameFly ships in.

  9. This isn't the Yahoo! Stocks boards by Rogerborg · · Score: 4, Informative

    So how about an article that documents the effect on us, the customers, not on speculators and investors?

    Here, let me get that for you:

    Customers can still subscribe to both, but the two sites will not be integrated anymore. [...] Separating the businesses will also force customers to make a choice

    Crib notes: squeal, piggies, squeal.

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    1. Re:This isn't the Yahoo! Stocks boards by SirGarlon · · Score: 1

      So, a 60% price increase, followed by a huge downgrade in the quality of the user experience? This is quite a one-two punch to the customer. Ouch, indeed.

      --
      [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
  10. It would be different... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... if they actually had all of the content available for streaming, but as it stands only about 10% of my Queue right now is streamable. I think what would've been easier to digest for the masses would've been an introductory price of like $4/mo. Also, maybe they could've told us a bit beforehand.

    All in all I like Netflix and it makes me sad to have to make a hard decision on if I should let them go. Much like a baby bird that once gave me great DVD streaming and rentals, now I have to decide if I should keep my poor bird at double the monthly cost, let it fly away and be devoid of a big part of my media capabilities, or instead cut it in half and have to deal with partial entrails, never quite getting the same experience.

    1. Re:It would be different... by cob666 · · Score: 2

      Much like a baby bird that once gave me great DVD streaming and rentals, now I have to decide if I should keep my poor bird at double the monthly cost, let it fly away and be devoid of a big part of my media capabilities, or instead cut it in half and have to deal with partial entrails, never quite getting the same experience.

      I think this is the first time I would have actually preferred a car analogy.

      --
      Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law - Aleister Crowley
  11. A new name divorced from their core? by phorest · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why of all things QWIKSTER? Why not MailFlix/NetFlix. Much more in line with the service capabilities.

    Dear Reed:
    I don't know you and this morning you send me an email telling me you messed up but yet I have never heard of you. I have a feeling you messed up again and didn't think this through. So now I'll need to have TWO accounts? Please reply when you know what you really want to do.

    Signed

    A new disgruntled customer.

    --
    God: When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.
    1. Re:A new name divorced from their core? by trout007 · · Score: 1

      What's great is they don't even know how their users use their service. If these really are two different sites with nothing in common it sucks. I usually first go to Watch Instantly to see if the movie I want is there. If not I can easily add it to my DVD queue.

      --
      I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
    2. Re:A new name divorced from their core? by phorest · · Score: 1

      I usually first go to Watch Instantly to see if the movie I want is there. If not I can easily add it to my DVD queue.

      I rarely waste my time looking for streamed movies as they are so few in number anyway.
      Just try to watch "The Andromeda Strain" as a stream. It's been broken for 6 months.

      --
      God: When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.
    3. Re:A new name divorced from their core? by lnx_daemon · · Score: 1

      I was thinking "ShipFlix" and "NetFlix", which also easily transitions to shitflix if you are so inclined :)

    4. Re:A new name divorced from their core? by Bill+Dimm · · Score: 1

      Why not MailFlix/NetFlix

      I think they are trying to get away from the "flix" part of the name because they are adding games now. Really, the name is the smallest part of the problem. Splitting the websites apart is unbelievably idiotic.

    5. Re:A new name divorced from their core? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My wife and I watched "The Andromeda Strain" last month with no problems. What was wrong with the version you were watching?

    6. Re:A new name divorced from their core? by McKing · · Score: 1

      I watched it on streaming just last week....

      --
      If only "common" sense was actually that common...
    7. Re:A new name divorced from their core? by phorest · · Score: 1
      Well they must've fixed it then because what was funny were all the reviews how the stream was broken. Just a sample:

      08/16/11 This movie won't even load, when it comes up - it's already 5 mins in and just stalls out. I have 5mps service and never have connectivity speed issues, so something is definitely wrong with this file. 4 out of 11 members found this review helpful

      --
      God: When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.
    8. Re:A new name divorced from their core? by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      My response:

      Honestly, I am not sure if this will get through to anyone as it was from a big blast e-mail, but here it goes anyway...

      Are you guys daft?
      I am a massive user of both streaming and mailed service.
      The tight integration of the two from a user front end is your single biggest selling point for users like me.

      I put up with the rate hike, largely because I hoped a bigger war chest would help you in trying to re-sign Starz (and hopefully HBO and others). If you really do separate the two user interfaces as I understand is planned, and start charging with two bills as I expect, you will lose at least one more customer (but based on the chatter at slashdot.org I am not the only one). I will *not* maintain two queues. I will *not* maintain two bills for entertainment. I _might_ keep one of the two services, but will not keep both, not if I have to maintain two accounts at two websites with two queues and two rating prediction algorithms and two bills and two logins and two...
      Those customers that walked on the rate hike, they are not coming back. Now you are driving away more customers with this shenanigans.

      so that would be my two cents.
      respectfully,

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    9. Re:A new name divorced from their core? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They could have gone with GetFlix
      In Canada Getflix.ca is availalbe (.com seems taken)

    10. Re:A new name divorced from their core? by Zhiroc · · Score: 1

      mailflix.com is taken, according to a WHOIS search. Maybe it could be bought for the right price. Just about every *flix.com name is probably also gone by now.

  12. Subject related advertising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I lolled
    http://i54.tinypic.com/fo3uav.png

  13. Worthless Queues now by omnichad · · Score: 1

    I add movies to my DVD queue now and they magically sometimes appear on my Instant Queue without any effort on my part. I don't search for streaming content. Their catalog isn't that extensive. Sometimes I browse, but I never search it.

    This might make me cancel my streaming service. I kept both during the price transition.

    1. Re:Worthless Queues now by tangelogee · · Score: 1

      I agree. Streaming never seems to have much I want to watch, and I have the DVD service because it's the only place I can seem to find older movies. Seeing as how Hollywood can't seem to come up with an original idea anymore, and I mostly prefer the originals, I'll go with the DVD service over the streaming. I also love how if you stream some of the TV shows, especially old ones, there are some of the episodes that show up "DVD only." Why is that?

  14. MPAA Drone by xaoslaad · · Score: 1

    Netflix CEO Reed Hastings has got to be an MPAA Shill planted to destroy cheap internet movie streaming. It's the only explanation. Has Hastings always been CEO of Netflix - I'm too lazy/disgusted to look, but if so I propose either that he has been killed and cloned, or brainwashed early on to be an unwitting sleeper agent, who has now been triggered to commit his acts of espionage. These are the only explanations for this kind of disaster.

    1. Re:MPAA Drone by Kjella · · Score: 1

      He's a co-founder, so I guess it's your "killed and cloned" theory. By the way, don't you mean acts of sabotage or something, not espionage?

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    2. Re:MPAA Drone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not sure if he's always held the CEO position, but he was one of the co-founders of Netflix, so he's been there all along.

    3. Re:MPAA Drone by AlphaWolf_HK · · Score: 1

      Reed Hastings is a co-founder of netflix.

      --
      Careful with names containing L slashdot.org/~AiphaWolf_HK slashdot.org/~AlphaWoif_HK slashdot.org/~AiphaWoif_HK
    4. Re:MPAA Drone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, I meant sabotag.e :)

    5. Re:MPAA Drone by firex726 · · Score: 1

      I think something is going on behind the scenes.

      I remembered when they rolled out their streaming service, they made the announcement and that it would be at no additional cost.

      Lately it seems like they have been doing everything they can to get people to cancel.

  15. Apology??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "Sorry we screwed you over, so in response we'll make things extremely inconvenient."

    Dollar vote people, dollar vote.

    1. Re:Apology??? by SirGarlon · · Score: 2

      Unfortunately there are few viable alternatives to Netflix streaming at this time. Hulu has commercials -- a deal breaker for me. Amazon Prime takes extreme inconvenience to whole new levels. I tried it with my Roku box -- they don't even alphabetize the titles in their catalog! I couldn't believe it. Blockbuster has DVD-by-mail service now their streaming service is immature, and Blockbuster is pricey.

      It's more like, "Sorry we screwed you over, but our competitors haven't got their acts together, so we won't, either. Expect more screw-over in the future."

      --
      [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
    2. Re:Apology??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, that "New Arrival" of the Flintstones with John Goodman has few viable alternatives...

      The best alternative now is bittorrent/usenet/etc. My big problem is the old bait-and-switch tactic they pulled on us. F---k 'em.

    3. Re:Apology??? by Myopic · · Score: 1

      Man, I wish commercials were a dealbreaker for more people. They are also a dealbreaker for me, and if they were a dealbreaker for, oh say 15% of people, then that would be enough of a margin, enough of a niche, to carve out solutions for us. Alas, i think we're more like 2-3%.

  16. So will it still be simple to switch? by DarkOx · · Score: 4, Insightful

    One of the reasons I decided the price hikes were acceptable was that Its "month to month" in that I was going to be able to do the streaming only service, consume the new content there, than switch back to the DVD service for a couple months until they get new stuff available on streaming.

    If this makes it hard to do that it further reduced the value to me and starts to make competitors like Amazon and Hulu+ look interesting. I still think Netflix is probably the better value proposition at the moment, even with the price hikes; but if this means I can't easily switch between one type of service and they other, I might have to start looking at other options for content again.

    This is a dumb move, all around AFAICT. Its basically an accounting trick to make the EPS of Netflix proper look a little better, investors won't wont be fooled, customers like me will be aggravated.

    --
    Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    1. Re:So will it still be simple to switch? by Talderas · · Score: 1

      I think the move is smart for Netflix. They're looking at what they're seeing now and what the field looks like in the future. They're looking to cut the disc based business to avoid having it drag down the streaming business. There's a lot of potential out in the future that could cripple the disc-based side of things (look at the current turmoil involved with the Post Office). If the disc-based side goes too far in the red it would drag down the streaming side. They're trying to find ways to maintain profitability in the disc side and you can tell with how they're looking to expand into game discs in addition to DVDs.

      It's been pretty obvious to me for awhile that Netflix was looking to divorce the two sides as much as possible. I didn't realize they would straight out split into two companies. I imagine that if they don't use the same databases or servers they will eventually develop the processes to tie them together.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    2. Re:So will it still be simple to switch? by truthsearch · · Score: 1

      To me, such a complete split and a rebranding mean they're looking to sell the DVD business. Otherwise there was no reason to frustrate the users by delinking their ratings, recommendations, accounts, history, etc. Technically they can run on separate servers and share information between them, but they're not even bothering.

    3. Re:So will it still be simple to switch? by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      Maybe but to me a gradual phase out of the disk business would have made more sense. Keep slowing raising the prices for disks, order smaller numbers of new releases and stop expanding the back catalog. You would lower the yours costs of the disk business will increasing the price until one day you just shut her down.

      In the mean time you work like a dog to improve the content and souring of new content for your streaming service. I agree with Hastings that they need to get out the DVD business if they are to survive, but its to much to soon.

      Right now the DVD by mail service was something non of the real competition (those in the streaming business) could offer. It was something that really differentiated them in the market. They should not give that up until they have something to offer on the streaming side you can't get anywhere else or that nobody else can do nearly as well.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    4. Re:So will it still be simple to switch? by Chibi+Merrow · · Score: 1

      I had a Hulu+ subscription. Got one right when they came available. It was pretty bad. They don't force all of their partners to offer Plus content. So, for example, none of the SciFi shows had more than the three most recent episodes available. Which, considering I got the service mainly to allow me to catch up on Stargate: Universe, made it pretty worthless to me. After about a month I realized that everything I was watching was available on the free side anyway, and cancelled it.

      --
      Maxim: People cannot follow directions.
      Increases in truth directly with the length of time spent explaining them
    5. Re:So will it still be simple to switch? by natophonic · · Score: 1

      There's a lot of potential out in the future that could cripple the disc-based side of things (look at the current turmoil involved with the Post Office).

      If I were to wager, I would bet that the Congresscritters who blather on about "limited government" will prefer to let Level 3 et al upcharge and/or QoS route Netflix network packets, than face their rural constituents' ire at the USPS no longer routing packages down their country roads.

  17. Actual Post by clinko · · Score: 4, Informative

    Here's the actual blog post from Netflix instead of the Techcrunch blogspam that quotes it:

    http://blog.netflix.com/2011/09/explanation-and-some-reflections.html

    1. Re:Actual Post by elguap0 · · Score: 2

      From the blog post: "Another advantage of separate websites is simplicity for our members." I really don't know how someone can say/write that with a straight face.

    2. Re:Actual Post by Colonel+Korn · · Score: 1

      From the blog post: "Another advantage of separate websites is simplicity for our members."

      I really don't know how someone can say/write that with a straight face.

      It's the Apple-style simplicity that's not so uncommon in tech these days. To you and me, simplicity might mean a single site that seamlessly allows search and queuing of streaming and physical media. In the nouveau-simple mindset, simplicity means removing all but a few options so that customers on a single site "don't have to deal with excessive functionality."

      --
      "I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
    3. Re:Actual Post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for the blog link. Now I know that the entire post contains nothing about changing the 60% price increase. It also fails to mention the illusive Linux client. There goes my temptation to subscribe.

    4. Re:Actual Post by alder · · Score: 1

      I really don't know how someone can say/write that with a straight face.

      It gets easier after only a couple of lattes...

  18. Was about to subscribe by mprindle · · Score: 1

    Well, I just got a new PS3 that I'm using for a media center manager and I had planned to signup for Netflix in the next week, but in the wake of this news I'm going to be holding off to see what the heck they are doing. First the 50% increase in the plans and now a complete divergence of the company. I'm sorry I only give money to a company that I feel I can actually get service from and right now that Isn't Netflix/Qwikster.

    1. Re:Was about to subscribe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I just got a new PS3 ... I'm sorry I only give money to a company that I feel I can actually get service from ...

      Error, does not compute.

    2. Re:Was about to subscribe by mschiltz · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry I only give money to a company that I feel I can actually get service from and right now that Isn't Netflix/Qwikster.

      I'm sorry too, because right now it also isn't Sony/SNEI. Although they do have some pretty slick lawyer types working for them, it seems that's about all they got.

    3. Re:Was about to subscribe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I subscribed for a month, the freebie offer.. use my PS3 to view. I must say, the offerings are poor, either TV show I have seen, or show I will never watch or movies labeled as new that are from the 80's seriously OMEGA man as a new release...

      So I will drop it before the bill comes due, and use either red box or the drivel that cable offers...

  19. Great... by andymadigan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So now when something in my queue is available on instant I won't be able to see that unless I specifically search a different site. (For an 100+ item queue, that's unreasonable).

    Now when I'm looking for something to watch, I'll have to check Netflix first, then Qwikster.

    I can't even see this as sensible business plan. The world is moving to streaming, so Netflix is going to create a new company that ships old discs? Do they really expect this business will still be growing in 5 years?

    Before Netflix split the plans, I had assumed that Netflix would slowly raised prices on the DVD-by-mail service before finally killing it. In the meantime they would work on expanding their content, and lobbying Congress to make it as easy to broadcast video as it is for radio stations to broadcast music (no individual negotiations, just a single company to make payments to).

