Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Netflix Signs Exclusive Deal With Dreamworks

Posted by samzenpus on from the let-there-be-movies dept.

tekgoblin writes "Netflix has signed an exclusive deal with Dreamworks Animation which will allow them to stream content from the studio to Netflix. The deal will allow Netflix to stream content from Dreamworks, which previously supplied content to HBO. The contract was negotiated at approximately $30 million per Dreamworks film title."

10 of 199 comments (clear)

  1. $30 mil per movie title! by firex726 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    $30 mil per movie title!
    That just seems insanely expensive to me.

    1. Re:$30 mil per movie title! by mr1911 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Market cap is not working capital or cash flow.

      --
      This post comes with a double-your-money-back guarantee!
      Any offense taken to this post is at your sole discretion.
    2. Re:$30 mil per movie title! by Antisyzygy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Stock prices don't affect revenue and assets (except for the stock held by members of the company) of a company who issues the stocks, its the other way around. Netflix took a hit to its stock because people are not confident they will continue to grow as a company, however there was not an instantaneous change in their revenue. They still had as many subscribers after the stock took a hit as before +/- a few thousand probably.

      --
      That brings me to an interesting point, / . is just "the ramblings of socially-inept, technology-literate news-mongers".
  2. Re:Nice slashvertisement by J-1000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Netflix is pioneering the new TV landscape. This nerd, for one, wants to hear news about them.

  3. This is why Netflix is doomed by jandrese · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So Dreamworks has produced a little over 100 titles, so that would be a 3 billion dollar deal to get a tiny sliver of the movies they're about to lose with the Stars deal back. That is not sustainable by any measure. For comparison, with the DVD rental business the Disks would have cost somewhere on the order of $2 million. Back when the Streaming was just a sideshow for the disk rental business this didn't matter, but now that the company is split in two it's clear just how badly Netflix is screwed. The studios don't like it, and they ultimately have control over the business thanks to the fact that internet streaming to one household is considered "broadcasting".

    It doesn't even matter if this is the future of movie rentals. Studios have shown time and time again that they'll prefer to kill off any new and disruptive technologies instead of trying to profit off of them. They had to be dragged kicking and screaming by court rulings into the VHS and DVD era, and they're not going to go quietly into the streaming era either. Not that they'll have to anyway. They learned their lesson the first time and bought all of the congressmen and FCC executives they need to prevent them from ever having to face inevitable change anyway. Can you imagine legislation that would reclassify streaming in a sane manner from this congress or FCC? The thought is ludicrous.

    --

    I read the internet for the articles.
  4. Re:so how long will it take by bws111 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Lost half their customers? Where did you get that nonsense? They lost about 4% of the customers, which they made up for in revenue with higher prices.

  5. 2013!!!! by Crock23A · · Score: 5, Informative

    According to the article, no streaming content from this deal until 2013. Maybe I'll reactivate my account sometime around then but in all likelihood, I'll have found a much better alternative by then.

  6. Re:It sounds great by tag · · Score: 4, Insightful

    But my kids will watch them over and over, ad nauseum.

  7. Starz was only 200-300 mil/year... by mj1856 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I don't get it. Netflix drops Starz over 200-300mil/year but signs Dreamworks at 30 mil per movie? I'm sure Starz delivers more than 10 movies in a year. Do Netflix execs really think their audience will prefer cartoons over serious content?

  8. What makes that likely? Seems rather UNLIKLEY by SuperKendall · · Score: 3

    According to the article, no streaming content from this deal until 2013. Maybe I'll reactivate my account sometime around then but in all likelihood, I'll have found a much better alternative by then.

    What makes you think that, at all? What ray of hope is there anywhere that something better will come along?

    One possibility was pay per stream, which is essentially what iTunes rentals was. Dead.

    Another model is Hulu. Oh awesome, I get to pay more than Netflix for an order of magnitude less content that includes commercials.

    Or perhaps you prefer a total balkanization of content? Like the NFL streaming you can buy on the PS3 - for $100...

    Like it or not, Netflix has the only streaming model that is really reasonably priced and commercial free with a pretty wide range of content. If Netflix falls you can look forward to paying $100 for the same amount of content, if you are lucky... By not buying into Netflix now, you are basically helping to seal the fate of the only solution that is close to good. When you come back in 2013 and find NOTHING viable apart from torrents, well don't come crying to Slashdot!

    My thought is that the death of DVD's and physical rentals is greatly exaggerated as long as the streaming scene is so horrific and fragmented. I will continue to support Netflix because they are the only content neutral providers that I like the approach of.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley