Slashdot Mirror
Netflix CEO Comments On Recent Decisions
ExE122 writes "Netflix CEO Reed Hastings makes several comments about mistakes that were made over the past year. Hastings claimed, 'We moved too fast with it', [trying to exit the DVD-by-mail business] and explains that he still thinks Internet video will dominate in the coming years. From the article: 'Hastings also faced tough questions about last month's double-bomb disclosure: Netflix now expects to lose money for all of 2012, and it is looking to raise cash in a secondary offering of its stock.'"
At least, that's what you told me.
When did we as consumers decide to forgo quality over convenience? I recently tested Netflix. I was sorely disappointed with the quality of the video as well as the lack-luster audio quality. I quickly deleted my account within minutes of opening it. Until they are able to stream true HD sound I see no reason to give up disks. 7.1 is a beautiful thing...not going to waste it. :-)
The Post Office is in the process of shutting down, so everybody'll have to get off the DVD plan, anyway, just like we were trying to cajole them to.
I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
I think that the decision to exit the DVD-by-mail market is a great one. Maybe it's just because I'm a college kid, but most people I know don't even bother renting DVDs anymore. As Netflix gains more and more licenses for various production companies, and their ability to stream online grows, nearly everyone I know has switched to exclusively streaming (I know I certainly have). Streaming is where the market is at, these days, since we're practically glued to our technology, particularly the internet.
Good on you, Netflix.
Why are all the good movies disappearing from Netflix streaming service. I know they are losing Starz, but these are disappearing now.
My guess is Netflix is headed for that dot.com graveyard.
* Carthago Delenda Est *
Sometimes, what's good for the stock-price is not good for the business.
Maybe he had to be "decisive" and "strategic" in order to survive so he went boldly ahead to exit the DVD-by-mail business and preserved investor confidence at the expense of the business, even though he wasn't sure it was a good idea.
blog.sam.liddicott.com
What shocks (and appalls) me is that Reed Hastings has made several horrible mistakes, has led his business from profit to loss, and he will still take home a multi million dollar pay package for 2011. It's about time he admit that he is willing to actually PAY for his mistakes, and forego his compensation for the next year since it will clearly be a terrible one for the business. Until then, Netflix is a sinking Titanic with an irresponsible madman at the helm, refusing to change course.
he still thinks Internet video will dominate in the coming years
It will dominate in the coming years. Right after the media companies control the majority market share of all ISPs.
Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
While I hate the idea that Netflix may not be around much longer, I'm not surprised. Mr. Hastings strategy seems to be focusing on maximizing contribution margins instead of maximizing profit. Getting one doesn't mean you'll get the other. What I don't understand is why Hastings believes that the major studios will allow Netflix to operate the online distribution at the price levels consumers demand. It is clear that Hollywood has no interest in lowering prices on digital content even though the marginal costs of distribution is minuscule. It won't be long before Netflix changes to a "on-demand" pricing model that Apple, Amazon, and a whole other set of competitors are already doing, and the recent exit of a third of their customers due to the recent price increase is a clear indication that Netflix is selling a highly elastic product. When will Hollywod ever learn that we don't want to pay 2.99 per episode for a show with DRM restrictions that force you to re-purchase the damn video for every device you have, and that paying $14 for a digital download when the DVD is selling at Wal-Mart, Best Buy, and Target for $10 is price gouging.
I think Indie movies/shows are going to be a big boost in the coming years.
It's going to be just like video games and steam. In that case, more and more games are being released by independent companies or smaller studios (think quality games, torchlight, super meat boy, etc), instead of being published by major corporations, a lot of those games are fantastic.
I know Netflix has a lot of indie films, but the quality of some leaves a lot to be desired, but if they open up to a lot of independent filmmakers that do not have gigantic budgets, they could become the go-to source for this type of content. Who knows, maybe they could even finance their own films via some of these smaller filmmakers. I'm not talking about anything ridiculous, maybe boost an indie films budget from $10k to 100k or hell even a million if it'll have returns, not like that show they're producing costing them how many millions?
The price of a $7.99 one month subscription is ALREADY less than the price of a single movie ticket in most of the world, if they had quality, good films that couldn't be seen anywhere else that'd be a great boost.
It will be like the 90's when Microsoft decided to move into markets previously dominated by Wordperfect, Lotus and dBase. Verizon has deep pockets.
Such idiots at Netflix. You borrow money to fund shortfalls. And you increase rates over many years so people don't feel the pinch. You keep the DVD business around. People already have the option to do streaming only. It's not hard.
Eventually rates will be high enough to pay the interest off. Doubling prices overnight was the dumbest thing I have ever heard.
And it's not like they did not know what was coming. They knew years in advance that their contracts with Hollywood would be up for renewal and the terms would not be so favorable. So start increasing rates pre-emptively.
I know this with a BSEE. Why doesn't a CEO know this? Just more reason to shirt Netflix.
Surely Netflix is in a position to understand that video streaming as a market has been crippled by the MPAA. Physical media will not be killed by streaming because people cannot do the sort of things they do with discs when they using streaming services. I know quite a few people who lend DVDs to their friends and family members, including DVDs from Netflix. People still do not always have Internet access, or if they are away from home Internet service may be very expensive -- but it is easy to use a portable DVD player (I may not be up to date on this, but as far as I know one cannot simply download video from Netflix and watch it on a laptop). Connecting a computer to a TV is still a pain and it still is not widely done; people generally do not want to watch movies on a smaller computer monitor when a larger TV screen is available.
When the MPAA stops making life hell for people who want to use their PCs to watch popular movies, killing DVD rental services will be more feasible.
Palm trees and 8
Because the USPS is slowing down on their delivery times, Netflix's DVD service will benefit by delaying the delivery and return of DVDs and BluRay disks. The slower the mail runs, the fewer disks per month a user can receive. This includes not just the reduced number of days that the USPS will deliver by eliminating weekends, but also not guaranteeing next day deliveries.
Assuming Netflix sends a DVD on Monday, and you receive it on Wednesday (slower USPS) and immediately watch it, it will be picked up Thursday, and arrive at Netflix Monday (slower USPS and no weekend deliveries). They can immediately send you a new DVD, but it is still a full week round trip, limiting you to 4 DVDs per month per # of DVDs on your plan.
I8-D
I'm going to be unpopular but I love Netflix. I never used the DVD delivery service so that change didn't affect me, and I do understand why people who were previously on the DVD service would be upset about the changes. It seems like every time I get to a point that I "can't find anything on Netflix" that I'm interested in watching within a few days their contract/content/whatever changes and there's a whole new set of TV series, movies, documentaries, etc. that I'm interested in. I have a Roku box on all my TVs now and subscriptions to Netflix for movies and Hulu+ for stuff I want to keep up with that's currently being aired. Hulu and Amazon are shite for movie content and UI compared to Netflix on the Roku. The only thing that makes Hulu+ palatable is the subscription/queue so I can subscribe to all the shows I watch and then just watch the queue. The device/app/whatever that will really get my business is something that allows me to search all of my subscription services through a single interface and manage a single queue. That's the next killer app but it will take an act of Congress to make that possible.
Check out my lame java blog at www.javachopshop.com
So people in general complain any time corporations put short term profits over the long term well-being of the company? You have a CEO who isn't being an idiot but made mistakes. What he is trying to do is make sure his company doesn't die in the long run by trying to keep the short term profits.
Maybe executives focus on the short term for a reason. It's kind of like we say we want a politician who does the greater good, etc., etc., but when push comes to shove we want a politician who fights to keep our piece of the pie. Same thing here.
We send a bunch of mixed signals. We don't want an executive to play it safe, but if you make the wrong decision you're fired.
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
is to lose confidence in Netflix. They have a business model that should be how content is distributed by the cable companies. Everything on demand, cheap subscription rates, and access to older archives of content that would otherwise not be available except to purchase physical media, which consumers seem to be shunning.
The problem is that while the big cable companies are still struggling to maintain a greedy monopoly on TV content distribution, companies like Netflix are the necessary upset required to get these big companies making better decisions and offering better services. When Netflix was consuming the largest amount of Internet bandwidth, you know the big Telco companies started paying attention. A few decisions in the right direction and Netflix could replace cable services completely.
