76% Of Netflix Subscribers Think Netflix Can Replace Traditional TV (cordcutting.com)
An anonymous reader writes: It turns out plenty of people think Netflix is ready to replace their traditional TV. According to a survey on AllFlicks (Editor's note: the site is Netflix focused, so it's not really a neutral audience), 75.6 percent of Netflix subscribers said that the on-demand movies and TV shows streaming service has grown good enough to replace whatever the traditional TV has to offer. The participants, however, also noted that the streaming service still can't replace live sports coverage or the experience of the movie theater. In some other news, Netflix knows which picture and video you're likely to click.
If Netflix provided the movie theatre experience, I would cancel my service.
Amirite?
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
With ESPN now talking to HULU, we are moving closer to a break of the sports content lock that cable has held, and hopefully we'll have IPTV choices to suit our needs from true competitors. Cable is going to have to adjust. With smartphone habits overtaking TV watching anyhow, its a matter of time.
Netflix didn't cut their movie selection, the studios did. Netflix would be perfectly happy to show you every movie ever made if they could.
Also, their own shows are sufficiently successful (both commercially and critically) that for you to call that a "waste" is objectively wrong in every sense.
If they know what I'm likely to click, why don't they show it to me, instead of aggressively doing the opposite?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
News has been broken for a long time. I can't tune into any of 24 hour networks without wanting to throw something at the TV due to the utter stupidity being displayed by the teleprompter monkeys. Evening local news is filled with "Is your cat going to kill you? After the break..." I'd rather get my news online where I can choose to skip past the inane crap.
The economics never made sense. There is no possible way they are getting $10/month out of me for advertising. By paying that much in subscription I am doing more to subsidize the content than by watching the commercials. Sure, there are idiotic marketing people that think my eyeballs are worth that much money but they're delusional. I'm buying no-name brands, whatever is the cheapest, or the same thing I bought last time, and then I make it last for as long as possible. And I skipped past most the commercials anyway as I had a DVR. I never even watched the superbowl commercials. Now maybe I'm unusual, but I think getting $10/month from me is pretty damn good.
Then look at it this way. If they did not have Netflix, then I wouldn't watch the TV. It is no longer an option of cable/satellite vs Netflix, it's nothing vs Netflix. TV companies are also delusional in thinking that everyone cutting the cord will be back if the streaming dried up. There is no mandate to watch TV, no mandate to listen to music, no mandate to watch movies, yet all those industries assume they have a captive audience.
Even if you are right, they should still not have to rely on my charity to stay in business. I'll make decisions that are good for *me* rather than decisions that keep some of the country's most hated corporations in power.
Since Netflix has bowed to the content conglomerates and started blocking people getting around geoblocks (100% legal where I live) I've terminated my membership.
Wilst I've got the skill, I dont have the time, patience or willingness to spend the money on complex solutions involving running my own VPN server from an S3 container. Fuck that, I've gone back to Channel BT.
Yes Netflix, you can tell the content owners that instead of paying for their content like I was happy to do before they started fucking around, they've forced me back to piracy, mission fucking haycomplished guys, well fucking done.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.