    Instead, their streaming library is shrinking and they're cutting away the DVD business that makes up for it. I think Reed has drank a little too much of the Kool-Aid. He starts out his post talking about how well Netflix works on TVs. Yes, Reed, the software is great, but the selection is terrible. As an addition to the DVD service, it was great and promising, but it's not ready to be its own general market product yet.

    --
    The right to protest the State is more sacred than the State.
    1. Re:Great... by Goboxer · · Score: 1

      I can't even see this as sensible business plan. The world is moving to streaming, so Netflix is going to create a new company that ships old discs? Do they really expect this business will still be growing in 5 years?

      People keep saying this and trying to get people to switch to streaming content. Well, that totally blows for two kinds of people. The poor and the technologically inept. Netflix would still have had a solid dvd business for the next 5-10 years. Now they won't have a solid business between the two.

    2. Re:Great... by CmdrPorno · · Score: 1

      "...I had assumed that Netflix would slowly raised prices on the DVD-by-mail service before finally killing it."

      Me too, but he's laid down the gauntlet that they're "done" with price increases, which will only make people more outraged when the next price hike comes, whether it's across the board or they begin offering "premium" streaming with new releases at a higher cost.

      --
      Sent from my iPhone
    3. Re:Great... by indytx · · Score: 1

      Netflix is really just screwing over busy familes.

      I can't even see this as sensible business plan. The world is moving to streaming, so Netflix is going to create a new company that ships old discs? Do they really expect this business will still be growing in 5 years?

      People keep saying this and trying to get people to switch to streaming content. Well, that totally blows for two kinds of people. The poor and the technologically inept. Netflix would still have had a solid dvd business for the next 5-10 years. Now they won't have a solid business between the two.

      It doesn't just blow for the technically adept, it blows for anyone who likes HD movies and wants them at a reasonable price. I have the streaming service and the DVD service which is upgraded to Blu-ray. For my $10/mo Blu-ray subscription, I get at least one HD movie each week. AppleTV charges $3.99 for HD movies. There is no price comparison.

      I suppose I was one of the few people who didn't really care about the price increase as I had already done the math on how much it would cost to changes services (and that's not including changing equipment). Netflix has been a one-stop shop for my family, and that's who this is really screwing over. Families. The streaming service has been nice because there is a pretty decent catalog of educational and children's content WITHOUT COMMERCIALS!!! Seriously, no fruity pebbles. No beer ads. No smoking substitutes with people acting so satisfied as they exhale mist. Netflix streaming is a great way to control some of the popular (ie LCD) culture your children get exposed to. Does it suck that Netflix lost Starz? Sure, but I don't care. It's hard to find time to watch one movie a week, let alone something on streaming. What I don't understand is why it makes since for me to now have to look at two places for movies. Wasn't the whole point to make it all easier and more convenient? Maybe next they'll take a page from Microsoft and add a *&^%ing ribbon to the website, too.

      --
      Make love, not reality television.
    4. Re:Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So now when something in my queue is available on instant I won't be able to see that unless I specifically search a different site. (For an 100+ item queue, that's unreasonable).

      Agreed

      I can't even see this as sensible business plan. The world is moving to streaming, so Netflix is going to create a new company that ships old discs? Do they really expect this business will still be growing in 5 years?

      NetFlix totally screwed up by introducing their streaming option "for free" as part of your existing NetFlix DVD rental account. The word "free" does not exist in Hollywood, not to mention being an excellent way to draw "the wrong type" of attention from the movie industry. The movie studios have been steadily increasing their licensing fees to companies like NetFlix because of streaming. The movie companies totally missed the streaming bandwagon but they are trying to make up by jacking their fees. Notice the break between Starz & NetFlix...over licensing fees. So I think the business model from streaming might be doomed if the movie companies all come up with their own streaming businesses (and even more queues to manage?), and that makes the traditional DVD rental business look good again.

      Before Netflix split the plans, I had assumed that Netflix would slowly raised prices on the DVD-by-mail service before finally killing it. In the meantime they would work on expanding their content, and lobbying Congress to make it as easy to broadcast video as it is for radio stations to broadcast music (no individual negotiations, just a single company to make payments to).

      NetFlix could lobby Congress until the end of time. The major obstacle to their lobbying and your proposal is existing copyright law. As copyright holders the movie companies don't have much incentive to make life easier or to open access to content unless they can make a buck at it.

      Instead, their streaming library is shrinking and they're cutting away the DVD business that makes up for it. I think Reed has drank a little too much of the Kool-Aid. He starts out his post talking about how well Netflix works on TVs. Yes, Reed, the software is great, but the selection is terrible. As an addition to the DVD service, it was great and promising, but it's not ready to be its own general market product yet.

      Totally agree here

      The real villian in this mess/movie is the movie industry for being greedy. NetFlix is nothing more than a "walk on" player that keeps fumbling their lines.

  20. Maybe not such a bad move by billrp · · Score: 1

    The DVD rental by mail business is a dead end, and Netflix can more easily sell it off after they figure out streaming deals. I never understood how they make money - I pay about $8/month for renting a max of 1 DVD, and I get about 2 DVDs by mail each week. That's 8 each month, and with postage/envelopes each way at about $0.50, that's $8.00 - not much profit here. I suspect Netflix wants to emphasize to movie studios that DVDs are a dying business, and to get their streaming act together.

    1. Re:Maybe not such a bad move by pla · · Score: 1

      The DVD rental by mail business is a dead end

      A third of the US still lacks broadband. A larger number, including myself, pays way too much for a service that technically qualifies as broadband (satellite, 3g, etc), but have such onerous bandwidth caps (not to mention random but usually short drops in service) as to make streaming movies a virtual impossibility.

      It sounds great to say "we have higher margins on this side of the business, let's ditch that old crap", but just giving up on 100+ million potential customers doesn't count as the wisest of business decisions.

      That said, I agree with you about the postal overhead for their mailed DVD service, and this hideously-named spinoff will eventually need to figure out how to deal with that problem.

    2. Re:Maybe not such a bad move by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 1

      I pay about $8/month for renting a max of 1 DVD, and I get about 2 DVDs by mail each week.

      Way back when I had the 1 DVD option, I was lucky to get one disc per week. To get 2 per week, you would need to watch and mail it the day you receive it and hope the USPS is functioning perfectly. 25% were unplayably damaged. Realistically the average person can get 3 playable discs per month if you keep your queue full of unpopular choices that are not back ordered and watch the disc soon after receiving it.

    3. Re:Maybe not such a bad move by truthsearch · · Score: 1

      I agree, except for your postage cost estimate. Like any large mail user they have a special contract with the postal service. They pay less per envelope than we do.

    4. Re:Maybe not such a bad move by residieu · · Score: 1

      When I watched my discs as soon as I got them, I had three day turnaround. Receive and watch Monday, Mail Tuesday, Netflix receives and next move mailed on Wednesday, Receive and watch Thursday. Repeat on next Monday. USPS is very efficient in my area. Unplayable discs were rare, and I didn't have to worry about backorders since I mostly ordered older movies (which is why Redbox is an unacceptable alternative)

    5. Re:Maybe not such a bad move by HideyoshiJP · · Score: 0

      For every heavy DVD user like you, there are users like me that watch maybe 2 DVDs a month. It balances out.

  21. Alternatives? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, how do the alternatives stack up at this point? Amazon's VoD vs. Blockbuster On Demand vs. Roku vs....? Especially in terms of title availability?

  22. It's recognizing where video is going. by CaptainJeff · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's not stupid. It's NetFlix acknowledging that streaming is how people will watch content in the future. They are putting themselves 100% on the bleeding edge of all-streaming with no physical media. Now, there are a whole bunch of people that still want DVDs...and that's why they are still playing in that area at all. However, five years from now, when no one wants DVDs at all, they can just kill Quickster. Meanwhile, NetFlix becomes the dominant king of streaming content, as they can dedicate themselves 100% to that. It's not about innovating both business models anymore. It's about milking the DVD market as it dies while still allowing themselves to focus entirely on the streaming market, which is the future.

    1. Re:It's recognizing where video is going. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That in no way explains why they'd remove the integration now, while the streaming isn't up to par yet. Running them as two seperate businesses makes sense, but removing the integration and splitting your brand does not.

    2. Re:It's recognizing where video is going. by Duradin · · Score: 1

      Though when they find out that people don't want $60 per month streaming killing off Netflix will leave them to rebuild from Qwikster (or WTH it was).

      Netflix going streaming only shows they think they can make a profit it from it and if they can make a profit from it their suppliers will figure out they aren't making enough profit from Netflix. Kinda like what's happening now. DVDs by mail require a physical infrastructure. Streaming just takes some web monkeys.

    3. Re:It's recognizing where video is going. by drinking12many · · Score: 1

      and they could have done all of this under the Netflix name. They will always have the ability to have a small DVD business because there are large parts of america that have no broadband or crappy at best(i know hard to believe) this wont change in the next 5 years. Also when content is limited on streaming I loved the flexibility of getting it on DVD from one site, also when I go to europe I cant use the netflix streaming but at least I can take a DVD with me or rip some to put on the hard drive of my computer.

    4. Re:It's recognizing where video is going. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Streaming may be the future for many, but Netflix doesn't have much of a library for streaming. Old movies, even older TV shows, and bargain bucket foreign TV shows from the 80s and 90s. Current shows are at least a season behind, and those that own that programming are squeezing Netflix for licensing. Their streaming library is getting smaller each time Netflix says "no" to increase in costs for them.

      Unless the library is substantial, Netflix will be used as a novelty catch up service by many, and then dropped once people stop finding stuff they want to watch. Not everyone is interested in Amine and British sitcoms.

    5. Re:It's recognizing where video is going. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that assumes that in 5 years I can get everything on streaming that I can currently get on DVD. the trend so far seems to be in the opposite direction.

    6. Re:It's recognizing where video is going. by javakah · · Score: 1

      It is stupid. There is value in a combined service.

      I had been a bit annoyed about the price increase and their BS handling of it, but I had gotten over it, and was figuring that I'd just pay a bit more and keep both the DVDs and the streaming (despite probably using the streaming less). It was just easy and already packaged nicely together, where I had my queues together, and if I was interested in a show I could easily see if it was on instant first before trying to get it on DVD. This is destroying that severing that link and destroying that convenience. This is actually making me think now that perhaps I should just drop the streaming part, since I use it less and it's now going to be far less convenient. I am thinking that I should perhaps take this opportunity to look into Amazon's streaming content, as using it would now be just as convenient, and due to their pricing changes, I wouldn't have to pay more to just keep the DVD service.

    7. Re:It's recognizing where video is going. by superdude72 · · Score: 1

      In the future... when the movie studios make their entire catalogs available for streaming, all the time, at a reasonable price? I'm not holding my breath.

    8. Re:It's recognizing where video is going. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But they don't need to separate DVDs as a company before they kill it. They could just keep going as they had been and kill DVD mailings whenever they wanted. The only reason I see for this is so they can sell off the physical DVD rental portion.

    9. Re:It's recognizing where video is going. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's NetFlix acknowledging that streaming is how people will watch content in the future.

      Maybe, but not yet and not for a long time to come. Why not? Because it's WHAT they stream that matters, not just the fact that they have streaming available. Look through their crappy titles available for streaming. See what I mean? Nobody is going to pay for that junk. About the only saving graces are some of the TV series they have, and even many of those are one or more seasons behind. They are already a month behind with DVD releases - far longer until on streaming, in the unlikely event it EVER gets to streaming. No thanks.

      However, five years from now, when no one wants DVDs at all,

      LOL! That's what people said when Blu-ray showed up. DVD is not dying anytime soon, and most certainly not within 5 years. Why not? Because people can rip a Netflix DVD into a 2-4GB file and toss it on their external HDD, or just burn their own DVD copy dirt cheap. A huge number of people are signed up to Netflix exclusively so they can do this. I predict the Qwikster DVD side will be the real winner of this split, NOT the streaming company, unless Netflix has some mega deals up their sleeve with Hollywood distributors, and I seriously doubt that.

    10. Re:It's recognizing where video is going. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except they are losing their streaming titles as well and their selection was not that great to begin with. I would hardly call that dominating. It won't be too hard for the up and coming services to grab their viewers.

    11. Re:It's recognizing where video is going. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That and about being able to reduce their overhead while increasing their profitability.
      Streaming video as a service most likely doesn't require the same level of taxes, accounting department, mailing facilities, etc. as does their dvd mail service.
      Plus they see redbox / blockbuster eating into the dvd profit margins.
      Basically for them to compete against other online streamers they have to be as profitable as they can.
      Oh and they can charge more too while making use of nice corporate tax loopholes and doubling their CEO fee.
      Sounds like a win win to me.

    12. Re:It's recognizing where video is going. by tepples · · Score: 1

      also when I go to europe I cant use the netflix streaming but at least I can take a DVD with me

      You'll have to take the DVD player too. Not only are the United States and Europe in different DVD regions, but even with all-region discs, I've found that a lot of DVD player models can't convert between 50 Hz (Europe) and 60 Hz (North America/Japan) video. For example, an all-region PAL disc (Wobbl and Bob) played on an NTSC PlayStation 2 produces "TV system doesn't match."

    13. Re:It's recognizing where video is going. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's kinda stupid, because as a streaming only company, Netflix has very little to differentiate itself from any other streaming video company.

      What it has going for it is nearly ubiquitous availability (it has the best hardware client support by far - TVs, game consoles, mobile apps, streaming boxes, etc. - if it can display video, it can play Netflix content, pretty much.)

      And that's it. No real advantage in negotiating for content (if anything, being bigger appears to be a problem when negotiating with content providers these days...) so they're losing content rather than gaining it. No more customer loyalty, after the last few months of idiocy, and no more mature platform, after their recent website overhaul.

      And now, no more queue spillover to DVD, which was the one thing that Netflix did that was a clear advantage over streaming only competitors. If you're a streaming Netflix customer, jumping ship just got a lot easier.

      So yeah, it's kinda dumb.

    14. Re:It's recognizing where video is going. by crackspackle · · Score: 1

      I don't think anyone would disagree that the future lies in streaming, just whether or not Netflix is pulling the trigger to soon. There are a lot of big players against who they will have to compete should they choose to get more serious about the game - Amazon, Google, Apple, as well as the studios themselves to name a few. They also have unconventional competition from the ISP's who will continue to play the front as a direct competitor while trying to block the back with non-net neutral policies. As long as they paired DVD delivery with streaming, they had a stronger product they could use as leverage to keep the streaming option going. Now that they have effectively split them, it will be a lot easier for customers to drop them for the next big thing.

    15. Re:It's recognizing where video is going. by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      Now, there are a whole bunch of people that still want DVDs...and that's why they are still playing in that area at all.

      Not entirely. I would prefer streaming-only, but they are offering DVDs because too much isn't available for streaming yet. I suspect with Starz leaving that will actually get worse, not better.

      I subscribe to both the DVD and streaming services because 50% of what I want to watch isn't available on streaming. So I look it up, go "Oh darn, that one isn't available for streaming. Wanna watch it Wednesday night instead?" Then I click "Add to DVD Queue" and keep surfing.

    16. Re:It's recognizing where video is going. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bleeding edge? Maybe if they even had 30% of the content available by DVD available on streaming.. but no. Half the stuff I search for is DVD only. So it was nice to be able to add it Tony queue and move on to my seconds choice.. if its available for streaming (most likely not)... rinse and repeat.