I do fear, however, that eventually Netflix may become extinct once big Telco gets into the game of offering similar services, but for now Netflix is the black sheep of content distribution and should be supported rather then complained about. For $7.99/mth I am accessing television and movies I have not seen before and no other service (cable, iTunes, movie rental stores) can offer me that value.
Its easy for people to b*tch about how poorly Netflix may have been operating their business, but in the end these same people will b*tch louder when Netflix shuts its doors for good.
I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
While streaming is going to be huge, it is the ability for indies like the guy who made The Annoying Orange to most their own content that is going to rule the day.
My kids watch that damn show on You Tube and it makes me want to jump off the roof. They love it.
20 minutes to download a 2 hour movie.
Streaming? Disks? Screw all that mess.
click click click wait 20 minutes. movies here! and 6 more queued up that will be done before im finished watching the first one!
And holy shit. it was free too. damm. can't beat that. awesome price. real convience. and the movie will play on any device i want, in any way i want, anytime i want! Damm someone should (ha) sell this as a service.
FOIS Free On Demand has a huge overlap content-wise with the Netflix Streaming plan.
In a sense, if you have Verizon FIOS TV, you already have Netflix. The only difference is that the FIOS offerings are hard to find (probably so that it doesn't detract from their pay per view on demand offerings).
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
It has nothing to do with security, the world and their dog knows Win PCs are the haven of pirates and copyright infringed media.
Your claim is that Windows computers have been used to store a lot of pirated media. What does that have to do with the effectiveness of security or DRM in relation to the OS?
I mean, I agree that the Netflix excuse of requiring the right hardware/software for working with their DRM is a lie. But assuming it were not... the difference in it being Windows or Linux, from a DRM perspective, would likely favor Windows (particularly Windows 7).
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
Blockbuster's site sucks compared to Netflix, and their disc mailing schedule is slower, but for me to put some pain in Netflix's wallet it has been worth it to me.
Giving money to Blockbuster won't pressure Netflix to improve streaming, Netflix already wanted that; it's every single movie producer that doesn't want it. And I presume both services have access to the same DVDs. So what are you accomplishing?
Starz was Netflix' biggest contract, and during renewal talks Netflix offered them ten times as much money to renew the deal. Starz still said no - not unless Netflix would make a special 'Starz' plan that cost more.
Big Content won't give Netflix a simple, reasonable streaming contracts because that's 'not the model'; they give Netflix the very last dregs of the market for a film, and when it looks like anyone might possibly be waiting for a film on Netflix rather than watching it somewhere else they stop giving Netflix streaming rights - and even try to fuck with their acquisition of DVDs.
It's content producers' obsession with gouging the shit out of every distribution channel and their delusional attempts to make internet video behave like premium cable services that keeps streaming shitty, not Netflix' management.
You hate Blockbuster, but you'll use it to punish Netflix. How about you show some contempt for the assholes holding the cards and pulling the strings rather than despising the companies that are trying to give you a cheap, convenient option for video?
The biggest mistake they did was unbundle the disc & streaming services. Streaming media is a convenience. Their library is also still too limited for them to consider it a viable standalone product. I personally liked watching my blockbuster movies in their entire Blu-ray HD goodness. When I was bored, or vegging out, and wanted to browse around for something I possibly wouldn't normally watch I'd use the streaming service. Once they raised their prices and unbundled the two I was out. In my house Redbox has taken Netflix Blu-ray/DVD's place and Netflix's streaming has been replaced by Amazon Prime streaming and good old channel surfing. In its current form Netflix's streaming should still be promoted as a complementary service. The best thing Netflix could do now is bundle the two services back and price it right.
But if customers aren't stupid they will notice decreased value of the service and switch to kiosk rentals.
Which have a Ron Jeremy-sized hard on for late fees- or at least, late fees under the new guise of charging you by the day. I don't know anyone who uses kiosks who doesn't pay as much or more in extra days as they did in outright penalties at old-school Blockbusters. You can say that people don't have to keep them for 8 days and this is true; people also don't have to pay the minimum on their credit cards or finance their cars, but they do and it's a predictable source of income for banks and car dealers. Much as extra days are a major source of income for Redbox.
