Slashdot Mirror


Netflix Is Becoming Just Another TV Channel

An anonymous reader writes: Netflix revealed in a blog post that it will not renew its contract with Epix, meaning you won't be able to watch movies like The Hunger Games and World War Z through the service anymore. With the increase in cord-cutters and more original content, Netflix is positioning itself to be like any other TV channel (one that owns its own distribution model) and is betting that customers won't miss the Epix content. Chief Content Officer Ted Sarandos says, "While many of these movies are popular, they are also widely available on cable and other subscription platforms at the same time as they are on Netflix and subject to the same drawn out licensing periods."

24 of 294 comments (clear)

  1. I don't want a fucking TV channel! by Chas · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I want something that allows me to watch movies and/or episode-based content AS *I* want.

    Their offerings of content have continued to get slimmer in the recent couple of years. And I'm finding myself using them less and less.

    If Netflix stops delivering that content altogether, I stop subscribing.

    And, if we start seeing ADS attached to the content, I'm fucking outta there so fast the wind of my passing will bowl you over.

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
    1. Re: I don't want a fucking TV channel! by mark-t · · Score: 5, Interesting

      They can get cancelled even if you *DO* contribute to their ratings...

      Anecdote:

      I was in a Nielson household once... from about '99 to '04. When a show that I really *really* liked ended up getting cancelled after barely more than half a season, despite me and my wife and 4 kids watching it every single week starting with the pilot, I ended up cancelling our participation in January '04, and had them take their equipment back. I know that it's not Nielson's fault that the show got cancelled, of course.... but that experience with trying to participate in their ratings program, and *STILL* seeing a show that I really liked get cancelled before it could even get started was very discouraging, and I kind of stopped seeing the point.

  2. Idiots. by gfxguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "While many of these movies are popular, they are also widely available on cable and other subscription platforms at the same time as they are on Netflix and subject to the same drawn out licensing periods."

    The reason we can be cord cutters is because we get netflix, so you're suggesting I go back to doing both? %#!# you. #@# you very much.

    --
    Stupid sexy Flanders.
    1. Re:Idiots. by Phoenix+Rising · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This. I get Netflix so I can "rent" movies. While I've liked some of the Netflix original content, what I really want is a super video rental store.

      --
      Let us live so that when we come to die, even the undertaker will be sorry -- Mark Twain
    2. Re:Idiots. by Daetrin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Agreed. Like so many other lines of business there are two general strategies they could go for, wide or deep. In the case of media distribution you can try to have as much content as possible, "why subscribe to all those other channels/distributors when you can get it all here in this one spot?" Or they can try to have unique programming that is unavailable anywhere else. "If you want to watch this show you have to subscribe to us."

      Doing both can be difficult, both in terms of balance and expense, (but it is the way to go if you want to become a monopoly.) Unfortunately it seems like Netflix is trying to transition between the two, which is a tough sell to the people who originally bought into the service because of what they _used_ to be. They not only have to convince me to be interested in their new original content, they also have to convince me not to care too much about the old licensed content that they're losing.

      If any other service (Hulu being at the top of the list) were able to snag all the content that Netflix is dropping Netflix might be in some serious trouble. From what i understand though the reason Netflix is dropping so much content is that the owners have started realizing how much streaming rights are worth, so luckily for Netflix it seems unlikely that any single provider will be able to acquire the same range of content that Netflix used to have.

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    3. Re:Idiots. by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Hulu will *never* be a contender for me, as they insist on shoving advertisements in my face even if I pay for a premium subscription. I've experienced TV programming on demand and without commercial interruptions. I can't go back.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
  3. Re:Epix was one reason they were forced to stream. by bobbied · · Score: 5, Funny

    Seriously 160 kbps connection? Dude, you need to subscribe to the "We will mail you the disk" part of Netflix and just forget this video streaming idea. Trust me, they can turn a disk around in the mail faster than you can download the movie..

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  4. kept my Netflix dvd subscription by Dan667 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Looks like the netflix dvd model is coming around to be in vogue again.

  5. TV channels are not what people want by McGregorMortis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What people want from a streaming service is every movie, every TV episode, and every piece of music ever made at any any point in history, anywhere in the world, at a modest fee.

