Slashdot Mirror
Netflix's US Catalog Has Shrunk by More Than 2,500 Titles in Less Than 2.5 Years
According to a report on AllFlicks, a website that lists and categorizes Netflix content, the streaming service's library for American subscribers has shrunk by a third since 2014. The report claims that in March 2014, the US Netflix library consisted of about 6,500 movies and 1,600 television shows. As of this month, the same library offers 4,330 movies and 1,200 TV shows. An article on Quartz explains the shrinkage: The reason is that securing international streaming rights to shows and movies is exceedingly difficult -- laws and regulations differ by country, as does the type of content that people around the world consume. Netflix hopes that its library in other countries will eventually rival its comprehensive selection in the US.
All this tells me is that Netflix has looked at what people actually watch or want to watch and have lessened everything else. Furthermore, the real question is, how many titles do they have in their current catalog. How much of a percentage is 2,500 titles.
> According to a report on AllFlicks, a website that lists and categorizes Netflix content, the streaming service's library for American subscribers has shrunk by a third since 2014.
> Netflix hopes that its library in other countries will eventually rival its comprehensive selection in the US.
So they're going to equalize the catalog sizes by shrinking the American catalog to be more like it's international catalogs? Makes me scratch my head, but I'm not a MBA or a management consultant, so what do I know.
Although the summary is simply quotes from the article, the way they presented them makes it nonsensical. (The US Netflix library is shrinking because it's hard to secure international streaming rights?) The actual article at least has a couple real reasons -- competition from Hulu and getting rid of obscure titles.
How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
International will be as comprehensive as US content withers away...
The real explanation is simple, Netflix was not taken very seriously as a potential channel to displace traditional revenue channels (was seen as free money for little threat), and as Netflix proved it would displace the usual revenue channels, the content holders began being far more demanding as renewal time came around.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
It really has nothing to do with international rights. Cost may be a factor, but it isn't the most important right now. They can license whatever the studios will sell them.
The studios aren't selling.
The reason is that they figure they've got the killer show that is enough to get them to install the service for just that studio's output. HBO and Starz are already exclusives (with HBO recently revoking Netflix's license with Sesame Street), Disney's working on theirs, CBS has forked off their own instead of signing on to Hulu with the other networks.
At $15/m, they figure they've got the one killer show that is enough to get that monthly subscription, and they're gambling they're right by taking their material off of Netflix.
In the end, "cutting the chord" is not going to save anybody any money, because instead of paying cable $99+ / month for shows and HBO, they're going to have to sign on to 7 services to get the same shows they want to watch, resulting in the same $99/month.
"But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
-- Joe
I still pay for DVD subscription for anything that isn't streaming. And they are shrinking their deep catalog fast. My queue has almost as many unavailable titles as available titles now. They are dumping used discs at Dollar General or Big Lots fast.
It used to be that just about anything you could think of was available on disc, and then there was streaming with the more limited catalog. Now, DVD is less and less worth paying for. I am turning to buying a copy of a movie rather than having any way to rent for the more obscure titles.
Although the summary is simply quotes from the article, the way they presented them makes it nonsensical. (The US Netflix library is shrinking because it's hard to secure international streaming rights?) The actual article at least has a couple real reasons -- competition from Hulu and getting rid of obscure titles.
Competition is a big one. Hulu's free offerings have gotten much worse (and mostly they flood it with intrusive or deceptive advertising about their subscription service, like claiming they have X eps when only X-150 are available unless you subscribe to their premium service), but they are paying for more content. Amazon Prime has its own big library. Even the cable companies have amazing on-demand content libraries now, just terrible interfaces. You would think it would drive prices down, but it's actually driving competition for content up and overall prices up if you want the same or greater coverage.
That would only serve to cause a loud portion of the internet to deride TPB as a "sellout", pick up their ball and go somewhere else they don't have to pay for it.