Just because it's a machine in a parking lot and just because they don't call it a 'late fee' anymore doesn't mean the model is different. All they've done is remove the guilt and vindictive gouging from the process - and then promoted their new, spiffed up late fees as a convenience service.
They want to get out of the DVD through the mail biz. Unfortunately their streaming biz has terrible problems that are getting worse.
When most of us signed up Netflix offered about the same things that cable did. Now that we pay for streaming and most of our offerings are in a foreign language or simply very old or very unpopular.
Some of the Korean/Hindi/Euro movies would be fine if Netflix's "other language" options actually played a different language than default.
Right now Netflix streaming is a mere shadow of its former self and they expect us to now pay ~10$ a month for the privilege of this grossly reduced product we used to get for free.
With Amazon offering free streaming to Prime members this is not the way to compete with something that you alreay cost 50% more than.
Being the fan that I am for Google products, and also knowing that the cash is there and the possibilities are there, if I was Google, I would buy netflix, and voila instant stardom for youtube netflix merger.....!!!
I completely agree. But for those users that do stay with the Netflix DVD plan, Netflix will increase their profit margin. Let's say you and I agree how badly it sucks, and we leave. Well, I want 2 or 3 movies per week, and maybe you do, too. But Netflix doesn't make money on us as DVD customers, they lose money. Grandma, who is happy to get 1 DVD per week, is who makes them money. Grandma, unlike us, doesn't want to use the Redbox kiosk or its too far or what have you. Maybe she got a movie, and forgot to take it back for a week, and when she saw a $10 charge, her grandson set her up on Netflix DVD.
Similarly, some people like loaning out movies. For instance, I know two sisters who both have netflix, and like trading their movies, before sending them back. They get twice the movies like with a larger plan, but they get to pick their own. With a kiosk, the extra night instantly doubles the cost, and is impractical for DVD sharers.
All hypothetical, but can happen.
The question is, how many customers will stay with the plan? Without enough customers, the DVD delivery and warehousing infrastructure will cost too much to maintain, and even if the profit margin is high enough, it may be insignificant.
I've been railing against Netflix, just check my history. But, I still must say, the USPS changes are a total benefit to them. They never wanted customers like you or I anyways.
I8-D
Netflix has control over DVD rentals business; it keeps their lights on. Netflix has little control over streaming content business; that is Hollywood's.
They should have preemptively raised rates only on streaming (assuming that DVD pricing was already inline with costs).
But I suspect that it was a calculated tradeoff, because they could have priced themselves out of a nascent market.
Netflix probably gambled that the content producers would bend, fold, as content producers were looking for a business model and electronic distribution channel (I believe their previous attempts had all failed).
But as history shows, entertainment is gold - and content providers will hold out until their monetary demands are met. Whatever the market will bear; and that means commercials sooner or later.
Off the top of my head, renting out video games, and adding adult movies into their lineup with them being optional for $1 more a month.
Not only would it bring in more revenue, it would grow their subscription count ten fold. 1 million subscribers today, 10 million tomorrow. Half the people on the internet use it for two things: Games and porn. There might be someone out there reading news sites, but who cares about that nerd.
Comments like this really annoy me. What has happened is that Netflix, a company that has kept rock-bottom prices for years, has been squeezed so hard by its providers that they're losing money hand over fist. Netflix is not losing money for all of 2012 because customers are leaving them.They're losing money because:
"Buying those rights is getting tougher, as studios are demanding more money for their valuable content. One analyst predicted earlier this year that Netflix's streaming content licensing costs will rise from $180 million in 2010 to a whopping $2 billion in 2012."
Netflix's cost of goods is increasing by more than a factor of 10. In light of that, I'm shocked that Netflix still managed to keep the cost to their customers down below $8/month (for streaming). Instead of sticking their customers with the entire increase, they decided to eat some of the cost by selling part of the company instead:
"Netflix now expects to lose money for all of 2012, and it is looking to raise cash in a secondary offering of its stock."
