Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Netflix Has Twice As Many US Subscribers As Comcast (allflicks.net)

Posted by BeauHD on from the staggering-statistics dept.

An anonymous reader writes: You want to hear a staggering statistic? Netflix has more than twice as many U.S. subscribers as Comcast. Netflix USA writes, "According to [Comcast's] Q4 report, Comcast ended 2015 with 22,347,000 video subscribers. Netflix's own shareholder report listed their U.S. membership base at 44,740,000 strong. That's 100.2% more than Comcast -- a staggering statistic." It's impressive to see how quick the Netflix subscriber base has grown just in the past five years from around 20 million subscribers to nearly 45 million subscribers. What's also interesting to reflect on is the two different business models. Netflix USA writes, "Netflix makes its money off of a lot of subscribers paying about $10 a month each, while Comcast charges far fewer customers far more."

14 of 112 comments (clear)

  1. I keep dreaming of the day by toonces33 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    that we can cut these bastards off. But between news and sports, the things that we do watch just aren't available on any of these streaming sites.

    1. Re:I keep dreaming of the day by tom229 · · Score: 2

      It will never happen within the current way things are done. Telecoms still own the backbone on which the internet operates, which Netflix relies on. I have friends that work for telecoms. The management calls people that drop cable "cord cutters" and they have a simple plan: raise internet rates as required to offset the revenue loss from them. They aren't even secret about it. So until you see much overdue telecom reform in the US/Canada (I'm not going to pretend to know the state of things in Europe), you'll never see major telecoms lose any meaningful power or control.

      --
      If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
  2. Well duh... by Penguinisto · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...it's the other sharp edge of that two-edge sword called local monopolistic power. Sure, Comcast has exclusive markets, but that means they cannot go into other markets that are already taken up by some other cable ISP. Netflix has no such restrictions.

    Doesn't matter though - Comcast is a, like most cable ISPs, a bag of dicks, so even at 1/4 the size, they'll do their level best to extort money from Netflix and anyone else that streams video for a living...

    --
    Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
  3. Apples to Oranges by cogeek · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Comcast is limited by physical constraints to the markets they're located in. Netflix is available to anyone with an Internet connection. I hate Comcast as much as the next poor soul that's bound to them simply based on their zip code, but this is like saying "penguins in the wild eat more fish than polar bears at the zoo"

  4. That's pretty surprising by OrangeTide · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Considering that I have to have Comcast's cable internet service before I can use my Netflix account. There aren't a lot of great options for me in this area, my experience with Netflix over DSL has not been good.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    1. Re:That's pretty surprising by aralin · · Score: 4, Interesting

      How about some regulation that would make companies itemize the bills correctly. Why is the prize of cable internet with Comcast $15 with TV subscription, but $65 without it? I want one service to have one cost. If there is cost of running the cable, then itemize it at $50 on the bill. I want to be able to see what am I paying for and make my choices alla carte. The same with TV programs. I am sick and tired of all these packages.

      --
      If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.
  5. Content provider vs. service provider by jmcbain · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why are you comparing these two companies? Netflix is a content provider. Comcast is a (cable and Internet) service provider. That's like comparing Amazon with the UPS.

    1. Re:Content provider vs. service provider by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 2

      A much more interesting statistic would be what percent of the Netflix $9/mo. spent by Comcast subscribers is redirected to Comcast. On top of the mucb more massive direct Comcast bill.

      Comcast demanding a cut is fraud as far as I am concerned, as they do not tell me they will be claiming a part of my Netflix fee as well.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    2. Re:Content provider vs. service provider by Ralph+Wiggam · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why are you comparing these two companies?

      So we have a thread to talk about how much we like Netflix and hate Comcast. Were you expecting some kind of insightful content or intelligent discussion here? It's not 2003 anymore.

    3. Re:Content provider vs. service provider by breeze95 · · Score: 2

      Why are you comparing these two companies? Netflix is a content provider. Comcast is a (cable and Internet) service provider. That's like comparing Amazon with the UPS.

      Not entirely true. Comcast is a content provider via NBC Universal.

    4. Re:Content provider vs. service provider by Ritz_Just_Ritz · · Score: 2

      Actually no. They are a content AND service provider. You forget that Comcast owns NBC Universal as well.

      Personally, I would drop Comcast tomorrow if an alternative broadband provider was available in my area. The instant that happens, I'll be a former customer of their internet service. I don't recall the last time I watched any of their TV or movie content. It's been years. Perhaps someday they'll release something worth watching. Hope springs eternal.

  6. Re:Get on with the times by Guy+Harris · · Score: 2

    There's "cable" as in "the cable TV industry", there's "cable" as in "the programming on your cable TV connection that doesn't travel over DOCSIS", and there's "cable" as in "the communications infrastructure of the cable TV industry".

    Given "There is no point in having completely separate network for watching video and another one for all other information.", I suspect the person to whom you're replying meant "cable" as in "the programming on your cable TV connection that doesn't travel over DOCSIS", i.e. "why doesn't the cable TV industry provide only IP to the home and run their programming over that"?

    It sounds, from "cable (in your walls)", as if you're talking about "cable" as in "the communications infrastructure of the cable TV industry", and, in particular, the customer premises part of that infrastructure. In that case, what MoCA proves is that, with MoCA 2.5, you can get "up to 2.5 Gbps actual data rates". Is that really "VASTLY greater bandwidth capacity" than gigabit Ethernet?

  7. This isn't surprising by kuzb · · Score: 2

    Give people what they want, on demand, at a reasonable price, without tying it to some other service people don't want and watch your userbase grow. Netflix has done a first class job on this score and comcast hasn't.

    --
    BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
  8. From a business perspective by kilodelta · · Score: 2

    I deal with Comcast for our internet service. Dealing with them is like dealing with the old Ma Bell. The problem just couldn't be on their end. So the latest, from a Comcast business account you couldn't reach Comcast aka Xfinity residential email servers. Showed them the traceroutes from our border device and it just dropping the connection. They wouldn't believe me until I took our network down to test at their border device. Of course I knew the IP's so I just modified it and sent it back to them.

    It was a fucking ACL on the gateway. One that we did not ask for. Took two weeks and about a dozen emails and calls to get it fixed. Comcast sucks.