    Netflix certainly wasn't that, but it was trying to be. If it's going to stop even trying, then they're just driving people back to BitTorrent. Because that's what BitTorrent is, and it's free.

    Until people are given what they want at a fair price, they will continue to find it elsewhere.

    1. Re:TV channels are not what people want by bobbied · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Never going to happen, NEVER. No matter how many different services you sign up for. Seriously there is way too much stuff to do what you want and there are films which will never, ever see the light of internet streaming. For instance "Song of the South" which is owned by Disney will never be shown in public again for PC reasons, not to mention all the horrible "B and C" movies which would never deserve the disk space needed. (Who's going to watch "Howard the Duck" more than once? Most will quit that movie before the first reel change.) There is just way too much material which the license holder won't let go of and a whole host of stuff nobody wants to watch, even for free.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  6. Re:Epix was one reason they were forced to stream. by Grishnakh · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How is it a tech hub like Seattle doesn't have broadband fast enough for Netflix, yet I'm living in rural Virginia and it works just great for me? What the hell is going on in Seattle?

  7. You're opening the door to your competitors... by thedarb · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Taking away popular movie titles is only going to give your competitors an in. I didn't have to go see films at the theatre if I didn't want. It would end up on Netflix. I didn't need Comcast, it would end up Netflix.

    Simply put, if things stop coming to Netflix, so will the viewers. We aren't locked in to 2 year contracts, so we can come and go as we please. Maybe, Netflix, you should continue to court us.

    --
    This sig intentionally left blank.
    1. Re:You're opening the door to your competitors... by c · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Simply put, if things stop coming to Netflix, so will the viewers. We aren't locked in to 2 year contracts, so we can come and go as we please. Maybe, Netflix, you should continue to court us.

      You sound like believe this is something Netflix is doing on purpose. Given the business environment they're operating in and how content licensing works, it's just as likely that someone in the industry is jerking them around.

      --
      Log in or piss off.
    2. Re:You're opening the door to your competitors... by rsmith-mac · · Score: 4, Informative

      Given the business environment they're operating in and how content licensing works, it's just as likely that someone in the industry is jerking them around.

      And that's exactly the case. Netflix's streaming service started out as a last-run content distributor. They could get cheap access to lots of TV shows because the content had already been sold on DVD, sold to first-run syndication, sold to later run syndication (3am on TBS), etc. So selling that content to Netflix for cheap was the final way - the last way - to make money off of it.

      However any time you're selling content on a last-run basis, you're also expecting the service provider to either rake in little in the way of income, or at least not overtake higher tier services. Instead what happened was cord cutting, with viewers no long subscribing to cable services, ordering PPV, buying DVDs, etc. This is a great deal for viewers - lots of content for cheap - but it's a poor deal for content owners. The fact that this happened indicated that they undervalued the content they sold Netflix, and that in turn was because they didn't see the value in streaming.

      So whether Netflix likes it or not, they're going to be treated as a high tier syndicator due to the amount of revenue they bring in and the number of viewers. And Netflix doesn't charge enough or pay content owners enough to provide all that content that they got for cheap early-on. They either need to pay more or drop the content, so dropping the content they are. That leaves Netflix with little choice but to go the Turner/HBO model and provide original content to hook viewers, along with a mix of syndicated content to fill out their catalog.

      As for content owners, they're going to turn to other content distributors who will pay more for it. Hulu, cable companies, etc until revenue sources at each tier match what providers think they can get. Remember, a lot of this stemmed from undervaluing their content in the first place by virtue of underestimating how many people would go to Netflix. They have a general idea of how much their content is worth, via revenue from the pre-Netflix days, so it's only a matter of finding the right mix of distributors to sell to in order to find the right mix of services and customers. There are people out there who will pay more, especially if you balkanize everything so that the viewer pays a larger number of smaller bills (to avoid sticker shock).

  8. Re:Epix was one reason they were forced to stream. by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I really do think hell would freeze over before a republican would take office in any office that governs Seattle.

    Besides, if that was the case, then I wouldn't have gig service right now where I live in Arizona, which is about as much of a red state as you can get. In fact, come to think of it, a lot of red states have gig service somewhere within the state, such as Utah, Nebraska, Kansas, Missouri, Texas, Oklahoma, Tennessee, North Carolina, and Louisiana.