Now, would you rather stick with the company that is still trying its best to give you rock-bottom prices, or go back to the cable/phone companies who have spent decades trying to find ways to trick customers into paying more than you should (and who will go right back to doing it once Netflix has been laid low)? Unfortunately, human nature is such that most people (in the US, at least) would rather whine and act like Eric Cartman when they get upset than to stop and think things through. Netflix's competitors are betting on it, and unfortunately betting on the crappier side of human nature usually pays off for large companies.
The reason I don't subscribe to netflix streaming is the lack of content. The reason for the lack of content is the legal control-of-information battle that rages on. Until that nonsense is settled and I get my single (cheap) subscription that gives me access to everything out there on my schedule, I will stick with DVD.
That is all.
I've been meaning to cancel my account. Thanks TFA! On a side note, when one cancels an account Netflix asks what your primary source of TV and Movies will be. The last option for both is "Bootleg DVDs".
Frankly, we thought the service was crappy on both DVD and streaming. We had been waiting for a popular movie for weeks by mail and it never came and walked in to a local movie rental outfit and there it was... at $1.99.
Also annoying was the streamed offerings labeled as "recent"; most of which were so not recent.
And then, of course, they raised the price. We stopped our subscription that very day!
No one ever had to evacuate a city because the solar panels broke!
I still enjoy netflix. It's much easier getting the dvd via mail and having a huge queue than having to take trips to the rental store. The streaming is great though. I just use it via the xbox, and there is always stuff on there to watch. Most movies I do want to watch aren't even there anyway, usually it is older stuff, but honestly what I love are the documentarys and just the odd things floating around out there. It's all the stuff I don't know about, and if I did, would probably not rent, or bother to download.
It is all that one shot content, sort of like how I used to channel surf. You are bored, don't feel like doing anything, so put on the tv, find a random show, watch it. This is what I do with netflix except I have a lot more control over the random show that I watch, and can save shows that I might want to randomly watch another time. I guess so far its been the equivalent of what discovery and the history channel used to be. Now I can watch all those nature and history shows without having to worry about commercials every 5 seconds nor UFO Ice road truckers getting in the way.
Have watched a ton of stuff I found very interesting on there, and its stuff I wouldn't have found on my or heard about, just stuff discovered from stumbling around the huge library that is there. Seems like 7 bucks a month to me for that is a pretty damn good deal.
They're losing money because:
"Buying those rights is getting tougher, as studios are demanding more money for their valuable content. One analyst predicted earlier this year that Netflix's streaming content licensing costs will rise from $180 million in 2010 to a whopping $2 billion in 2012."
Then don't pay it, and explain to your customers why you aren't paying it, or offer a deal where customers can choose to pay or not in an a la carte model. What Netflix did was fucking stupid. They took the side of their business that was presumably profitable and liked by their customers, and decided to split it off into it's own thing. How fucking dumb can you get? Companies pay billions of dollars to acquire business like the original Netflix model, and they decided they were going to jettison it.
And rather than being honest with their customers, they tried to talk a bunch of corporate public relations bullshit that just pissed people off. It also looks like they were trying to extract cash from their customers so that they could expand into Europe, instead of using investment money for that.
Never mind he ran the company into a ditch. Watch what happens. They'll ask him to leave eventually, pay him millions to go, all because he did about as good a job as anybody on this earth could have done with no experience. Executive America wonders why the public gets upset with them. We are about to see a case study emerge in the coming year.
Netflix content was cheap when people still kept their premium channels on cable. As more people started using the service Netflix profits grew and the show producers didn't see it on their end, so they raised their prices... cost of doing business. Cable infrastructure costs money, show production costs money, bandwidth costs money... Netflix is a new delivery system and feeling the pinch just like video rental places did not so long ago.
I'd prefer a company with a spine. The problem with certain business types is that man times they are too afraid to tell their clients or their suppliers when something just isn't going to happen.
It's the classic problem of valuing one relationship over another. NetFlix doesn't want to piss off the content providers by telling them that they aren't going to license their content for higher prices, for fear that the content providers will cut them off; instead, out of fear, they are playing into the content provider's hands, and screwing up their relationship with their customers.
In the end, NetFlix ends up pissing off a lot of their customers, and charging them higher prices. The content providers, who have NetFlix now on this treadmill, will continue jacking up content prices until NetFlix keels over and dies. NetFlix's demise will be greatly aided by the content provider's themselves coming out with their own competing service, for less money than NetFlix.