      By going to streaming only, you better have most of the content available or you just crippled the whole deal and really made me question if having even just the streaming is really worth it.

    17. Re:It's recognizing where video is going. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You sound like a Netflix employee... erm, Reed Hastings. You can "recognize where video is going" without spinning off a new company with two sites. It's called evolving the business, which all businesses do.

      Splitting it into two pieces so you can really "focus" on streaming is just a weak spin at something that inconveniences customers.

      Last month I ended my DVD subscription. Now that I received this email this morning, I'm just about to end my streaming one too. This guy is just not smart.

    18. Re:It's recognizing where video is going. by Col.+Klink+(retired) · · Score: 1

      Maybe everyone will stream in the future, but they were one of the driving forces and they just shut it off. When I search for a movie, Netflix will tell me if they have it available for streaming (at which point, I just into the future). In fact, when it's not available for streaming, they'll tell me similar titles that are available.

      Going forward, I'd have to search the streaming site first and then fall back to the DVD site. Given there poor streaming catalog, I'm not going to bother searching the streaming site at all.

      Not to mention the fact that they are divorcing their ratings and reviews. That means that if I only rate DVDs, they won't be able to make suggestions for streaming content based on my preferences.

      Netflix just burned their bridge to the streaming-only future.

      --

      -- Don't Tase me, bro!

    19. Re:It's recognizing where video is going. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not about innovating both business models anymore. It's about milking the DVD market as it dies while still allowing themselves to focus entirely on the streaming market, which is the future.

      Perhaps in the future but as Netflix has really bad stuff on streaming and nothing new at all...how exactly will they keep customers while this transition is in place.

    20. Re:It's recognizing where video is going. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. This has nothing to do with pleasing the consumers and everything to do with letting the two sides of the business grow and die separately so the shareholders can eventually sell off one portion without messing with the other.

      The "apology" is just there to try to make it sound like this was all for us even though it's really just them trying to protect their asses. Again, they're being a bit condescending since some of us would have been fine with the real reasons.

      It's unfortunate, since losing the ability to easily find streaming vs. physical content was helpful. Having said that, sometimes I did just want to search streaming only and the site wasn't really that great for that (hence the helper sites like http://instantwatcher.com/). Maybe instantwatcher will fill the missing gap now and search both sites.

    21. Re:It's recognizing where video is going. by Mindragon · · Score: 1

      Small problem with that amazing(tm) idea. The MAFIAA(tm) does not want this to happen unless they are compensated(c) every time someone even utters one of the copyrighted or trademarked words that their pyramid-scheme(r) has come up with. In their view(c), the entity formerly known as Netflix(tm) is giving away their content(c) and the MAFIAA(tm) isn't being compensated(c) for this release(r). They want to be compensated(c) every time someone sings(c), views(r) or in any way shape or form performs(tm) their material. Enjoy your freedom ... soon it will no longer be free(c)(tm)(r).

      --
      Just add {In Space!} to anything.
    22. Re:It's recognizing where video is going. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's premature, is what it is.

      Most of their content is irrevocably invested into the DVD library. It would take an act of God to convince any copyright lawyer that Netflix would be permitted to stream an arbitrary DVD to a single person over the internet, even if technology permitted only one person to stream from a file at any given time. Their contracts for streaming content look shaky, and now that content producers realize the value of streaming rights they are shopping around for the highest bidder. (not Netflix)

      As a person who was quite interested in signing up to their services, it is with dismay that I saw the events over the past few months unfold like a high-speed train wreck. Netflix went from being a shining example of a company that had vision to a battered wreck that shows just who is in charge around here. (not Netflix)

      All the other streaming alternatives to Netflix seem to be worse in various respects. For example, you still get advertising on Hulu Plus, ostensibly to lower the cost of streaming to you. AppleTV is just the same overpriced files from iTunes. Blockbuster is equally insanely priced.

      A touch melodramatic, but I think we have hit the high-water mark for digitally delivered content. I expect things will only get worse from here. Streaming is certainly the future, but it does not look like the kind of future I want to live in.

    23. Re:It's recognizing where video is going. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's about milking the DVD market as it dies while still allowing themselves to focus entirely on the streaming market, which is the future.

      Right. That's obvious. Here's what you're missing, though: it's NOT obvious why I need to manage two accounts, two sets of ratings, two sets of recommendations, and two entire queues during this "milking" phase.

    24. Re:It's recognizing where video is going. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is, they just don't have selection. You can have a great e-reader, but without the catalog (amazon kindle store), it is pretty worthless. There is more than delivery medium at play here.

    25. Re:It's recognizing where video is going. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, this is like Amazon deciding to spin off selling physical books just because "ebooks are the future of books."

      There will still be books twenty years from now. There will still be video on physical media then too. As we are learning again, bandwidth is not free. Physical media can be loaned, gifted, and inherited. Streaming is only as durable as the company that streams.

      There is a real market for both. And a real benefit to coordinating queues for both. Netflix just shot off their left foot.

    26. Re:It's recognizing where video is going. by badatnicknames · · Score: 1

      There's still alot of value in DVD's by mail. The studios will likely continue to increase the prices for streaming. ISP's continue to impose bandwidth caps. DVD's provide portability without using mobile bandwidth which is even capped more. DVD's have close captions and extras. You can buy DVD's if you really want to own the content.

    27. Re:It's recognizing where video is going. by Syberz · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it's much better to alienate your customers, remove very useful features and make your customers lives more complicated by creating a 2nd company in order to close it back down in a few years, rather than simply fazing out a department while keeping your customers happy and gently weening them off DVDs towards streaming.

      --
      ~Syberz
  23. Games by feidaykin · · Score: 4, Informative

    Missing from this submission is the news that Netflix/Qwikster will now offer game rentals. I suppose that's not a big deal to everyone. I'm sure gamefly isn't happy about it, but competition should be great right? Personally I rarely if ever rent games, since I tend to play a demo first (and if there isn't one, pirate) and if I like the game I purchase it through Steam, so that I can get up-to-date patches, play online, and have that warm fuzzy feeling of supporting the developers. I wish the industry was more receptive to demos, because they do work, for good games at least.

    For example (an off-topic gaming story follows here), I recently watched X-Men: First Class and the American/Soviet ships primed for battle with each other put me in a Red Alert mood. I had never played the third game in the franchise, because when it came out I was raiding heavily in WoW and not playing anything else. Anyway, I went to check the price on Steam to find out if I had to get a pirated version as a sampler first, and to my surprise there was a free demo. The demo only offered two missions, but after spending an hour messing around with the various units in one mission I decided it was certainly worth the $20. Moral here is, game demos make sales, at least if the game is any good. But it seems to me like the industry simply expects you to rent the game if you want a sample, or else pay the full price, which is likely one of the driving forces of game piracy. Obviously the whole "free of charge" thing is a major draw for pirates, but I can imagine I'm not the only person who buys games, but won't waste $20-$50 until I'm certain it's something I will get several hours out of.

    --

    "To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit." -Stephen Hawking

    1. Re:Games by jkmartin · · Score: 1

      "One improvement we will make at launch is to add a video games upgrade option, similar to our upgrade option for Blu-ray, for those who want to rent Wii, PS3 and Xbox 360 games."

      But now I ask, do I have to rent DVDs to rent games?

    2. Re:Games by tepples · · Score: 1

      Even if you do have to pay for renting DVD movies to rent PS3 and Xbox 360 games, PS3 and Xbox 360 can play DVD movies.

    3. Re:Games by MattSausage · · Score: 1

      Forget Rentals, and demos aren't much better. Even selling your used games is the same as stealing money out of the mouths of the developer's children. Renting is effectively a legal sex slave brothel where a Pimp (your local rental place, or gamefly, or, now, Qwikster) buys a child slave (a copy of a game) then pimps it out to be used... nay not used... RAPED HORRIBLY... by strangers, who then return the sad sad little creature to it's pimp who puts it back in its proprietary case and puts it back on display to be drooled on by further perverse strangers.

      And the worst part of all this? The Parents who sold the child to the renter, only get paid once, whereas the pimp gets paid until the end of time. So you should not only feel bad for the poor developers. You should immediately report yourself or anyone you know who's borrowed or bought a used game to the police for grand larceny, because you have stolen $13million from the developers of a crappy game. If you borrowed a GOOD game, god help you, you caused the financial collapse of 2008.

    4. Re:Games by darth+dickinson · · Score: 1

      I can imagine I'm not the only person who buys games, but won't waste $20-$50 until I'm certain it's something I will get several hours out of.

      You're absolutely right. Honestly for me the reason I "try before buying" is to make sure it will work with my current hardware, or if I need to budget for an upgrade. I will probably get flamed for daring to have a 2 year old video card, but honestly I have more important things to spend money on than this month's new hotness in gaming hardware.

    5. Re:Games by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      The Parents who sold the child to the renter, only get paid once, whereas the pimp gets paid until the end of time. So you should not only feel bad for the poor developers.

      The lesson I take from this is that the Parents should cut out the middle-man and pimp out their own kids directly.

      I'm sure EA would do it.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    6. Re:Games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree with everything you wrote. Why Netflix is going to offer game rentals, and then I went to make a sandwich. Hey look a bunny rabbit.

    7. Re:Games by feidaykin · · Score: 1

      I agree with everything you wrote. Why Netflix is going to offer game rentals, and then I went to make a sandwich. Hey look a bunny rabbit.

      I have to admit, that's pretty funny. Except, dear AC, in my post I did warn you that I was about veer offtopic in parenthesis (like these) in hopes that I would preemptively prevent comments such as yours. Bravo though, that was better than I was expecting. I fully admit that my style of communication is rather rambling, both online and in real life, because I tend to see abstract connections to topics that most people view as entirely unrelated. In fact going from Netflix offering game rentals to a rant about game demos is a pretty short stretch compared to most of my ramblings. So consider yourself lucky!

      --

      "To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit." -Stephen Hawking

    8. Re:Games by residieu · · Score: 1

      If I were doing it, they would just count as discs. A DVD is a disc, a game is a disc. You can have a total of X discs out (depending on your subscription.) Maybe charge a small premium to have access to games, like they have for Blu-Ray. This would be the sensible way to handle it. So of course, this is not the way they will handle it.

  24. The reason they are doing this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Licensing. Simply put they can't afford the licensing for both the rights to streaming and rental in the same company. The rental will have access to more publishers. That's pretty much why they had to split it into two companies.

    1. Re:The reason they are doing this... by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      I have to admit, Im surprised the customers are being as fussy as they are about it. The rates are the same and they're adding game rentals. Now they're seperating the businesses which, I hope, will reduce conflicts of interest while they're negotiating their licensing deals.

      I'm sorry, I am just not ready to wave my pitchfork around.

      --

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

  25. Cover my bar tab and you'll get a better name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After the millions spent on the brand and trademark searching, not to mention the looming millions on re-branding, and that's the best hey can come up with?

    Seriously, cover my bar tab for a nights and I'll give you 5 choices that rock and make way more sense.

  26. Re:Incoming bitchy comments... 3.. 2.. 1 by digitalsushi · · Score: 0

    Whoa -~! You nailed the timing on that bro! You are the world's first digital soothsayer. I read your post and went into hater mode, but dayum son you have this site pegged.

    --
    slashdot: where everyone yells sarcastic metaphors to themselves to understand the issue
  27. Should have called it 'Dumpster'... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    because that's where they're headed.

  28. Saucer separation by khendron · · Score: 1

    This is like the Enterprise doing a saucer separation.

    Netflix is separating themselves from the part of the business that they think are doomed. That way, when the DVD by mail business does go belly up, Netflix itself won't be around to take damage.

    And I think they fully expect it to go belly up. Qwikster? Come on! "*ster" names went out of style almost 10 years ago!

    --
    Life is like a web application. Sometime you need cookies just to get by.
    1. Re:Saucer separation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I send you a hearty 'Harrumph' of agreement. They should have just called it 'Dumpster' - 'D' for DVD, 'umpst' for the gaggin noise you make when the garbage smells bad, and 'er' for what are we talking about again?

    2. Re:Saucer separation by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

      I would think it was the streaming business that was doomed to failure. ISPs are implementing bandwidth caps everywhere, so it is only a matter of time before it is no longer worthwhile.

    3. Re:Saucer separation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The funny thing is that I'd be more likely to dump the Netflix online streaming side of the business than dump the new Qwikster DVD by mail side.

      Netflix's online streaming catalog of movies is still pretty puny, and it's only going to get worse once they lose the Starz Play catalog.

    4. Re:Saucer separation by SemperUbi · · Score: 1

      If that's really what they were thinking, they're nuts. Their streaming selection is awful.

    5. Re:Saucer separation by omnichad · · Score: 1

      And add to that, the studios licensing the content are trying to bait and switch Netflix too. Those rates are going to skyrocket when they see Netflix trying to make all that money on streaming alone.

    6. Re:Saucer separation by EastCoastSurfer · · Score: 1

      Between caps and content, I'm not sure the streaming side is really going anywhere. They are making good money with their DVD service, so wouldn't it make more sense to keep it around in order to fund, grow, and protect some risk on the streaming side? They can wind down the DVD side if it ever stops making money, but spinning it off now seems way to premature.

      IMHO, we have seen a lot of miscalculations the last week or so from Netflix that sound like desperation. It makes me think there is another bomb that is going to be dropped.

  29. I messed up. I owe you an explanation. by johann21 · · Score: 1

    Did anyone else think that email started out sounding like a nigerian money scam?

  30. Good news, everyone! by heptapod · · Score: 2

    NetFlix is also changing the name of their streaming service to The Pirate Bay increasing their streaming library 100fold!

  31. Sounds like Trading Places. by trout007 · · Score: 2

    I wonder if he made a one dollar bet with another CEO that he could ruin a successful company in one year and the other one could make a company successful in one year.

    --
    I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
    1. Re:Sounds like Trading Places. by Bucc5062 · · Score: 1

      That sounds like a losing bet since these days, CEOs seem more interested in ruining companies then building them up. I'd be interested in knowing what was the rags to riches success company for I'd buy short on the stock. No company is allowed to be successful today, only profitable for the next quarter.

      --
      Life is a great ride, the vehicle doesn't matter
    2. Re:Sounds like Trading Places. by Bill+Dimm · · Score: 1

      No, he's having a race with Leo Apotheker to see who can destroy a company fastest. He was off to a slow start, but has pulled ahead.

  32. What do they put in the water in CEO land??? by nedlohs · · Score: 1

    So after pissing off a minority of users by changing the pricing struture the plan is to piss off the rest?

    Force me to consider the disk and the streaming as unrelated things so that when I don't use one that much it'll be easier to ditch it?

    I have to search for things in two places?

    That whole recommendation thing they did a million dollar prize for not that long ago - it now can't use my DVD watching to recommend streaming?

    Sure they are clearly planning to ditch the DVD half and re trying to limit damages from people ranting about it to a brand name that isn't netflix. But I doubt the people doing the complaining are going to oblige.