  9. Missing the point by grilled-cheese · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Today's media consumer wants what it wants, when it wants it, right then. This is opposite traditional cable company methodologies. It's why customer's are cutting the cord. To that end, the first service to offer the best selection will win (pricing models aside). If it takes multiple overlapping subscriptions to get the selection, customers will be forced to pick and choose or to go back to pirating. The stuff frequently pirated are the things that customers can't afford (multiple services), can't find (selection problems), or are going to have going 24/7 (kids shows and bandwidth caps). I don't blame netflix entirely though. It's a business decision to keep from raising rates. The real problem lies with the distribution points arguing unreasonable amounts of money for potentially exclusive contracts with providers like Netflix/Hulu/AmazonPrime/CrunchyRoll/etc.

  10. Re:Epix was one reason they were forced to stream. by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's just the city of Seattle that's screwed up. The suburbs actually outside the city itself (where I live, and where MS is located) has FIOS broadly deployed. My understanding is that it has to do with Seattle's own rules - there's a huge amount of entrenched bureaucracy and crappy infrastructure in place that essentially prevents competitors from coming in and upgrading. Naturally, large businesses (like Amazon) can simply bypass the mess with commercial-grade connections. It's apparently just the consumers that have it bad.

    --
    Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
  11. Re:Epix was one reason they were forced to stream. by bobbied · · Score: 5, Insightful

    > Seattle...160 kbps

    That isn't too bad. You can download a 700 Mbyte movie in only ten hours. With my 56k modem (because stupid Comcast despite having the government-granted monopoly over most of Seattle, still doesn't offer service to their entire monopoly area), I can download that in 30 hours. That's not too bad. I can leave the download running while I'm at work and at night and then have two movies to watch over the weekend. I really do hope they add a download option.

    So a DVD will take 10 hours and a Blu-Ray will take days to get... Go with the Netflix disk delivery option and it takes about three days to turn around ANY title they have, which is just about any title you could want, plus you can save that internet connection for something else, like browsing Zillo for houses OUTSIDE of Seattle that you can afford...

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  12. Quote by neminem · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "...won't be able to watch movies like The Hunger Games and World War Z"... "betting that customers won't miss the Epix content. "

    Yeah, not with examples like those I won't...

  13. Re:Epix was one reason they were forced to stream. by Dunbal · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I live in Seattle, and I don't know anyone with a connection fast enough to stream Netflix.

    Heck I live in Panama. No not Panama City, Florida. Panama the country with the canal, all the way down in Latin America. And I have the bandwidth (20Mbs) to stream Netflix, through a US VPN. So someone in your city is screwing you.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  14. THE END OF NETFLIX... by pellik · · Score: 4, Interesting

    When Netflix gave up it's deal with starz people thought that it was the end. Now Netflix is giving up Epix and people think it's the end again. Netflix still has a lot of content, and will possibly even sign a new content deal. They've long said they intend to rotate through content providers.

  15. Re: Epix was one reason they were forced to stream by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You are very lucky. I live in a suburb of Phoenix that is only served by Centurylink (no cable TV available). On a good day I can see 1.2 meg down speed and it's costing me over $60/month. Centurylink has been promising to upgrade soon (within 2 months) for the last five years.

    Why would they upgrade? They are your only choice of provider, they have you by the short and curlies.

    Time to move...

  16. Re:Epix was one reason they were forced to stream. by tsotha · · Score: 4, Insightful

    He's simply using his own personal definition of "Republican", which for him is "Any person or situation I don't like".

  17. Dropping Epix and gaining a lot by Frigga's+Ring · · Score: 4, Informative

    Did people read a different article than I did? The linked article says the following:

    "We also have some great family films coming your way, including Minions, Hotel Transylvania 2, and Home through arrangements with Sony Pictures Animation, Universal Pictures and DreamWorks Animation. Starting next year, we will be the exclusive US pay TV home of the latest theatrical movies from the The Walt Disney Company, including Pixar, Lucasfilm and Marvel movies. The majority of these films will arrive on Netflix faster than traditional arrangements had previously allowed."

    I lose movies like World War Z and Transformers and gain access to the libraries of Disney and Sony? So long, Epix.