You see, the content providers (these particular ones) have a particular MO, and have a penchant for avarice that compares favorably with that of a two year old. They want ALL of the money, not just SOME of it. See the history of DRM if you need examples of content providers going a little insane.
The best thing NetFlix can do is tell the content providers that while they would like to continue offering their content to end users, they cannot for the prices they ask. If they have to make a choice, they'd prefer to remove the content provider's content, and stay in business, rather than lose their customers through attrition, ultimately resulting in NetFlix's collapse. After all, NetFlix has a duty to its shareholders, and they can make more money, by offering less content at lower prices, than more content at prices likely to bankrupt them.
I am John Hurt.
Hulu has only a tiny fraction of the programming Netflix streaming does, let alone discs...
Yes it can get you current TV. Which I can get for free with a DVR.
Netflix streaming movie selections are pretty limited - but stream TV has a lot wider scope, and is well worth the VERY LOW price Netflix is currently charging (yes it's still really low even after the increase).
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Until then, Netflix is a sinking Titanic with an irresponsible madman at the helm, refusing to change course.
Possibly he should forgo some compensation. But your statement is simply wrong.
The thing is, he DID change course. Qwickster is gone. Yes it was a stupid idea but how many CEO's back down from stupid ideas once they are released to the public? If nothing else he deserves some credit simply because he was able to put ego aside and do the smart thing.
Fundamentally with Qwickster gone he has done nothing else wrong. The price increases were mandatory because of content providers forcing Netflix to pay more, it's just that simple.
I also think it was a good idea to split out charges for streaming/discs. If people want just one or the other, the service is cheaper than it was. I, as a consumer, prefer that choice unbundled (even though I'm currently buying both).
So basically everyone's beef is with a choice that is not even relevant any more. Give the guy some slack, he is caught between some VERY cheap customers used to getting product for free, and content providers who want to charge an arm and a leg.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I thin he has earned a generous severance package.:) https://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=&q=netflix+generous+severance+package&oq=netflix+generous+severance+package
For us, it's worth the extra $$ to keep both the DVD and streaming services. When they made that change, we decided to dump Comcast cable, not NetFlix. So much more value for the money, even if it costs twice as much as it used to.
by messing with Netflix. Thanks to withholding their content from Netflix, my children have never, and will never, view a Disney movie. That means they will never pester me for Mickey Mouse dolls and all that crap. They will never demand to go to Disney World; they don't know it exists. And we all know that merchandising dwarfs box office revenue, so that's a giant revenue stream to them from my pocket that will not materialize. As a budget-minded father, I am grateful for that.
So not brainwashing my kids to want their crap is one positive externality of the MPAA picking up their ball and going home. Another is the quality foreign films, indy movies, and documentaries I have watched instead. I've discovered Korean, Indian, Russian, and other movies whose stories and production values equal or exceed Hollywood's. With those and the indies and documentaries I realize I am more entertained but also better informed now that the MPAA has pushed me outside the circle of their influence.
Lastly, all Slashdotters know and have said for more than a decade that if Big Content makes it too difficult for customers to pay for their product at an affordable price, then they will simply get it for free online. A friend recently lent me an external 500GB harddrive ($50) with more movies on it than you can shake a stick at. I know others exchange files in myriad other ways. And as hard as Big Content tries, that genie is out of the bottle and will never, never go back.
In the end, the only party that loses is Big Content. The rest of us gain in nearly every way.
Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
The center speaker is actually vastly underrated. Having trouble hearing dialogue over the music or sound effects in movies? A decent center speaker helps a LOT with enabling you to pick out the dialogue from the background sound. I'm not sure if it's the channel separation itself, or the fact that it is physically coming from a distinct direction, but it makes a ton of difference imo.
Streaming media is a problem.
I play games and use the internet while I am watching movies.
Playing any streaming content impairs my game playing and internet usage. I do not see an end my bandwidth limitations in the near future.
I buy and rent DVDs and Blurays to keep my outside bandwidth to a minimum. This allows me to conserve my internet bandwidth and still watch movie content in the best quality possible.