    1. Re:What do they put in the water in CEO land??? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      That whole recommendation thing they did a million dollar prize for not that long ago - it now can't use my DVD watching to recommend streaming

      Yeah, well when the entire library is crap you've never heard of, you really need the algorithm to tell you what to watch. Like stupid teen comedy/dramas like Hannah Montana? Watch the Australian hit H20: Just Add Water.

  33. Drowning! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This whole scenario reminds me of what happens when someone falls in the water and realizes they are in over their head! They panic and begin to flail about instead of making calm decisions to get themselves out of trouble. If you're there with them, they'll try to hold on to you and end up dragging you down with them!

  34. Are they planning on selling one of them off? by elrous0 · · Score: 1

    That's the only possible reason I can think of for this bonehead move.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:Are they planning on selling one of them off? by bananaquackmoo · · Score: 1

      That sounds likely. I haven't heard anyone else talk about this angle yet, but this seems to make the most sense of any possible explanation I've heard so far.

  35. Sell it off or wind it down. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This sounds like they're starting to think about selling off or winding down the physical media side of the business.

  36. It's going to be sold off... by QuietLagoon · · Score: 1

    It looks to me as if Netflix will next be looking for a buyer for Quiflix. First the separate the HQ, then totally separate pricing with no discount if you use both services, now the separate name. It looks Quikflix is being separated away from Netflix because Netflix will soon be selling the Quikflix business off to another entity.

    1. Re:It's going to be sold off... by omnichad · · Score: 1

      At least now if their streaming business goes under, the DVD rental service might still be around. They won't survive long in the streaming business once the studios pick prices they can live with for the long term.

  37. Turds are like worms by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    if you cut a turd in two, what do you get?

    Two turds, that's what.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    1. Re:Turds are like worms by freeze128 · · Score: 1

      ...and a dirty knife.

  38. Definitely Not Thought All the Way Through by sarbonn · · Score: 1

    I received the same email this morning and immediately thought to myself that this was someone playing damage control, not someone with a plan and vision. I'm currently going through the process of finishing up a season of a television show I wanted to watch. And then I'll cancel both services. This whole Quikster thing rings of desperation, not a solid plan, almost as if they queried the fry guy at McDonalds and asked him what he would choose if he had to come up with something and then went with the first thing they heard. I don't think they realize that their customers are slowly pushing away from them, and that the damage has yet to be felt (it's going to occur during the next few months as the impact of the increase arrives and then the realization that Netflix is no longer the company it once was, as they pay two bills to get the same thing they used to get under one, even if it is the same price).

    --
    Sarbonn's blog: http://www.sarbonn.com/blog
  39. From a streaming only subscriber by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Its interesting how mad everyone is getting. I dropped DVDs when the pricing changed because they weren't that big a deal to me so the existence of Qwickster doesn't affect me. I've put all my eggs in the streaming basket so I really hope they make good on their promise to get more streaming content available because of this course of action. If not and they crash and burn I'll have to go to Green Scene or Amazon Prime or something...

  40. No, they are gambling by EzInKy · · Score: 1

    Neflix is gambling on how people will watch content in the future. Seriously, do you really think that five years from now the US will have improved its infrastructure enough to support universal access to downloadable content?

    --
    Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
    1. Re:No, they are gambling by Nox3173 · · Score: 1

      It's too bad ISP's won't deliver on their promises of bandwidth, they're just going to change their promises...

  41. Uh oh by boxxa · · Score: 1

    From a financial standpoint, this sounds like the Netflix business of streaming is trying to prevent the DVD business side from bankrupting it.

    --
    Bryan
  42. Streaming doomed to fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does anyone else besides me thing that "Qwikster" sounds more like a streaming company name (I can get my movie QWIK instead of having to wait for the mail)? Besides, streaming is doomed to fail as long as ISPs are allowed to maintain bandwidth caps.

  43. Not really. Bashing stupid has... by EzInKy · · Score: 1

    ...has been a cool thing since forever.

    --
    Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
  44. Only smart if they announce new titles streaming by swb · · Score: 1

    This ONLY makes any sense if they announce at the same time that they have made new agreements with all the studios to put all their catalog available for streaming.

    That didn't happen, so now they are divorcing the service that actually *has* all the titles you want to watch from their primary brand and associating that brand with all the crappy titles you don't want to watch on streaming.

    Corporate suicide -- how do they get all those apparently smart people to go along with this at once?

  45. Re:Incoming bitchy comments... 3.. 2.. 1 by MightyYar · · Score: 1

    I'm not going to bash Netflix, but I will say that it's been a while since I've seen the complete destruction of a very well-regarded name brand.

    Maybe the IBM PC?

    Can you imagine Coca-Cola changing their name? McDonalds? Apple? Why work so hard to build name recognition for a service and then toss it in the garbage?

    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  46. Well that's great by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    there goes Netflix. What made them useful to me was the low price compared to cable television. Take that away (by charging me $20/mo for two or three different services) and I'm out.

    I guess people will pay just about anything for TV. Life sucks pretty bad unless your rich, so I can't blame them.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Well that's great by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 1

      I guess people will pay just about anything for TV.

      This is the crucial issue. If true, then Netflix will morph into an inconvenient service costing as much as cable/satellite. If false, then Netflix will go broke and disappear as they try to morph into an inconvenient service costing as much as cable/satellite.

      Netflix streaming originally provided good value for the customer, and content providers and Netflix both made money. This was popular with customers. Netflix responds by destroying value as quick as possible to try and make more money. This is not popular with customers. How will it end?

  47. Embracing the disruption by CyberLeader · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So we here in the Slashdot crowd are the first ones to laugh at businesses that fail to stay ahead of the technology curve. AOL and their endless CDs, RIM getting destroyed by iPhones and Android phones, Yahoo's failure to recognize that Google's advantage comes from more than just its search algorithms, et al. A common theme through all of these dramatic implosions is that the old business model strangled the new, and that the leadership of these companies was unwilling to take the short-term pain hit to prepare for the future. Yet Netflix is doing just that, and they meet with even more derision because it's going to screw up the existing customer base.

    Do any of us believe that DVDs via USPS are the future of content delivery? Of course not. Could Netflix have spun it a little better? Sure, but there's a whole set of reasons that moving away from your established business model is considered painful, and one of those is that it's going to piss off the established base and cost you some lost business. A little more artistry in the transition would have been nice, but anyone who thinks that this move is going to kill off Netflix is probably mistaken. They are being remarkably honest about it all.

    The DVD business is dying fast, and they know it. Direct content delivery is the growth industry that is disrupting DVDs (and eventually CDs, games, and packaged software) out of existence, and they're jumping to the new ship before the old one is sunk.

    --

    Software Shouldn't Suck

    E-mail: frank at jacquette dot spamless com (remove the spamless!)

    1. Re:Embracing the disruption by Fulminata · · Score: 2

      Maybe, but I think that what they'd already done was sufficient. Dividing into separate plans was a good decision, it was just handled poorly from a PR perspective. Dividing into separate companies is simply a poor decision that compounds the previous PR blunder.

      What happens now is that they have pissed off nearly everyone they didn't already piss off with the price increase. A lot of people who had decided to go ahead and keep both services despite the increase will now end up dropping one or both because they no longer consider it to be worth it with the separation of queues and inability to do a single search for availability.

      They're throwing away a working synergy in exchange for what? Game rentals? They could have just added that to the available plans if they'd wanted to, and given the way things are going in the gaming industry, the physical copy of a video game could go away before the physical DVD does!

      This move won't kill Netflix, but it certainly isn't going to help it.

    2. Re:Embracing the disruption by SkimTony · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Having read the same comments you did, I think you're missing the point. Very few people are complaining that Netflix is doing the wrong thing by pushing streaming; lots of people are of the opinion that streaming is the future of content delivery. However, it's not ready to be the present of content delivery, and that's what most of us are lamenting. All those comments seem to end with "I'll see how things go, but if they screw up DVD rental, I'm out." I'm in the same boat - streaming is nice, but I signed up for Netflix for DVDs by mail.

      For all that Steve Jobs believes it, Disc-based content delivery isn't dead, because no one has stepped up to provide the content and experience that at least some of us want. None of the fully licensed (**AA compliant) services provide equivalent features to the physical media experience: I want to be able to watch non-English-language content with subtitles, and I want full surround sound from my action movies. Some folks like to watch the "extra features" on the disc. None of us wants the bright red "buffering" screen. Since streaming services don't provide these features, we're not willing to switch, yet.

      Presently, the best media-viewing experience possible is to obtain a physical DVD, rip it so that I can skip the out-of-date previews and commercials, and then watch it from a computer with appropriate A/V connections. Streaming has a lot of potential to let me skip a few of those steps, but they haven't realized that potential, yet.

    3. Re:Embracing the disruption by tangelogee · · Score: 1

      The DVD business is dying fast, and they know it. Direct content delivery is the growth industry that is disrupting DVDs (and eventually CDs, games, and packaged software) out of existence, and they're jumping to the new ship before the old one is sunk.

      But going with the ship analogy, you don't decommission a perfectly good ship until there is a FULLY functioning and fitted replacement already afloat. Just because a ship is floating does not mean it is ready to go to sea.

      Do I see the mailed DVDs as the future? No. However, I for one do not find much worthwhile content on the streaming side (at least that is permanent. Until all their content is there to stay, why bother?) on a regular basis. As mentioned by someone earlier, the only things that seem to be there are sequels/threequels/straight to DVD releases, and swiss-cheese versions (missing episodes in the middle) of TV shows.

      For that reason, you can keep streaming Netflix, and I'll go back to DVD only for now, thank you very much.

    4. Re:Embracing the disruption by Skreems · · Score: 2

      They had absolutely no reason to "jump ship", since they had the perfect business model to smoothly transition without pissing people off. Netflix has, for the past 3 years, been a mediocre-at-best streaming library with a backup of every DVD on the planet which would be shipped to you in 2 days on request. Once they get every studio in the world to put their stuff on streaming, then fine, cancel the DVD branch. But if they're looking to avoid alienating customers, how much does it cost them to keep the DVD branch around to provide backup coverage on things that can't be streamed for contract reasons?

      At the very least, they could be up front about it: say, "Look, rising costs on the DVD side require us to raise fees. We think our catalog is strong enough that most people can go streaming only, and we recommend that you do so if possible, but we're keeping the DVD service as an option for those who want access to more rare or more recent releases."

      As more things become available on streaming, they could naturally spin down that side of the business. Repurpose staff, sell off inventory, close warehouses, etc. Presumably they've already been doing that if they had any sense. If there are parts they can't ditch because they're in use, then that should be a sign that streaming isn't good enough yet.

      --
      Slashdot needs a "-1, Wrong" moderation option.
      The Urban Hippie
    5. Re:Embracing the disruption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The dvd business was dying fast BECAUSE of them...

      Blockbuster, hollywood video, movie gallery would still be around if netflix hadnt just decimated their business with cheap rentals...

      I predict a new national rental chain. Probably built on top of the redbox brand.

      They are hemorrhaging customers. The rate increase is the root of it. Its bold thats for sure. But will sink them in the long run. Customers like reliable and cheap. Flaky, changing, and limited selection they do not...

      Come feb they loose 20% of their streaming availability. On top of their already crummy selection.

      My guess they are setting it up to be sold off.

    6. Re:Embracing the disruption by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      The problem is that DVDs via USPS is the present of content delivery. Much of what I want isn't available for streaming still. So now they make it twice as much effort. I have to look it up for streaming (which I do via Windows Media Center -- so I never even run a browser). Then I have to quit media center, grab a keyboard and mouse, run a browser, visit to a web site, possibly login, and run the same search. Then I add it to my queue and switch back to media center.

      Wow - that kinda defeated the purpose of my media center box didn't it?

    7. Re:Embracing the disruption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      streaming is the DRM curve. at least with DVDs we broke the DRM. try backing up your netflix streams. I'll be ripping as many DVDs as I can and canceling in a few months.

    8. Re:Embracing the disruption by SydShamino · · Score: 1

      The brand renaming all at once is foolish. They should have tested the waters by renaming it "Netflix by Mail, Inc." or something in the short term.

      Also, the separation of the two web sites is downright he-should-be-fired stupid. Give that way more time until the overlap between streaming and DVD customers has dwindled much more than it has already.

      At this point I'm burning through DVDs as quickly as possible to use up my queue. But after that I'm not just dropping "Quackster" - I'm aiming to drop both. Amazon Prime is a better value proposition if they get the hardware support and the selection, since we pay for prime shipping anyway (making the streaming at this point free).

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
    9. Re:Embracing the disruption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the problem is that high speed internet is not going to support this at the current rate of growth. Netflix shot itself in the other foot. Dumb.

    10. Re:Embracing the disruption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The vast majority of the country does not have sufficient bandwidth capability to make good use of "streaming". DVD by mail is not going anywhere in the near future. At least, not naturally. Perhaps that's the plan, to kill it off and only focus on urban centers with fast internet connections.

    11. Re:Embracing the disruption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do any of us believe that DVDs via USPS are the future of content delivery?

      Apparently Netflix streaming isn't the future either. That's why I still use the DVD service.
      Just checkout feedfliks
      http://feedfliks.com/streaming

      The number of titles expiring is usually 5-10 times the number arriving. It has been this way ever since I started watching this a year ago.

    12. Re:Embracing the disruption by n7ytd · · Score: 1

      Do any of us believe that DVDs via USPS are the future of content delivery? Of course not.

      I stuck with Netflix during the recent price increase, specifically hoping that they would be able to use the increased fees to get more streaming content. We will see if that pans out. Right now 80% of their catalog is DVD-only; the future of their content delivery seems to hinge on their ability to sell the idea to their content providers.

    13. Re:Embracing the disruption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except their new ship is those foam noodles duct taped together, not so much a ship but a raft. Have you seen the selection on Instant Watch? It's garbage. On top of that, they are about to lose Starz, aka anything worth watching in the movie section.

    14. Re:Embracing the disruption by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Streaming is the future, but how far down the line is this future? One year? Five years? A decade? While Netflix (sans DVDs) tries to get profitable via streaming (while fighting studios who don't want streaming to succeed and who own the keys to the content), The-Service-Formally-Known-As-Netflix-DVDs will be doing a reasonable amount of business. (Assuming everyone doesn't jump ship because of the whole Netflix PR messup, of course.)

      They're betting the company on a product that isn't viable on its own just yet and, by doing so in a clumsy fashion, jeopardizing both sides of the business.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    15. Re:Embracing the disruption by kgeiger · · Score: 1

      The DVD business is dying fast, and they know it. Direct content delivery is the growth industry that is disrupting DVDs (and eventually CDs, games, and packaged software) out of existence, and they're jumping to the new ship before the old one is sunk.

      Explain that to RedBox.

      RedBox should change their name to ReedBox to thank Mr. Hastings for all the new business he's driven their way.

      --
      Vision with execution is hallucination.
    16. Re:Embracing the disruption by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      > Very few people are complaining that Netflix is doing the wrong thing by pushing streaming; lots of people are of the opinion that streaming is the future of content delivery. However, it's not ready to be the present of content delivery

      Reed needs to have this tattooed on his forehead. Backwards, so he can read it in the mirror.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    17. Re:Embracing the disruption by Syberz · · Score: 1

      In my case, I'm not laughing at what they're doing, but rather I'm laughing at the horrid execution. It would have been far wiser to slowly ween their customer base off of DVDs and move them to streaming by providing incentives to do so (gradual price hikes of DVDs, more and exclusive content to streaming, etc.) instead of pissing in their coffee like they're doing now.