Perhaps true. But as a long time user of TPB for content I cannot find on Netflix/Hulu/etc, I'd happily pay for a legitimate version...they could even call it "The WarnerSonyEveryOtherFilmCompany Bay" for all I care.
Just put all the content in one place, and make it easy for me to watch it whenever I want on whatever platform I happen to have in front of me at the moment, and I'll be happy to pay a reasonable fee.
That was due to a move by the BBC. They see the money in their own streaming channel too...
Netflix is NOT the cause of this -- it is the greedy asshole content providers. Have a NetFlix (streaming) subscription but travel to Canada or over seas and want to watch Netflix? Tough shit -- you are forced to use a proxy / VPN workaround due to retarded licensing contracts. The content providers don't have a fucking clue that some people want to watch anything anywhere and that we're willing to pay for it. They want to nickel and dime every region independently to maximize profits.
The actual reason Netflix's catalog is so sparse -- where the fuck is Seinfeld? Big Bang Theory? -- is because licensing costs go up about 10% every few years. Sadly, Netflix just doesn't the capital nor critical mass that the cable industry has. :-/
Here is a list of Movies not on Netflix
People think "cutting the cord" is a solution. That doesn't effect the content providers AT ALL. The cable companies are big enough that a few lost customers aren't going to make a difference. The cable industry is so OVER saturated that the terminology is "churn". Cable box penetration has remained consistent for the past ~10 years.
It is a similar reason Netflix basically ignores its deaf subscribers and screws up the subtitles. The solution would be crowd source the whole dam thing but you can thank the lawyers for fucking that over.
* http://theweek.com/articles/45...
Does anyone else have access to your account? Kids perhaps?
I know that when they changed their pricing model we were dropped in to the equivalent tier in the new model.
But, afaik, the 4 screen tier didn't come alone until 4k content was available.
Perhaps you have a 4k TV and wanted to try some 4K content and so upgraded without fully understanding the different tiers?
Also, you say it is "not even worth figuring out how to get the single screen plan" which implies that you are not familiar with the pricing tiers.
All you have to do is go to your account and select the single screen streaming plan... but that only gives you SD quality streaming.
My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
More and more things in my DVD queue keep being silently moved from the "next to be mailed" section into the "saved" section with wait times of "unknown", never to come back out. There's never any explanation or even warning.
I think this has to do with having 4 screens streaming at once, not 4k but not really sure.
I can see why you are having an issue. You don't know how to comprehend what you read, such as right now.
"His name was James Damore."
retarded licensing contracts. The content providers don't have a fucking clue that some people want to watch anything anywhere and that we're willing to pay for it. They want to nickel and dime every region independently to maximize profits.
I don't think anyone in the media industry is unaware of the consumer desire to watch any content anywhere, but the problem is that in many territories "non-internet media" like cable TV and over-the-air TV is paying so much more than Internet media SVOD distributors. You can't make your reliable, paying distributors mad by encouraging distribution channel cannibalization.
The top content producing media companies have gross profit margins between 30% and 40% right now, and international revenue is rising quickly - often based on syndication to countries where TV access is way ahead of Internet access, and where poor people are more likely to watch free broadcast TV than have any kind of subscription.
The actual reason Netflix's catalog is so sparse -- where the fuck is Seinfeld? Big Bang Theory? -- is because licensing costs go up about 10% every few years. Sadly, Netflix just doesn't the capital nor critical mass that the cable industry has. :-/
The truth is that (in just the US) Big Bang Theory can regularly bring in 20 million viewers in live + 7 days VOD, and the advertising opportunity revenue for that will blow away any kind of SVOD revenue.
I sure as hell do. I don't have a 4k tv or multiple ways to stream so I really don't care which one it is. All I know is they inadvertently upgraded my account for something I don't need. Were you born a jerk?
love is just extroverted narcissism
Yeah I get that. But the way Netflix pricing tiers are set up, the number of screens is linked to the streaming quality as well.
So the 4 screen plan also allows 4k content streaming.
IIRC the 2 screen plan is HD content and the 1 screen plan is SD content
My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.