I think Netflix jumped the gun on the technology. Streaming is here to stay, but until the bandwidth limitations of the current internet become "non-existent", streaming content will continue to be something I use only when I have nothing better for my computer to do.
(I have dropped Netflix after the most recent changes. I got tired of the price increases for bluray access and their last increase caused my to drop them. I did not find their streaming content very attractive either. I buy my movies now. I had Netflix for several years and they had a great turnaround time on their rental service.).
I personally am not a fan of disc media. I think it's something that will (hopefully) die out in my lifetime before another format comes along. I've watched the formats vary from BetaMax to VHS to Laserdisc to DVD to HD-DVD to Blu-Ray. All it means is having to re-purchase your entire movie collection along with a new expensive device to play them on.
As far as music goes, I got rid of my CDs a long time ago (as have most people) and am 100% onto DRM-free MP3s. I have recently switched all my DVDs to electronic format as well. I threw out the bulky plastic cases and kept the actual DVDs in a binder (since they are my license to own the content). Now, instead of thumbing through a wall of DVDs, I just double click a file to play whatever movie I want.
That being said, I find it amazing how far behind video is. Music is widely accepted in its electronic format. ID3 tags allow you to organize your music by artist, album, year, genre, etc. However, nothing like this exists for video formats (to my knowledge). I am still limited to just a file name. Video just hasn't gotten the same level of acceptance that music has.
I feel that this is reflected in streaming content as well. I know a ton of people who love streaming music from the internet - whether it's Pandora or some cloud account. But video gets no love.
I'm guessing Reed Hastings feels the same way that I do. He thinks disc media is dying off and wanted to separate his company from that sinking ship. The problem is, the masses lashed out. People clung on to their DVDs and Blu-Rays as if Hastings were trying to rip their first born out of their arms (even though their CDs ended up in the trash a long time ago).
That's where he truly failed - he underestimated people's love for physical media. He may end up being right 10 years from now when the technology catches up and we'll be streaming super high-def with surround sound... but for now people just aren't ready to accept streaming video.
Now, would you rather stick with the company that is still trying its best to give you rock-bottom prices, or go back to the cable/phone companies who have spent decades trying to find ways to trick customers into paying more than you should (and who will go right back to doing it once Netflix has been laid low)?
That's the wrong model. It's either the movie studios play ball with reasonable distribution fees/practices, or else they fall victim to file sharing. Studios are trying to strong-arm Netflix now that Netflix has succeeded in popularizing streaming rather than being a tertiary income stream for studios. But if it drives customers away, it's going to backfire, and I for one am not going to support such tactics. If Netflix is a collateral casualty, then so be it. Corporations are replaceable.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
"Then don't pay it, and explain to your customers why you aren't paying it"
What a brilliant idea! Netflix should have simply stop paying for (and providing) all content! That would have kept their customers happily paying! They did stop paying for some of the most expensive content (e.g. Starz), but the cost of everything went up sharply, and they can't drop everything. Just as many customers are leaving due to the streaming selection drying up as they are due to prices going up. A lot of customers may still love the original DVD option, but once they get used to the convenience of immediate gratification with the streaming content, they'll get pretty upset at having it messed with. If you really take an honest and objective look at it, Netflix didn't have any good options, and their customers were going to get pissed off no matter what they did.
The only part I agree with you on is the PR BS.
"Cable infrastructure costs money, show production costs money, bandwidth costs money..."
Umm, AFAIK Netflix pays for the bandwidth for their servers (which pays for the cable infrastructure to carry that bandwidth), not the show producers. And it's not the cost of bandwidth that's killing Netflix. I'm not saying the show producers didn't deserve more for their shows, but an order of magnitude increase? Admit it, they got exceedingly greedy. It's killing Netflix, and it's going to kill anyone else who tries to offer reasonably priced entertainment like that.
Digital media needs the same benefits as hard media. If I buy 1 digital copy of a movie at $10US; then I can stream that same copy for rental to 1 customer at a time indefinitely, just like a DVD. So what if digital copies don't wear out; I back up my important hard media. It will be the responsibility of the streaming service to control access to the streams based on the number of digital copies they purchased 1:1, and their method for doing so must be transparent and auditable. This way digital licensing cannot become a barrier to entry or selectively put competitors under financial duress who do not produce their own content. Purchased digital media should not come with a license, only subject to copyright law, which should be amended back to at least pre 1976 terms for many things.
Republicans should love how this benefits small business, and Democrats should love how this benefits consumers. Win win situation, right?
All content? Do you have the numbers to back that up? I bet you don't. Early on streaming Netflix had limited content, but there was a lot of it, including older stuff and indie stuff.
Also, if the major content guys were going to be extortionists, then agreeing to pay it gives their customers no choice except to accept an all-or-nothing deal. They could have gone with an a la carte model.
Netflix had the bully pulpit and could have stood up now instead of caving in and explained everything to their customers. Instead they thought they could push their customers around, raise their prices, and use the money to expand into Europe while also removing the convenience of having a single site for DVD rentals and online.
Even if their customers were going to get pissed off no matter what, there were better options than this.
They did that. Hence why Stars content will no longer be on Netflix.
Even though this is going to get lost in a sea of arguments about broadband and bandwidth:
Lack of library parity. The Netflix streaming library generally sucks eggs compared to the DVD and Blu-ray libraries.
this is my sig
That part where *nix (and then some) have been questioning why they switched to silverlight, which is lower-quality and less compatible than flash.
Joining together dust coat collocation thick wool coat and replica Hermes handbags
A series of dust coat to sweep up the bleak autumn, very big of a. The wool massiness and personality with the cortex, bump the brightest personality charm, very is to let a person of tangled a. The style of the model is very concise, inside take the black pants and a yard, big want is the classic simple. The weather suddenly change, is still not to fit in? You must want to keep warm and clothes and fashion, every year autumn winter season in almirah of are not the dress is wool coa, this year a new pattern, individual character is handsome and mature elegance, after all, you want to style must have. The replica Hermes Bolide Bags with Silver Hardware in Magenta is a nice handbag , this replica Hermes handbags is made of top cowhide leather materials , this replica Hermes handbags is with double rolled handles for comfortable carrying , and there is a single detachable shoulder strap is available for the bags. That very nice for this style.
Netflix is trying to go all digital which turns them into just another video streaming peddler. They're a dime a dozen now... which is great. I can rent or buy from Amazon, Hulu, Netflix, Apple etc... quite easily these days.
The point being that Netflix is/was a great source to rent physical DVDs and that's what made them special. It is obvious that the remaining lifespan of mail order DVD rental can be measured in years... not decades. But NetFlix is making a huge mistake by being a media company as opposed to what they really are which is a logistics company. Instead of trying to find a new way of selling/renting films to their customers they instead should be finding a way to use their warehouses to provide items other than DVDs.
My local, independently owned, and operated DVD rental store(which also deals in used CDs, DVDs, and books) has a great selection and low prices. I even get decent store credit for trading in my used books and digital media. Sometimes the "old ways" are best.
Lol WUT?! Get off my lawn.
yup, its killing netflix... say hello to my little friend . Just big fish eating smaller fish. how you doin, bait.
Your cable that you record is free?
No, the over the air HD I record is free...
What cable only stations does Hulu carry? I've only ever used it for network shows.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Netflix is trying to go all digital which turns them into just another video streaming peddler. They're a dime a dozen now... which is great. I can rent or buy from Amazon, Hulu, Netflix, Apple etc... quite easily these days.
No, you can't. Have you tried all of them? Either device support is lacking, or the services simply suck. I have Prime and I still do not use Amazon video. Hulu has obnoxious commercials and really limited content.
Now Apple I do use, but that's per show... but it does have a lot of range and I don't mind paying for good content.
The thing is Netflix is still what gets used day to day. It fits in really well as a companion to video on iTunes since they are different models - what doesn't fit in so well is replacing Netflix alone with any of the options you list. You claim they are a "dime a dozen" but that utterly ignores my original point, which is the range of content on any alternative (except iTunes).
MY point is that Netflix is still quite special compared to any other competitor.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
the fuck?
They also managed to screw up their netflix app in the new Xbox 360 dashboard.