      Also, the costs and logistics involved with the creation of a separate corporate entity will immensely affect the company's profits. So not only are they pissing off their customers, they're pissing off their stock holders too.

      Methinks that there will be a CEO position opening up shortly over at Netflix... bah, Reed will make a few million on the way out so don't feel too bad for the guy.

      --
      ~Syberz
  48. Streaming in Blu-ray quality? by jgeiger · · Score: 1

    Until they stream in 1080p with full audio the online portion of the service is useless for me. I have a home theater with the big TV and big audio system so I can enjoy the whole movie. If I'm on a plane then streaming might make sense otherwise I want the physical disc quality.

    1. Re:Streaming in Blu-ray quality? by Treskin · · Score: 1

      There are a decent and increasing number of titles on streaming that are 1080p using h264 at around 5Mbps. If you use PS3 you can also get DD+ audio on select titles. Obviously the number of titles both in HD and with DD+ needs to increase, but at least there's an effort. An increase in top bit rate would also be nice, but the current 1080p content looks decent on my 60" LCD.

    2. Re:Streaming in Blu-ray quality? by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      > but the current 1080p content looks decent on my 60" LCD.

      That's kindof the issue really. You need over 50" to appreciate full 1080p. (And then you have to have a room big enough that the screen doesn't overwhelm.) We have a 46" LCD and a well authored 480p is fine. 720p is an embarrassment of riches, and 1080p is deep into diminishing returns; a waste of bandwidth for very little gain. With a 60" screen, your mileage probably does vary, but I suspect for most of us, 1080p is just for bragging rights.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  49. Re:Did not even thinke this through? by Alastor187 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I have been a member for about 6 years. My price has been going up slowly over that time for various reasons, but the recent jump due to streaming forced me to re-evaluate my monthly bill. To my surprise if I dropped streaming and blu-ray my monthly bill would almost be the same as when I first started (back before streaming or blu-ray).

    That lead me to believe that their pricing has just been changed to reflect the cost of streaming, they took the initial approach of giving it away for free and now feel they have enough of a user base to start building a business. I can understand they are business and need to charge for the service they provide. So I reduced by DVD plan and kept the streaming plan so there was no monthly impact for me.

    However, moving to two independent services is entirely different. As the email from the CEO stated by doing this they are breaking the integration between the DVD and Streaming services. As you stated it is now necessarily to manage both separately, meaning duplicated effort on two different websites. Not only does that waste the customers time it provides less incentive to use both systems. Integration is often what separates a good system from a great system, and that applies to many things we use in daily life and Netflix is no exception.

    I can't believe that the Netflix team doesn't understand the value of integration, as much of their past work involved integrating both Steaming and DVD on the current website. I also know that the CEOs long term goal has always been online delivery (hence the name), so maybe this is that first step. But it sure doesn't feel like a step in the right direction, perhaps because the primary differentiator between Netflix and everyone else was the option for both streaming AND physical media in one service.

  50. Reed has solved the ancient formula by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. Build big movie rental company
    2. Beat out competition and monopoly the market
    3. ?????? (sell off your shares of the company just before changing its rates and services)
    4. Profit.

  51. train wreck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this whole netflix debacle feels like a train wreck, and I can't pull my eyes away.

  52. More disgruntled customers by mu51c10rd · · Score: 1

    Wow...just wow. I was ok with the price hike, and figured I would deal with their horrible new interface they just rolled out. However, this appears to have finally pushed it too far. Are they determined to alienate their entire userbase? They lost a lot of mainstream content (Starz pulling all Sony films...and soon pulling completely out in February), made a horrible interface, made a 60% increase in price, and are now splitting the DVD service out (resulting in 2 websites and queues). Are the board going to do anything about this guy? He is driving the brand into the ground.

  53. rebranding is almost always a bad idea by Nox3173 · · Score: 1

    You don't need a psychic to see the writing on the wall, but they're in serious financial trouble if they are rebranding.

  54. Re:Incoming bitchy comments... 3.. 2.. 1 by localman57 · · Score: 1

    You hit the nail on the head with the IBM PC (at least the 2000's version of the story). Lots of people trashed IBM's sale of its PC unit to levono. But it turns out that IBM was just 5 years ahead of their competition in realizing that the margins on most PCs made them not worth dealing with. This is a reality that HP is finally coming to. DVDs are the same way. Five years from now, this may well look as forward looking as IBMs decision. Look for Netflix to sell off the DVD business in a year or less, and focus on online (regardless of what they say).

    Also, look for the game disc rental business to implode in less than 2 years. This move by netflix will push publishers to rapidly move to more 1-time code / pay for extra content / etc business models. When that happens, the game rental by mail business will be nearly useless.

  55. Re:Coca-Cola by DocSavage64109 · · Score: 1

    Now that you mention it, they once replaced Coca-Cola with a new formulation that was similar to Pepsi. They relegated the original to "Coca-Cola Classic". I'm not quite sure when they quit doing that.

  56. A better solution would be... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The idea sounds stupid. The separation brings only a slight value to single service user and takes away alot of it for customers of both service. The better solution would be simply to redesign the website since it was designed with one service in mind. Simply show a dedicated data/interface based on the subscription the user has. If users still have both services, they can still have the benefit of the original website.

    As for Netflix keeping streaming on the original website, that's an obvious choice. What do you think would happen to all those devices that support Netflix, many of which can not be updated easily? It would bring more hassle then it's worth. Putting the dvd service on another name however doesn't affect users much.

    Having 2 bills also is a lose for customer of both service, while it's a win/lost for the company itself. Clearer separation of accounting (easier to deal with each service costs/profits as they really are completely different in those terms) at the cost of larger number of processing (especially those who pay with credit/debit cards).

  57. I'm sure I'm not the first to say this by SkimTony · · Score: 1

    Really? Qwikster? It's 2000 again? Apparently, this company will be around for about six months before fading into obscurity, like every other *ster brand. Bah.

  58. Oh noes, the rats are escaping from the soup bowl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Quick, stir!

  59. The other company was HP by Kamiza+Ikioi · · Score: 1

    HP is showing the world how to kill a successful company in under 2 years. Netflix is showing that they can top HP.

    --
    I8-D
  60. Amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It still blows my mind people complain so much about a 5$ price change.

    5 FUCKING DOLLARS.

    1. Re:Amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey man, that 5 dollars could buy me a nice latte!

  61. unwarranted pessimism by Subratik · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Let me first begin by saying, let's have some foresight here fellow Slashdot readers. If the DVD business has been increasingly difficult for Netflix to maintain, and considering when they did change the price plans, most people dropped the DVD package but kept the instant video. Why would you try to push a market that is doomed to fail especially with the rise of instant media players for the TV and applications for phones/tablets?

    I would bet they have enough subscribers on their own right now to push this idea... considering they already have. I like how you all are trying to criticize a CEO for his business strategy but I think you should let their business speak for it first.. I think this is a good idea and only time will tell, I'm sorry if you're hurt that you'll have to go to another website for your DVD shipping service, but in all honesty, the DVD is dying market. Why should I ship myself a DVD if I can buy a media streamer where I can also rent or buy movies? (waiting for every angry technologist to tell me I'm wrong. meanwhile, not realizing that they're the minority in the market... especially the minority that's smart enough to pirate something if it really wants it)

    This is how I look at it... you may have to sign up with two different webpages to have them hit your credit card but in return it's cheaper than having the combined Netflix instant/dvd package. ALSO, you're getting the option to combine a gamefly like service with a movie rental service. And, as the CEO said in the article, they'll be able to focus on using their capital for more movie licenses for the people (majority) who use Netflix for their streaming services.

    Having said all this, Quixster is still a lame name.

    1. Re:unwarranted pessimism by tgeek · · Score: 1

      It may be a little bit premature to call the DVD (and I'm presuming you lump Bluray in here as well) market "dying" (in my opinion the market isn't dying until it starts losing shelf space at Walmart/Target). As it stands today, disc media generally offers FAR more value than streaming in the form of extras, subtitling (yeah, I know some streaming services are starting to offer this), and other stuff on the disc. If none of this is of interest to a consumer, then streaming may a good fit for them. But speaking for myself, streaming as it is today is nothing more than a higher resolution (and sometimes not by much) VHS substitute.

    2. Re:unwarranted pessimism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Well, the Slashdot audience is probably more heavily free and open source software, and so far, the only Linux that has been blessed with Netflix streaming is Google ChromeOS.

      Probably more than a few, like me, are still on DVD and a bit irritated by it.

      Luckily DVD is still quite adequate w/ a little planning of your entertainment, and has the advantage of avoiding any possible connection delays.

    3. Re:unwarranted pessimism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, and the DVD selection is still far better than the streaming when that was offered in my account that I never used.

      Far better.
      I rarely had movies that were out that year in my queue anyway. Often times, was stuff that had come out years ago, sometimes decades ago.

      And that situation in streaming could only worsen. I have two friends who *do* use Netflix streaming, and they stated their intention to cancel streaming if the Starz library was dropped.

    4. Re:unwarranted pessimism by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      > Let me first begin by saying, let's have some foresight here fellow Slashdot readers. If the DVD business has been increasingly difficult for Netflix to maintain, and considering when they did change the price plans, most people dropped the DVD package but kept the instant video. Why would you try to push a market that is doomed to fail especially with the rise of instant media players for the TV and applications for phones/tablets?

      Um, perhaps because, at least so far, the selection sucks?

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    5. Re:unwarranted pessimism by tunapez · · Score: 1

      Why would you try to push a market that is doomed to fail...?

      I'm more inclined to ask, 'Why does NF doom DVDs to fail prematurely?' I realize DVDs will die, sooner if not later, but why push out those users who find the online content selection lacking? How about the millions of people who get less than 1.5mbps, data caps or no Inet at all at home? NF really does not want the discerning or the unplugged marketshare, apparently. Has anyone tried signing up or perusing the title selection on the site? Signed in may be different, but not-signed in gives me crap sample titles with no info and nothing about DVDs except a quick summary of prices buried on a how to page...and no way to opt for said DVD options...when we have an agreement of terms, I give money or billing info, never not before confirming all terms, conditions and charges. 'Why must browsing be so counter-intuitive?' one might ask, and when they ask me, I say it's because when it's all laid out in plain sight the selection(streaming) is just not that impressive or they are with more interested in getting you signed up than delivering the service they are peddling..

      I have been contemplating getting DVD mail service(3rd time in 2 years, had it back in the beginning and loved it), but I find anyone who goes through so much effort to obscure their services and shape my choice for me deserves none of my money. Now this little bombshell makes my spidey senses tingle, I believe other options may be more reliable. I guess this neanderthal is heading out to the local video store that doesn't rhyme with nutbuster. *Yeah, I get DVDs from the library and I'm not interested in Hot Tub Time Machine or 90% of the other new release dreck, so Redbox is not an alternative.
       
      /netflix bash

      --
      Imagination drew in bold strokes, instantly serving hopes and fears, while knowledge advanced by slow increments...
  62. Re:Coca-Cola by MightyYar · · Score: 1

    Yeah, but at least they kept the brand name!

    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  63. streaming subscription by rjejr · · Score: 1

    Don't confuse "streaming" with "subscription". NF made it big over BB b/c they had an unlimited subscription plan on DVDs by mail. If they spin that off they have a subscription for streaming, but there are lots of other places now to get streaming - Hulu, Hulu +, Amazon Prime, VOD, Crackle, VuDu, game consoles, etc. Without having the combination for streaming and DVD unlimited subscription plans rolled into one they are left with subscription streaming, which requires more than just "web monkeys", it's requires broadband. The USPS may be a mess, but more people can subscribe to that than broadband.

  64. Why charge more to Netflix for streaming vs DVD? by Cutting_Crew · · Score: 1

    What difference does it make whether someone watching X DVDs by mail and someone who watches Y movies by streaming? The only difference here is that you can just watch them when you want and in a much shorter time span. I don't understand why content providers would think that just because someone doesn't have to wait for a movie in the mail, that that somehow put more value on that??

  65. Re:Incoming bitchy comments... 3.. 2.. 1 by MightyYar · · Score: 1

    Good insight - I hadn't thought about this as a means to exit the market.

    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  66. statistics by imunfair · · Score: 1

    I wish we could look at the Netflix numbers and conclusively say - look this is how many people will pay for content if it's at X price, and this is how many will think it's worth it at Y price. Unfortunately, because of the way they handled the transition, I think there is a noticeable percentage that left because they felt they were being treated poorly - not because of the pricing alone. I know that's the way I interpreted it when they raised the 1DVD plan pricing by $1 six months ago purely for marketing reasons when they introduced the streaming-only plan, rather than grandfathering in existing users.

  67. Netflix stock up. by spam4rakesh · · Score: 1

    I am disappointed to report that, even though I feel this is a bad business move, Netflix stock has been up by $4.31 ( 2.8% ). Looks like stock holders and investors lack common sense now a days.

  68. Ratings? Joint Queue? Limited streaming library! by Faizdog · · Score: 1

    So I go through spurts of using Netflix. I'll have DVDs lying around for 6 months, then will go through a 3 week spurt where I watch movies and immediately return them, get the next one, etc, until life gets in the way again and the discs lie around for another 6 months.

    The reason I continue to pay Netflix (and don't deactivate my account) for 6 months, during which they make money from me for no cost, is that I have a long queue, I have a HUGE library of ratings that I've put a lot of though into and which now recommends some nice movies for me.

    I also like being able to see which movies in my queue are available instantly to watch.

    Now, here's a few questions I have:
    1) Currently my queue is about 85 deep. Only about 10-15 or so of them are available for streaming. That means the streaming selection is very limited. Is that really a good future business model?

    2) Will my ratings be jointly shared across both services? I've put a lot of effort into them (it's like building a collection, same mentality) and it's one of the reasons why Netflix has gotten a monthly fee from me for months without me using any of their services. Even when I watch a movie on cable or in the theater, I now have the habit of logging into Netflix just to update my rating of that movie.

    3) Will I be able to maintain a single queue of what I'd like to watch and choose the best medium of streaming/DVD based on what's available?

    Frankly, if I have to maintain 2 queues and 2 rating libraries, at least one service will fast lose a customer. Right now I'm paying for the joint streaming and DVD mailing option.

    --
    -"Those who fought today will die tommorow."-
  69. You don't get it, do you? by fredan · · Score: 1

    Guys,

    Streaming is the future and making Qwikster will make it easy to kill it of when dvd rental doesn't generate any profit anymore.

    Simple as that.

