Netflix Expects To Be Unprofitable In 2012

PolygamousRanchKid writes with an article in CNN Money about Netflix's prospects in 2012. From the article: "Netflix warned in its last earnings report that it expects to be unprofitable 'for a few quarters' starting at the beginning of 2012. The primary culprit is Netflix's pricey plan to expand its streaming video service into the United Kingdom and Ireland, but a wave of subscribers jumping ship hasn't helped. The filing also revealed that Netflix is in the process of raising $400 million from investors to help bulk up its cash stash. While that will give Netflix more money to invest in content, secondary offerings are sometimes considered ominous signs."

Comments

More content

[Anonymous Coward]

They need more content...I watched nearly all the good movies over one winter off work.

Re:More content

[hedwards]

It's relatively common in the construction field to do that. Which is just as well because there's typically a lot less work in the winter anways. If they work enough they can even draw unemployment during the winter.

Re:More content

[tom17]

OK, let me do some random searches of stuff I want to watch...
(I PROMISE that these are as they come off my head, of stuff I am thinking of with no deliberately only looking for stuff they don't have)

Pulp Fiction: No
Stargate SG1: Oooh they have it now!
Stargate Atlantis: No
Dr Who (new): No
Top Gear(UK, New): YES!!
House MD: No
Lost: No (Not actually a bad thing)
Total Recall: No
Avatar: No
Airplane: No (But they have Airplane2??)
Shrek: No
Star Wars: No
Start Trek Series: No (But they do have three films, including the latest)
Die Hard: No
Inception: No
Crank: No (But they have Crank 2)
Family Guy: No
Futurama: No
Titanic: No (But, again, they have the sequel!. I don;t actually want to watch it anyway, I just thought of it is all)
Friends: No (For wifey)
Seinfeld: No
Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels: YES!!!
Snatch: YES!!!
Saw: Yes, but only 1 & 2
The IT Crowd: Yes!
The Backyardigans: Yes
Special Agent Oso: No
Mickey Mouse: No
Grays Anatomy: No
Kill Bill: No
Shaun of the dead: Yes :)
Poltergeist: No

Etc, etc, etc. Need I go on?

8/32 - 25% success.
Granted, this is a FAR better success rate than when I last looked (more like 5%), but it's still pretty piss poor :(

When it gets to over 50% such that most (i.e. over 50% :) ) of what I am looking for is there, then I will part with my money.

I wonder what the pass rate is for that list on the USA version. I don't have a US proxy so can't check. I bet it is much higher.

Re:More content

[VickiM]

That's weird. When I look at my account:
Star Gate Atlantis - Yes
Airplane! - Yes
Doctor Who - All the new Who that has been release on DVD except Season 6 which was released two days ago in Region 2 only
Star Trek Series - I see original, TNG, Voyager, DS9, Enterprise, the Animated Series.
Die Hard - Yes
Family Guy - Yes
Futurama - Yes
Grey's Anatomy - Yes

Are you a troll?

Re:More content

[billtom]

Yes, Bell and Rogers are evil bastards, but in the Netflix Canada case, it's the Canadian divisions of the major movie/television production companies that are the villians. Like: Sony Pictures Canada, NBCUniversal Canada, etc, etc. (And yes, Bell and Rogers are somewhat involved, but in their role as content owners, not as ISPs.)

From what I understand, these big multi-national companies are not particularly happy with Netflix US, but they're kind of stuck because they have existing agreements and Netflix US has too many subscribers to ignore.

But then when it came time for Netflix and the movie/TV production companies to negotiate contracts for Canadian distribution, the productions companies said, "hey, wait, here's our chance to really stick it to Netflix. the Canadian market isn't that big and Netflix doesn't have a big presence there yet."

So they offered much worse deals to Netflix that Netflix just couldn't afford; or refused to license the content under any terms.

Basically, the people who own the content copyrights are starving Netflix Canada in hopes that it dies.

Re:Good, but not for the reasons I had hoped for.

[JoeMerchant]

Folks, it's a measly $8/month for unlimited TV and movies.
How enticing is that? You know what's even cheaper? GETTING OFF YOUR BUTTS
AND MOVING! Instead of asking the family "What do you want to watch
tonight?" ask "Where should we walk to tonight?"

You know, when I get home from work in the winter, it's dark, and usually cold. I do like to get the kids out when I can, but pushing it against the dark and cold leads to sick kids as often as not. And, so, then, we can hop in the auto and pop round to, well, where? The shopping mall? A restaurant? Just the petrol cost will dwarf $8/month.

Golden Girls quote: "What did we do before we sat around like dolts staring at the Television?" "Oh, I remember when I was a kid, we sat around like dolts staring at the Radio."

Get a hobby, build a workshop, wash your dishes by hand and mop the floor - yeah, these are all good alternatives, but for the hours between 6 and 10pm, there's not a lot of decent outdoor activity available in the winter.

Re:Good, but not for the reasons I had hoped for.

[tibit]

I don't think there's any reason to believe that being out in miserable weather will make you sick -- not if you're maintaining proper body temperature, at least. That's some wives' tale that has lived way past its expiry date. I know not everyone can live in a place where there's a walkable neighborhood, but perhaps you have a public park somewhere?