    1. Re:You don't get it, do you? by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      But how far in the future will it be before Netflix can get a good selection of streaming movies. This split feels like it should have happened more gradually than announcing they were splitting the plans and then, 2 months later, announcing they are splitting the companies. What it'll do is force users to side with one company or the other. Meanwhile, Netflix won't have the DVD business to use as leverage when at the negotiating table with the studios.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  70. Acting Out 80's Teen Movies by tgeek · · Score: 1

    Looks like ol' Reed has been watching too many tired old 80's teen movies. Guy (played by Reed) has to choose between two girls to take to the prom. Choices are either Reliable But Plain Longtime Friend (played by DVDs) or Sexy Hot New Chick in school (played by streaming). True to form, Guy goes for Sexy Hot New Chick. Unfortunately for Reed, he didn't sit thru the whole film to see the valuable life lesson Guy learned by not choosing Reliable But Plain Longtime Friend.

  71. Boneheads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Quickster will go the way of Napster and Friendster...

  72. Great Idea, no really by namoom · · Score: 1

    By splitting the company they are able to bargain contracts differently for content and put a lot more emphasis on the two different businesses that were Netflix. The DVD service is just that, an online movie rental(now games too). The streaming service will now have the focus and ability to grow in more directions that would be a little to drastic for a former DVD service. I am gambling that they will end up with lot more content as a result of this split

  73. Re:Ratings? Joint Queue? Limited streaming library by jason777 · · Score: 1

    Ah, you do realize you can pause your subscription, right?

  74. A business lesson by cHiphead · · Score: 1

    A business lesson in how to ruin a company in just a few short months, from a CEO perspective.

    --

    This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    1. Re:A business lesson by psydeshow · · Score: 1

      But we already had HP and RIM for that!!!

    2. Re:A business lesson by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      Good things come in threes.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  75. Here's the blog post where they defend themselves by ruiner13 · · Score: 1

    http://blog.netflix.com/2011/09/explanation-and-some-reflections.html

    The customers in the comment thread REALLY seem happy. Everyone is going to love two bills, two services, two everything. I cancelled today.

    --

    today is spelling optional day.

  76. Re:Coca-Cola by localman57 · · Score: 1

    They don't want the the brand name. Not on the Discs. Discs are so 5 years ago. Just like AT&T doesn't want you to think of Telephones or Telegraphs. They want you to think of them in terms of a communication company.

  77. Re:Coca-Cola by Columcille · · Score: 1

    "I like classic Coke better than new Coke!" Flashback to the 80's.

    --
    I love my sig.
  78. NetFlix Explanation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hi, I'm Flix McNetFlix, mascot and president of the NetFlix company, and I'm here to explain why the convenience of one media rental website [in your town] has been replaced by the convenience of two media rental websites.

    You're probably thinking, "Sure, more media rental websites are great, and I don't mind paying the extra hidden fees, but how will I remember all those sites?"

    Well, scientists have discovered that even monkeys can memorize two sites. Are you stupider than a monkey?

  79. Split by MagicM · · Score: 1

    Oh Netflix. Don't they know that you should never split the party?

  80. Killing their advantage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The CEO talks about needing to separate the two products in order to improve the Streaming side, which just seems like a lack of creativity on their part. They are dissolving an incredible, unmatched service, without any real concrete example of what exactly they're prevented from doing in terms of marketing or technology.
    The differentiating factor of their streaming offering *is* the integration with a physical disc queue. Without that, there is nothing that makes their streaming service any different from the others. It seems like they are destroying the improved negotiation position they have with content providers over others like Hulu Plus. Any advantage they have with a larger library or better device integration will quickly disappear.

  81. Well, their stock is up 4.58% as of 10:39 by macbeth66 · · Score: 1

    At least Wall Street likes it.

    Say, is Blockbuster still around? :)

    And I bet you that by this time next year, Netflix will insert commercials into the shows without being able to fast forward. And the price will be higher.

    1. Re:Well, their stock is up 4.58% as of 10:39 by Bill+Dimm · · Score: 1

      Closed down 7.37% for the day. It seems Wall Street got a clue.

  82. Netflix are stupid! by Builder · · Score: 1

    I see lots of people calling netflix stupid and laughing about the fact that they're dying. And maybe they have made some bad decisions, but last time I visited the USA, most of my friends there were very happy with them, so they clearly know how to please people.

    But here's the question - if your raw materials costs rose by 5x from one financial year to the next, how would you handle it?

    To compound the problem that you'd have, you've been running for quite a few years, and you've captured as much of the market as you're likely to in the short to medium term.

    How would you go about keeping your company alive under these circumstances ?

    1. Re:Netflix are stupid! by PRMan · · Score: 1

      Not be so aggressive about streaming that has several major (insurmountable?) obstacles. It IS the future, but how far in the future? As long as the studios are against it, you're putting your future into their greedy hands. That's a lack of control over your own destiny.

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    2. Re:Netflix are stupid! by ninetyninebottles · · Score: 1

      But here's the question - if your raw materials costs rose by 5x from one financial year to the next, how would you handle it?

      I'd bring legal challenge against the cartel controlling prices and use my popularity to drive yet another antitrust conviction against them. I'd use my other business to continue to undercut their competing products and make the first market unprofitable and a niche market until such a time as the courts resolved the issue or I could get popular opinion behind legal reform.

      I'll tell you what I wouldn't do. I wouldn't abandon my leverage in the hopes that said criminal cartel would play nice and not slit my throat at a later date.

  83. Re:Coca-Cola by MightyYar · · Score: 1

    Yeah, that's a good point. I hadn't considered that they are looking to discard the disk business altogether, and this is just a step towards that.

    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  84. Sales tax by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder if Netflix' plan is to sell the streaming business to Amazon, or something like that? Amazon wouldn't touch Netflix in the past because Netflix had nexus everywhere, which would have forced Amazon to collect sales tax in every state.

    With Netflix only holding cloud services, this makes it easier for them to get bought out. Or, the opposite might be true. Netflix could be planning to sell the DVD business to Redbox, which would certainly save money on postage.

    Either way, I imagine there's more than meets the eye in this change.

  85. Ooh I Have An Idea! by Greyfox · · Score: 1

    They should reform their DVD and streaming business under a new heading of "Not-Getting-My-Money-Ster!" Because that's where their business is at right now!

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    1. Re:Ooh I Have An Idea! by roc97007 · · Score: 1

      Or... someone else should combine streaming and DVD rental with a single queue and a single website and a reasonable price under the name "Not Netflix".

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  86. I think this is great in the long run by supersloshy · · Score: 1

    Am I really the only person that welcomes this move? Sure, for now we're losing interactivity between DVDs and streaming, but in the long run this will give us better services. Already they're adding game support to Qwikster and it should only get better from then on. Maybe they'll even lower prices down the road for Qwikster due to not having to license anything or introduce more social features for each. They're not even close to killing off DVDs; that would be so stupid that it defies common sense. They're making a profit on it, so killing it off would only harm them. I for one welcome this change with open arms and, even though it might be a little rough at first, it will get better as time goes on. Besides, is there any comparably cheap alternative that supplies just about as much content in just as many places (Wii, 3DS, BluRay players, etc.)?

    --
    "Our country is not nearly so overrun with the bigoted as it is overrun with the broadminded." -Archbishop Fulton Sheen
    1. Re:I think this is great in the long run by ninetyninebottles · · Score: 1

      DVD rentals are a dead end. Within the next couple of decades they will be gone and all video will be distributed via the internet (sometimes through ISP provided boxes that also provide TV). Those of us that like and want streaming to be something decent feel that is much less likely now. Netflix's DVD rental club was the best chance of getting good streaming video contracts out of the media cartels.

      Aside from that, going to two different places means no one place has the info needed to make the best rental recommendations and for those things I want to watch regardless, I now have to check if they are on streaming then go check when they're on DVD for rent and keep checking back in case it reaches the former before my rental for the latter reaches the top of my queue. That's obnoxious and inconvenient. It seems likely the streaming service will only get worse over time as they have less leverage to negotiate good deals and legal streaming in general is going to get worse as competing with Netflix will no longer be a negotiating strategy that Amazon, Apple, etc. can employ.

      Frankly, I see very little upside, aside from some autonomy to make things better for the DVD rental service in the short term.

    2. Re:I think this is great in the long run by supersloshy · · Score: 1

      Just get an RSS feed reader and subscribe to Netflix's "New Additions" feeds. I do and it tells me every time they add a new title to either of their services (they add a bit more than you'd think).

      --
      "Our country is not nearly so overrun with the bigoted as it is overrun with the broadminded." -Archbishop Fulton Sheen
  87. Game, movie, what is difference? by tepples · · Score: 1

    The newly named service includes video games, so "flix" would be a bad choice.

    Game, movie, what is difference?

  88. Move to avoid 5-9 GB/mo cap by tepples · · Score: 1

    That's probably what they want, trying to get people to move away from mail to the streaming service.

    Except a lot of people who rely on discs by mail would have to do just that: move. There are still parts of the United States without cable or DSL, where single-digit GB per month capped satellite Internet is the norm.

    1. Re:Move to avoid 5-9 GB/mo cap by smelch · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and wouldn't those people benefit most from not having to pay for streaming as well as DVDs?

      --
      If I can just reach out with my words and touch a butthole, just one, it will all be worth it.
    2. Re:Move to avoid 5-9 GB/mo cap by tepples · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and wouldn't those people benefit most from not having to pay for streaming as well as DVDs?

      That wasn't what iteyoidar was talking about. The pricing split had already occurred, which had already benefited subscribers who no longer had to pay for a streaming service that they could not use over dial-up or wireless Internet access. But iteyoidar's point was that being a subscriber of "Qwikster" sounds more embarrassing than being a subscriber of "Netflix DVDs by mail", and people would switch from "Qwikster" to "Netflix" for just this reason.

    3. Re:Move to avoid 5-9 GB/mo cap by timeOday · · Score: 1

      There are still parts of the United States without cable or DSL

      I'll best most of the Post Office closings will be in those same areas.

      Qwikster may end up distributing its Blu-Rays via pony express.

  89. what?! why? by kharchenko · · Score: 1

    What happened to Netflix? I think they must've hired some ex-blockbuster employees to take the company toward a "new direction".
    It was a great service - simple, useful, pleasant. Then they started dumbing things down, screwed up the streaming movie selection interface (all I see now are stupidly large icons of the movies that I've mostly seen, without a good way of finding anything I want to watch; I am sure this works for a 4yr old who likes to watch the same cartoons over and over again, but common ... give me a @#$# choice!), took out friends options, then started fumbling with the price (although I could've handled that choice) and now they're just going to voluntarily pull the company apart, depriving customers of a comprehensive service. Time to look for alternatives (suggestions?). Sad. There was no reason to shoot yourself in the foot Neflix, really.

  90. Re:Content by Botia · · Score: 1

    Unless they've got an ace in their sleeve and they can add an order of magnitude to the amount of content available for streaming, this is going to kill them. I'll probably end up quiting one or both. I understand the business side of it, but you don't sacrafice a great product to do stuff like this unless the CEO's looking to hit some bonus and get out.

  91. Dear Reed by xs650 · · Score: 1

    "It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."

    --Mark Twain (Maybe)

  92. Re:Ratings? Joint Queue? Limited streaming library by Bill+Dimm · · Score: 1

    From the email they sent out about it:

    A negative of the renaming and separation is that the Qwikster.com and Netflix.com websites will not be integrated.

    So, I think that's a "no" for your questions (2) and (3). I think that's the real disaster here. Too many people are concentrating on the dumb name, and overlooking the huge downgrade in convenience. If Netflix wants people to transition from DVD to streaming, it seems they've created a huge barrier to that by not sharing the ratings and viewing history between the sites. The strategy just makes no sense.

  93. Amazon Streaming Here I Come!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stupidflix. Thats all I have to say

  94. Relevant: by dbet · · Score: 1
  95. It's business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This sounds like a bu$ine$$ move, not a technical one. The DVD side HAS been profitable, and the net streaming side is coming under increased pressure to own up to (and pay for) their bandwith. So, to take the old conglomerate model from the 1990's, set them up as separate entities, so the loss on one side doesn't drag down the stock price of the other, and hope for a sell-off or merger to feed them into retirement. The folks holding the ownership stake (stock) in NetFlix get representative shares in each entity, and if the plan holds, either through buyout, merger, or just plain luck that BOTH are profitable, the two halves are worth far more than the original whole.

    Can't add a movie from one search into the other queue? Of course not. They have to be completely separate, at least at first, or the SEC doesn't buy the "two separate" companies argument.

  96. Where does Netflix get its DVDs? by ZipK · · Score: 1

    So by having two separate companies they can negotiate streaming rights without having to agree to harsh terms on their DVD side (30 day waiting period after a DVD goes on sale, higher prices, stripped down DVDs)

    Why does Netflix have to negotiate with anyone but a retail partner for DVDs? What prevents Netflix from buying DVDs and renting them out? Do they need permission from the studios or other copyright holders?

    1. Re:Where does Netflix get its DVDs? by moortak · · Score: 1

      They needed to hold DVDs back to keep the studios happy for the streaming side.

      --
      Xavier Rabourdin for president 2012
    2. Re:Where does Netflix get its DVDs? by damiangerous · · Score: 1

      The last time Netflix released a breakdown of their numbers like that was back in 2003, when they only had 1.5 million subs. At that time, they bought 85,000 copies of a popular new release. For current numbers we can only go by analysts, which suggest about 1 to 1.5 million copies of a major new release. They don't legally need permission from studios, no, but logistically there's no way they're going to get at least a million discs ready to ship on release day without studio cooperation.

    3. Re:Where does Netflix get its DVDs? by JTsyo · · Score: 1
  97. When Hell freezes Over by TheTyrannyOfForcedRe · · Score: 1

    I would sooner burn X dollars a month than fund Apple's shitty business practices. Same goes for Sony.

    --
    "Liechtenstein is the world's largest producer of sausage casings, potassium storage units, and false teeth."
  98. Its about negotiation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problem is that so sign all these streaming deals, Netflix had to agree to delay providing DVDs-by-mail of new releases. By decoupling the plans entirely, the DVD side (Qwickster) can start DVD-by-mail as soon as the DVD is released to the public.

    And being in direct competition with Qwickster will help Netflix in negotiation. Netflix will be able to say "hey- we're competing with a company that has a large DVD-by-mail business. They absolutely never have to wait for new releases. And they pay you once for a DVD and lend it out forever, but we pay a recurring licensing fee." If media can't see the value in this and don't make deals, customers will move to Qwikster and the media companies will make less money. If they do see value in this, media will make deals with Netflix and customers will see more streaming content - and more quickly after movie release.

    The DVD and streaming may seem like a synergy to customers - but for negotiating with big media, its actually the opposite. The problem Netflix has is that they really haven't dealt with the customers well over this issue. If they can smooth that over, it will mean more streaming content, less waiting for new releases, and, hopefully, holding the line more on pricing.

  99. Meet the Shark by TheTyrannyOfForcedRe · · Score: 1

    Netflix / Qwikster meet the shark. You've just jumped it.

    --
    "Liechtenstein is the world's largest producer of sausage casings, potassium storage units, and false teeth."
  100. DVD's suck anyways, streaming only is awesome by metalgamer84 · · Score: 1

    I was more than happy to drop my DVD service and drop to streaming only. My wife and I stream tons of stuff and for only $8 a month it payed for itself long ago. Guess it all just depends on what you like to watch. We could care less about all the new crap that comes out, as we love all the old TV series that Netflix has.

  101. Re:Only smart if they announce new titles streamin by SemperUbi · · Score: 1

    So it only makes sense if monkeys are flying out of Reed Hastings' butt?

  102. Short term painful, Long term perhaps decisive. by Avidiax · · Score: 1

    This does seem like a strange plan, but one thought that occurred to me is that, probably, when the big content owners are negotiating about how much to charge for streaming (or deciding if they will even be available), the fact that their content is already available on Netflix via the DVD service makes it hard to force them. Imagine after this change, where if you have the streaming only service, even the recommendations don't show the DVD-only titles. Except for certain big titles that you search for, you will never know what you are missing, and those titles will drop off the radar. And if you are happy with the streaming-only titles, then what is your incentive to go with the separate DVD-by-mail service.

    This may help the big content owners come to their senses and allow streaming, or even download rental. I think what we are seeing are the effects of the current and impending shakedowns by the content owners, who prefer to own the channel and thus the profit inherent in the channel.

  103. This sucks. by Gyorg_Lavode · · Score: 1

    This just sucks all around. I feel for Hastings. Netflix started to get big and the content companies, (scared of another iTunes), started to rachet up content prices. His response was to jack up consumer cost which reminded people they had netflix and promptly cancelled it.

    That said, this solution is terrible. I have 2 disks + bluray + streaming. I honestly might have kept it. I like getting movies on bluray. I almost LIVE off of netflix movies. However, amazon prime is looking a LOT nicer now. I'd probably get hulu too if I didn't know that it would be putting money directly in the pockets of the people who screwed netflix. I don't want to reward them for their actions.

    --
    I do security
  104. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  105. ... with an elbow and a knee and a roundhouse kick by natophonic · · Score: 1

    The differentiating factor of their streaming offering *is* the integration with a physical disc queue.

    Exactly. I don't doubt that In The Future, we'll all be watching movies and TV programs primarily via internet stream. I already do.

    But Netflix needs to face reality about their current streaming offerings... I like Muay Thai boxing movies, sci-fi b-flicks, and 30-year-old TV series as much as the next guy (that is, I do, but a little goes a long way), but most people want to see something that's in the "Top 100" too (I do). Currently, Netflix streaming doesn't doesn't offer that, but Netflix streaming+DVD does... as does Amazon, iTunes, Hulu+, etc.

    The only thing that would make this make sense is if Netflix, by divorcing their DVD delivery and streaming businesses, will get better selection and terms from movie studios and other content holders for their streaming service.

  106. AOL? by Avatar8 · · Score: 1
    I was debating whether or not to cancel my DVD by mail subscription. The streaming was out the door due to lack of good/current content. This e-mail from Reed today nailed it for me in one sentence:

    Most companies that are great at something – like AOL dialup or Borders bookstores – do not become great at new things people want (streaming for us) because they are afraid to hurt their initial business.

    Borders, maybe. But when was AOL ever great?!?! Unless it was the only possible way of getting onto the internet, AOL hands-down sucked compared to any of their peers or predecessors, namely Prodigy, CompuServe or Bubba's tin-can ISP. The only thing AOL ever did was support the CD production/duplication industry and the postal service.

    If Netflix is using these two companies as a role model, they're already on the path to failure.

    1. Re:AOL? by muridae · · Score: 1

      AOL put local phone numbers in just about every exchange, and went to flat X$ a month fees. Prodigy and Compuserve sure didn't. I know, I lived in backwater middle-of-nowheresville, and an account on CompuServe would have cost me long distance charges along with their per minute or hour charge. Hell, the local phone company didn't have a dial-up ISP until years after AOL had been running a local number. You could lease access on an ISDN, but the cost was way above what most families in a dead coal and rail town could afford. Strangely, Netflix has also provided full DVD and streaming services for a flat rate, to everyone in the USA. I can see the similarity. And the threatening similarity in how AOL imploded.

  107. overreacting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Am I the only one who thinks Netflix streaming is still a really, really good deal, and those unsubscribing are overreacting?

  108. Re:Incoming bitchy comments... 3.. 2.. 1 by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

    Because they are planning on royally screwing the DVD by mail service and don't want it to kill Netflix? Its no secret the USPS is going under, they are broke as a joke and getting ready to close branches left and right. Add to this the teabaggers that wouldn't allow a tax raise on the top 1% even if the bridges all collapsed and planes were falling out of the sky and you can see the writing on the wall. The only way to save the USPS will be to raise the holy hell out of prices.

    Now as we saw even a small price increase when it comes to Netflix has people bailing in droves, so what is Netflix to do? Simple you spin off the losing model and keep the one that will remain profitable after our spineless president (I swear he makes Carter look like a tough leader) bends over for the teabaggers yet again.

    Of course now that Blockbuster has been bought out and got that nice cash infusion they may be in trouble anyway on the streaming side, and with a Redbox on every corner their DVD by mail biz is DOA. Final prediction? Netflix gone in less than 3, 4 tops.

    --
    ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  109. ... aaaand down 3.65% at 10:51 by natophonic · · Score: 1

    Wall Street is a fickle mistress, and cares overmuch what other people are saying about you.

    The initial bounce was probably due to their CEO saying something -- anything -- in response to the customer anger over the price hikes that have caused their stock price to go from ~300 to ~150 over the last three months. Now some 'analysts' are weighing in with much the same "Uhmmm, what?" that Netflix's customers are.

  110. Well, glad I gave up Netflix months ago by sfranklin · · Score: 1

    Before this whole price thing blew up, I gave up on Netflix. Why?

    1. If I want anime (my favorite genre), I'm better off with http://www.rentanime.com./ It costs $20/month, but the selection is significantly better. I'd already seen pretty much all the good anime that was on Netflix anyway.
    2. If I want TV shows, go damn near anywhere on the Internet these days and you'll hit a way to get TV shows. From Hulu+ to iTunes, to Amazon, they're everywhere. Pretty cheap, too.
    3. For new movie DVD releases, there's http://www.redbox.com./ Sure, it's not quite as convenient as Netflix was, but I only watch 1-2 movies a month, so it's a *lot* cheaper. Plus it has the spur-of-the-moment factor...as long as I'm willing to put some pants on and drive 5 minutes, I can get the DVD right away.

    About the only thing left is older movie DVD releases. You can get most of those on Amazon too.

    --
    Skip Franklin
    It's always darkest just before it goes pitch black. -- despair.com
    1. Re:Well, glad I gave up Netflix months ago by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      as long as I'm willing to put some pants on

      Had me right up to there.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  111. That's the last straw by g051051 · · Score: 1

    I'm cancelling my NetFlix account entirely. It's been one misstep after another, with NetFlix falling down the stairs and hitting their head on every step. Every move they've made recently seems designed to alienate me as a customer (and I've been a subscriber for many, many years.) The price changes, the web site makeover disaster, and now completely splitting the DVD and instant streaming, they've completely removed all the important features that made NetFlix so useful. It's now clear why they haven't reversed course on any of this...it's obviously been in the planning stages for a very long time and now that they've started, they can't stop. These weren't individual missteps, it was one giant leap off a building. They're forgetting that the product is video, and users don't really differentiate between DVD and streaming for consumption...I just want a service that provides ANY movie I want to watch, and I'll pick the delivery channel.

  112. Offtopic by TangoMargarine · · Score: 1

    Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html.

    After looking up the 17th Amendment, I have to say, Why? Are you advocating the Parliamentary system e.g. in the UK where the upper house is elected by the lower? Seeing as it removes power from the voting public, I'd be interested to know why...

    And your second link has nothing to do with the first. Oookay...

    --
    Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
  113. Re:Incoming bitchy comments... 3.. 2.. 1 by MightyYar · · Score: 1

    A little golf clap for making the demise of Netflix's DVD business into a partisan political issue.

    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  114. Insight Lacking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I find it incredibly hard to believe someone, let alone head of the largest digital media distribution company, is this short-sighted. The whole "ouch!" reply literally made my jaw drop.

    I'm kind of expecting a morning after message with a the simple explanation of how his keyboard should be taken away when he's drinking.

  115. Negotiations with Content Providers by muridae · · Score: 1

    I'll hazard a guess at why this is. The "content providors", the movie and tv networks, want Netflix to pay per subscriber. Some subscribers never use streaming, so the separation was an attempt at moving some people off of streaming, so that Netflix could point at the streaming subscribers and say "See, this is how many there actually are."

    Now, with the STARZ negotiations falling flat, I'd hazard another guess that STARZ insisted that Netflix pay for all subscribers, not just the streaming ones but the dvd only included. Why? Because that would mean Netflix would have to pay more, and the MAFIAA likes money. This step of separating them into separate businesses is pretty much the only step available to Netflix. Once they can say "See, these are the only customers we can negotiate for" then the content providers will have to either agree or raise their price.

    I'm actually surprised that it took Netflix this long to separate the businesses. And the process of doing so may mean I keep my account open after the first month at the newer price.

  116. Its a good thing for me personally.... by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    I predict Quixter will get way more customers than Netflix. I hope this will be a clear message to the Netflix board to finally get rid of the clueless CEO (Hastings).

    The reasons I don't, can't & wouldn't want to stream:
    * Netflix (still) don't support streaming to Linux
    * Streaming picture quality is significantly worse than DVD, let alone Blu-ray
    * Transient net lags often pause or even kill streaming mid-movie (I know this from both my neighbors who stream netflix)
    * Can't REW/FF with enough granularity (frame by frame)
    * The next thing will be compulsory-watch advertising in the stream

    Hastings recently stated there will definitely be no more price rises, but I find it VERY hard to believe that the monthly outlay for a Netflix account + a Quixter account will not be together more expensive than a single Netflix DVD+streaming account.

    1. Re:Its a good thing for me personally.... by AlienIntelligence · · Score: 1

      I predict Quixter will get way more customers than Netflix. I hope this will be a clear message to the Netflix board to finally get rid of the clueless CEO (Hastings).

      Want to wager?

      [I'm not saying the CEO has sense, just saying, any property Netflix owns or owned that dealt with DVD by mail is probably tainted. If I go back to DVD, I will test BlockBuster before going to any Netflix spinoff]

      -AI

      --
      For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion
  117. Doubling Down by dcollins · · Score: 1

    This seems twice as weird as the price hike earlier in the summer. "I messed up," says the CEO (FTA), but at the same he's going to double the mess-up by even further separating and ghettoizing the DVD customers, am I right? Seems not only tone-deaf, but more like a pathological liar. "Sorry that hurt, to make it up to you I'm fucking you in the ass twice as hard right now." Total doublespeak.

    (I'm not a customer, sure it's just business, but seriously this statement makes my brain hurt.)

    --
    We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
  118. Re:Ratings? Joint Queue? Limited streaming library by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mod parent up. This is my beef as well-- the way Netflix manages my queue and ratings is not ideal, but it's familiar and convenient. I liked that I could sometimes have a movie on my DVD queue that would move to my streaming queue when it became available-- it was like a little present. Now I have to toggle between websites? Major hassle. I guess I'll have to check out this "torrents" thing all the kids are talking about. Bummer.

  119. This breaks all DVD players by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you have one customer and you create two products do you make them go to two different stores?
    I just transcoded my DVD library (around a thousand). Some movies I'll probably never watch again and marked and kept them offline just in case. The others I searched netflix to see if they were available online so I didnt need to add them and save disk space also. While doing this I found very few of my favorites were actually available for streaming maybe 1 out 20. So I was surprised that so few are available. I cant believe my "taste' in movies would be that nerdly eclectic.
    NOT available online for streaming 12 Monkeys,2010 Space Odessy,Any of the Alien movies,American Werewolf in London,Bladerunner,Brazil, etc.
    SO if I was forced to have to pick streaming versus mail only... it would have to be mail only, because streaming is kinda thin. That Amazon premium offer starts to look better and better, My DVD player offers Netflix streaming and the XBOX 360 and WII both offer netflix streaming AND rearrange our Netflix by mail queue... that goes away if Cripster becomes fact and then all devices have to be reprogrammed. My wife just said she sure likes Netflix after they released streaming and mail order selection for her Android phone... We'll have to reevaluate now. And for the first time I will complain. Now to short my Netflix stock....

  120. Guess its back to torrenting again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dismal selection, high prices with no real sign of if they do raise prices any more gaining content, infact all indicators seem to point at losing content, No linux/BSD support. I think Torrenting may be better for my streaming movie requirements, And hey that works on my TV too netflix CEO!

  121. The REAL reason they are doing this: blackmail by goombah99 · · Score: 1

    The slashdot audience has named all the reasons why this is a stupid move in terms of customer service. SO why are they really doing it. I think the logical explanation is likely it positions them better with their suppliers.

    I would bet that under the Unified Netflix model that Disney was saying "give us a cut of your Disk service or no more streaming movies for you". When they didn't pony up, Disney forced STARZ to pull the plug.

    Basically, Disney or Sony or whomever could blackmail netflix. They can't control the DVDs since netflix buys those open market. But they can control who gets to stream. And thus they can blackmail netflix on one part of their bussiness

    Now if they split it in two. No more black mail. yep they could decide to hurt the streaming company. But what could they gain from that. The streaming company won't have revenue from disks to pay the black mail.

    Thus the split is a poison pill.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  122. Twitter by framew0rk · · Score: 1

    Have you seen the Qwikster Twitter account? I think the profile picture explains the thinking behind the split. https://twitter.com/#!/qwikster

  123. Re:Only smart if they announce new titles streamin by PRMan · · Score: 1

    I'd subscribe to Netflix to watch that exclusive content...

    --
    Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
  124. And in other news... by Taelron · · Score: 1

    companies manufacturing smoke machines and mirrors have reported increased sales and stock prices...

  125. Re:Incoming bitchy comments... 3.. 2.. 1 by desdinova+216 · · Score: 1

    I thought the game publishers were already doing that to foil the used game market.

  126. Re:Ratings? Joint Queue? Limited streaming library by PRMan · · Score: 1

    I have cancelled and returned numerous times, and they just keep your ratings around. My ratings are useless lately anyway. Since they put the new algorithm in, I get "You have rated 1028 movies! Please rate more movies to get suggestions." Huh?

    --
    Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
  127. Re:Incoming bitchy comments... 3.. 2.. 1 by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

    Not me. Anyone who thought the streaming would be a free add on forever must have been locked in a bunker or something, and ignoring the shenanigans of the content providers. I predicted to friends/coworkers who have Netflix a year ago that streaming would eventually be a separate paid service. I didn't predict separate *companies*, though. Why not just separate divisions?

    If I had to keep just one service, it would be a DVD all the way where I can get pretty much anything. I look at my queue, and maybe 5% or less is available on streaming. They were adding a lot for a while there, but then it all stalled out. Is it really time to make this split?

    The biggest error here is having two independent web sites. That might make me go DVD only.

    What baffles me is the folks dropping the DVD side. Really? I don't get that unless they supplement it with Amazon or Apple TV or some other pay per view service which I consider the true rip offs.

  128. Re:Incoming bitchy comments... 3.. 2.. 1 by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

    Can you imagine Coca-Cola changing their name?

    Is Netflix the new New Coke?

    I'd call Quikster Coca Cola Classic, then.

  129. Re:Coca-Cola by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

    Discs are so 5 years ago.

    They also have 100% selection. Is this the new hipster mode? Moving to the latest delivery system despite the fact that about 5% of the content is there, or you get ripped off with pay per view charges? Honestly, I looked into one service, and not only was it pay per view, but you had to watch it within a certain time period after paying. What the fuck is that shit? People sign up for that? Voluntarily? I'll stick with the physical discs until there's a digital service that has complete content without need for lube.

  130. Re:Incoming bitchy comments... 3.. 2.. 1 by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

    Why am I not amazed that someone could turn this into a political referendum?

    Now who gets to shovel this mess up and dump it into the Obama tax plan thread?

  131. New name lets me access the site from work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm delighted by the rename to qwikster for prosaic reasons: my employer's proxy blocks all streaming content, so I can't manage my DVD queue from work. The new site will let me access my DVD queue again.

    The Netflix streaming experience is pretty poor in my neighborhood. Lousy resolution, lots of delays, no subtitles for the hard of hearing. I don't see that improving in the near future. I'm happy to continue getting blu-rays in the mail.

  132. Video games are a new frontier by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As a Wii user, if they are offering video games on Netflix, now I don't have to pirate new games to play them whenever I want. That's a big bonus

  133. Netflix is spinning off the DVD by mail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously, why else would they do it. It is going to be 2 seperate companies soon, they're getting rid of it. I just don't think they're that dumb as to kill the golden goose. They're trying to save a sinking ship. What do you do when you need to gain height in a balloon, you throw the extra weight overboard.

  134. Re:Incoming bitchy comments... 3.. 2.. 1 by moortak · · Score: 1

    In my case dropping the DVD side made sense. I would often forget to return DVDs for long stretches of time. Streaming, on the other hand, was used frequently for kids shows for my daughter. Netflix was a streaming service with a few bonus DVDs for me.

    --
    Xavier Rabourdin for president 2012
  135. But they lose their leverage against the studios! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The biggest puzzle is that this disarms Netflix of its biggest negotiating leverage against the studios for access to streaming content. Previously, if the studios tried to charge too much or negotiate far beyond the true value of their content, Netflix could just threaten to say: "no deal; we'll just buy your DVDs on retail market on the day you release them and immediately start renting them out". Nothing the studios can do to stop it and it hits the studios profits. And Netflix has indeed used this in the past, negotiating say a 30-60 day delay on renting out brand new release DVDs in exchange for access to streaming content.
    Do not understand this move from Netflix/Quickster.

  136. This is what the modern stock market gives you by johncandale · · Score: 1

    Fact is, even thou netflix only thinks it is only going to lose1 million of it's 25 million subscribers with the price increases last 12 months, meaning it actually is, or would have been INCREASING profits, sense the stock price took a 50% dive, the CEO is under huge need to make a change.

    Does everyone see how retarded this is?

    I know it's never going to happen, but we need to move back to a very long term only stock market investment rules view

  137. Yeah, that's what you wanna do... by roc97007 · · Score: 1

    Piss off your customers in a down economy. It's like printing money!

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  138. mpaa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    could be the end result of a years long movie industry conspiracy to kill independent video rental stores

  139. Re:Did not even thinke this through? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They've got their head somewhere dark.

    Weird that this and the "PETA porn" announcement came on the same day :-)

    ron

  140. Whitney Tilson is a genius for call to Short NFLX by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whitney Tilson in 2010
    http://www.scribd.com/doc/45507715/Why-We-Re-Short-Netflix-T2-Partners-12-16-10
    Background
    We’ve lost a lot of money betting against Netflix, which is currently our largest bearish bet, in the form of both a short and put position. In this letter, we share our investment thesis in depth and describe why, at a stock price of $178.50 and a market cap of $9.3 billion (based on yesterday’s close), we think it’s an exceptional short idea.

    http://seekingalpha.com/article/242653-netflix-ceo-reed-hastings-responds-to-whitney-tilson-cover-your-short-position-now
    Hastings -
    To wrap up, I have to agree with my friend Whitney that there are many risks ahead for Netflix, that our valuation is substantial, and that it is possible that one could make money shorting Netflix today. But shorting a market leading firm as it is driving a huge new market is a very gutsy call. On balance, I would rather have my co-philanthropists on the long side of this particular bet. Whitney: Short or long, I look forward to dinner and drinks together in the New Year.

  141. Speculation about postal service by Torodung · · Score: 1

    I wonder if this move has more to do with the current problems at the U.S. Postal Service, and the possibility that Quikster (nee: Netflix) isn't going to be able to run their business off of some version of book/media rate, and may be paying actual market costs for their shipping. Book rates are supposed to be without ads, so I'm not sure they even get that rate, but if they had a special hybrid contract or agreement of that sort of rate, this could well be indemnification against changes at the USPS.

    The original Netflix relies upon cheap, fast mailing. Cheap and/or fast are now in question at USPS. The streaming Netflix business relies upon unmetered internet, paid for by the customer. But most customers are starting to see broadband caps, concurrent with the rise of streaming video. In both cases, the business model depends upon trivial delivery costs to Netflix, with the bulk of the real costs defrayed to some third party or the customer. That is: Netflix itself pays a fraction of the full value of that premium speed delivery service. Faced with actual market rate transmission/shipping costs, Netflix could become a lot harder to run profitably. I suspect they're already starting to see some of those costs return to them in the mailing business.

    But in the case of the breakup, "unlimited internet" is not threatened (or the caps are currently large enough), so the new Netflix still has a business model. In the case of Quikster, who may not even be able to use the USPS after the next shake up, things may have gotten a good deal more interesting. They may not be a sustainable business in the near future.

  142. What's next for Quikster? Late Fees? by Torodung · · Score: 1

    How much you wanna bet, after all disc customers have been diverted to Quikster, that the new announcement on Quikster will be a late fee system? After all, the email says:

    There are no pricing changes (we’re done with that!).

    But it doesn't mention the possibility of introducing fees and penalties, in addition to the pricing tiers.

    Because that would be in line with the level of haplessly delivered bad news. Neflix has a PR problem like Darth Vader: We are altering the agreement, pray we don't alter it any further.

    Unlike Lando, people can just go someplace else. When you can crush someone's throat with a thought, you have power, when you are Netflix, you have problems.

  143. Re:Incoming bitchy comments... 3.. 2.. 1 by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

    Name a SINGLE THING I said that was in ANY way false. Do you know who Grover Norquist is? If not you better learn, because he is the guy famous for saying "Get the government small enough you can drown it in the bathtub and he is currently the darling of the teabagger crowd.

    You see he is going through the halls of Washington carrying this "No new taxes evar!" pledge and over 60% of the teabaggers have already signed up. Now since we all saw what happened to Bush SR when he did his "read my lips" and flip flopped those that sign his pledge will NEVER vote to raise a cent, it would be suicide.

    Now considering the fact that Netflix DVD by mail business depends on a functioning postal service and that the USPS is closing hundreds of facilities just to survive another year YOU TELL ME, how is Netflix supposed to keep DVD by mail afloat? Are they gonna send them by carrier pigeon? Are they gonna hike their rates AGAIN to pay for the increases?

    Because as I just told you and gave you a link for the ultra right is signing a "no new taxes evar!" pledge which means the USPS is fucked. So lets hear it, you tell me, how is Netflix supposed to work with their rates for deliveries increased and many post offices just gone all together?

    --
    ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  144. Re:Incoming bitchy comments... 3.. 2.. 1 by MightyYar · · Score: 1

    The USPS has been pretty much self-sufficient for the last 30 years. Taxes have nothing to do with the postal service, and your combative tone is not making me feel like you are someone who can participate in any kind of real discussion.

    If you want to tone down the demonizing a bit, I'll be happy to discuss the relative merits of propping up the USPS with taxpayer funds just so it can maintain Saturday delivery and a gigantic pension fund.

    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  145. Re:Incoming bitchy comments... 3.. 2.. 1 by diamondmagic · · Score: 1

    Oh no, you just called a group of people a scary derogatory name, you win the argument. I don't even know what the argument was, but you sure won it alright!

    P.S. The USPS doesn't use tax money to fund operations and hasn't for a good while now

  146. oh yeah, qwikster makes sense -- oxymoron? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    when i think of the usps, the first thing that comes to mind is not quick

  147. Well, I'm done by AlienIntelligence · · Score: 1

    I've had my account on hold, so I'm not dropping pennies
    in the coffers. But since I'm not interested in streaming,
    a service I was willing to allow to keep me as a statistic,
    now loses me as such.

    And I'm not going to bother with the "new" service. I will
    try BlockBuster before rewarding Netflix for any of their
    current business decisions.

    -AI

    --
    For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion
  148. Business case by vitriol83 · · Score: 1

    Obviously from the users point of view this is a total PITA. The defense is that it makes business sense. Streaming is the future and DVD by mail is going to die. This my or may not be true, but its unlikely that netflix is going to dominate the streaming business in the future, and that's where they're making a big mistake by divesting the dvd business. This is because 1) Licensing costs. They lucked out with the Starz relicensing deal. It allowed them to get a bunch of content for well below it's economic value because back then Starz didn't realise its potential. The deal is due to expire in February at which point licensing costs will balloon (they already have actually, hence the rate hike). Moreover the content producers can quite simply refuse to license content and market their own platform. Compare this with the DVDs,- no licensing required other than buying the actual discs. 2) Barrier to entry. This is much lower with streaming, as you can tell with the number of competitors emerging (e.g. HBO). Ultimately the streaming platforms will become commoditized and the money will be made by the content producers. Which given his "apology" is quite gratifying.

  149. Subscription Transition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A couple of days ago (of course) I signed up for both streaming and DVD delivery via Netflix. Will my subscriptions for both be continued with the respective companies be continued in the appropriate one (i.e., will my DVD service automatically move over from Netflix to Qwikster)?

  150. Re:Only smart if they announce new titles streamin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Totally agree. Not a word from the CEO about how much they're investing in new streaming content or new deals with content providers. If Netflix can't come up with a significantly better offering on the streaming side, they will be handed their walking paper by the likes of Amazon.

  151. Everyone's looking at the wrong numbers by PhunkyP · · Score: 1

    It is a bone-headed decision from the customer perspective. No going concern would completely disregard the preferences of their client base in this manner unless there was something more compelling, such as the cost side. From CNN Money in July: "Pachter predicts Netflix's streaming content licensing costs will rise from $180 million in 2010 to a whopping $1.98 billion in 2012." (http://money.cnn.com/2011/07/08/technology/netflix_starz_contract/index.htm).

    Netflix is looking at a 10 fold increase in their licensing costs. They can't pass that on to their customers, the demand side is too price sensitive. Their former corporate structure probably restricted their ability to negotiate these fees because they couldn't differentiate the user bases, streaming from physical. The key difference with this change is that this is the only way to separate the client bases into two separate companies.

    Their setting themselves up for the 2012 negotiations with the content providers. This gives the two companies additional leverage and could potentially save them $1 billion (give or take a few hundred million dollars) in the process. In the long run, it probably is the best way to serve their customers, and their shareholders.

    --
    In all things moderation.
  152. Slow version of the Titanic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It doesn't matter. As soon as they decided to split the two services and charge for them independently, in my opinion, I think they lost their edge. People will shop around because they wont be as competitive. In addition to, I heard somewhere that they had lost their contract to some media provider meaning that they will loose about 1000 additional titles a month.

  153. Re:Did not even thinke this through? by EdIII · · Score: 1

    Wow. I think we all see that Netflix effectively has end stage terminal cancer here.

    To me the lack of communication between websites even more stupid than that. Having gone "plaid" just does not do it here.

    I don't have a Facebook account, but that damned website is integrated *everywhere*. I have to use Skype for business and it nags the crap out of me for Facebook. So do a lot of other websites.

    Two bills? You're fucking with me right? Does your ISP give you three different bills for Internet, TV, and Phone? No. One itemized bill. Fine, they are really making two completely different companies and it has to billed as such. Fine. Probably a bunch of lawyers and accountants told them that.

    Are you telling me that all the developers between the two websites could *not* figure out how to allow you to link your Netflix account with your Qwikster account? It would be as simple as a couple of API calls between websites. I do it all the time with our projects and clients. You might be on a single website, but it is making calls back and forth between multiple companies to get all the information you want. Facebook and YouTube can do it. You can be on my website, provide me with the credentials for YouTube, and from my website I can manage your channel, upload videos, remove videos, etc.

    Integration is still possible here, even with two wholly different companies. You figure they would want to keep that straight out the gate.

    There is no excuse for this. I absolutely know that the the CTO and the development team over there must have been in a state of shock listening to the stream of retarded bullshit coming from this CEO's mouth the last couple of weeks. You want us to do what? Ummm okay..... wait.... no integration? That really is not a great idea... We can do this you know right? Still no on the integration huh?

    I refuse to believe that anybody on the IT side of things over there was going along with this singing a happy tune. More likely, they were quietly polishing up their resumes and getting ready to find jobs elsewhere.

    *sigh*

    I knew Netflix was going to die, but that was only because nobody else wanted it to live. It was basically terrorism from Big Content and its many bitches out there. You don't fuck with the lucrative rental revenue of the Cable Providers and Big Content, which in some cases are the same content, and expect no resistance. Especially, when those same companies have to absorb the impact of all of Netflix's streaming on their revenue as an ISP. It tickles me ohhh so much to know how much that messes with their oversell. Oh sooooo much. Same thing. Netflix poked the bear, and it seems finally the bear figured out a way to fight back.

    Going to cancel the DVD service for sure. I have no patience for it. Spending 20 minutes looking around and adding shit to queues is all fine, but when I cannot add it to my Instant Watch queue when it is available instead of waiting for it.... that just is too stupid to participate in. My time is way too valuable to be having to different websites up on two different screens and cross referencing the shit between them with cut and paste. I would be the *best* at it too. Somebody like myself could operate very fast, because I do it in my job all fucking day long.

    I don't want Netflix and Qwickster to be a job . The whole point is to provide me with some relief and enjoyment. Hence, why Angry Birds is damned addictive. It's easy. They are no longer easy, even for somebody like me.

    Besides, it basically is about 7-8 Redbox rentals per month. Guess I will be using Redbox a lot more now.

    I will stay with the streaming as long as it under $20 and still offers some decent content. Other than that, Netflix, you were great while you lasted.

    R.I.P.

  154. Re:Did not even thinke this through? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can't believe that the Netflix team doesn't understand the value of integration, as much of their past work involved integrating both Steaming and DVD on the current website. I also know that the CEOs long term goal has always been online delivery (hence the name), so maybe this is that first step. But it sure doesn't feel like a step in the right direction, perhaps because the primary differentiator between Netflix and everyone else was the option for both streaming AND physical media in one service.

    See, you're going about this the wrong way. Integration only makes sense when the business is slated to stick around for a long time. The way this spin-off is being handled reeks of purposeful brand destruction. Netflix has, over the course of the past 3 years, performed every step necessary to get rid of the DVD business. Whether the pricing was too volatile, the losses from missing/stolen DVDs were too great, or the margin was too low; it was clear the current management believed that the DVD business was doomed to fail.

    At this point, Netflix's customers are stuck with the worst scenario: a DVD business soon to be destroyed (either deliberately or otherwise), and a streaming business that has a poor selection at best.