Slashdot Mirror


Over 90% of College Students Today Regularly Use Netflix, But Only 34% Are Actually Paying For Their Own Account (streamingobserver.com)

According to a new survey from LendEDU, more than 90% of today's college students have access to a Netflix account they regularly use, while only 8% who responded to the survey said they don't have a Netflix account. What some may find even more surprising is that of the 90% of students who have access to Netflix, only 34% of them are actually paying for their own Netflix account. Streaming Observer News reports: That actually goes right in line with numbers from Piper Jaffray that showed almost 40% of teens watch Netflix every single day. Their closest competitors, Amazon Prime Video and Hulu, each came in at just 3% each for daily use. Of course, that doesn't mean they're all paying for Netflix. 54% of respondents to LendEDU's survey said they use a family member's or friend's account, and 5% more said they used a boyfriend/girlfriend or ex's account. While only 34% of college students are actually paying for their own Netflix account, that's apparently not too big of a concern for Netflix, who has taken a relatively lax attitude towards password sharing in recent years.

55 comments

  1. Yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These are just future Netflix subscribers who are getting hooked while they're young. When I was in college, I shared one account with all my roommates. Now that we're all adults, we each have our own paid accounts...

    1. Re:Yawn by Aighearach · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That, and also the whole premise seems a bit confused. They're talking about password sharing while at the same time talking about roommates with shared media equipment, bf/gf who are most likely watching it together or on a shared device, etc.

      The nature of netflix is more something that is per-household than per-person.

    2. Re: Yawn by jxander · · Score: 2
      Exactly.

      My wife and kid use my Netflix account (the freeloaders) because we all live in the same house.

      That puts us right in line with the article. Three users, one account.

      --
      This signature is false.
    3. Re: Yawn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which is why we pay for the premium plan which lets you stream 4 devices simultaneous ... one account 4 different users at the same moment

    4. Re:Yawn by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      The nature of netflix is more something that is per-household than per-person.

      The terms of service used to say as much explicitly. I remember reading through the terms of service before sharing my password with family members a few years back. The ToS at that time made it clear that the license to view Netflix's content was extended to the entire household. I even seem to recall that they didn't care about geographic locations when it came to sharing the account (provided you were in the same region), suggesting that a family member away for college or on a trip could continue using the same account without running afoul of their terms. This was all back before they had multiple user profiles within accounts.

      I just did a quick check of the ToS, and things seem to have changed to no longer contain those provisions. Instead, they basically just say that you share your password at your own risk, since anyone who has it has full control of your account.

  2. The pragmatic approach by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What would a broke college student do if Netflix required them to pay for their own account?

    Let me give you a hint: the solution loses you a customer for life.

  3. Math is about right by Spy+Handler · · Score: 2

    Netflix allows 3 simultaneous logins per account, so theoretically you could have 90% of college students using Netflix and only 30% paying for it.

    I'm guessing the 34% figure comes from the 4% loners who don't have any friends and still wanna watch Netflix so they pay for their own account.

    1. Re:Math is about right by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hmm, I'd have assumed most of the students were using their parents' account....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    2. Re:Math is about right by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      It must be different for different locales, AU $8.99 1, $11.99 2 and $14.99 4, so it is hardly surprising people share accounts (video quality also varies according to account). I have always been a buying and never a renter, just don't like the idea, so no netflix (I am cool with borrowing though, bwa hah hah). Perhaps if netflix sold lifetime accounts, that would be cool. One time payment equal to say a decades worth of subscription and your done, that I could buy into.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    3. Re:Math is about right by CrankyFool · · Score: 1

      There's a difference between profiles -- each of which has its own history and recommendation -- and number of simultaneous streams. You can have several profiles on all plan levels, I believe, but at the lowest level only one of them can stream at any given point in time.

    4. Re:Math is about right by markdavis · · Score: 1

      >Netflix allows 3 simultaneous logins per account,

      Nope. The simultaneous watching is based on plans and there are three streaming plans:

      $8 for 1 screen at SD (eeeew)
      $10 for 2 screens at HD
      $12 for 4 screens at HD and [useless] UHD

    5. Re: Math is about right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      many college students leave home to go to school though they my have roomates. even if thry do get money from there parents perhaps one person is paying in the house hold even if they all pitch in.

    6. Re:Math is about right by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Why is UHD useless? do they just not have any offering?

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    7. Re: Math is about right by ninthbit · · Score: 2

      Right!! They probably don't have their own cell phone plan either. The 90% userbase should be all they care about. That's a ton of kids who will grow up and get account for themselves.

    8. Re:Math is about right by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Most people will want at least High-Definition which includes 2 screens, or the Ultra-High-Def plan that includes 4 screens.

      Otherwise the people sharing are either light users, Or they've paid for a plan that adds more screens.

      It's $9.99/Month for the standard plan that includes HD and 2 screens, $7.99/Month for the downgraded plan with 1 screen, and $11.99/Month for 4 screens.

      In other words: It's definitely more cost-effective to share accounts and add screens to a single account if possible, than to create an entirely separate one.

    9. Re:Math is about right by markdavis · · Score: 3, Insightful

      >Why is UHD useless? do they just not have any offering?

      Because at any normal distance on any TV, almost nobody can realize any difference with 4K. Also, a large percent of people don't have the bandwidth (25+Mb/s *continuously*). HDR is a different matter, but even that can't be noticed by most people, and few have devices that support it.

    10. Re:Math is about right by Lord+Crc · · Score: 1

      [useless] UHD

      It's not useless. The bandwidth is significantly higher which leads to far fewer artifacts such as banding, which are quite visible on regular HD streams from Netflix.

      HDR depends on the source material, for some stuff it's great, for other stuff you don't notice it as much.

      While I might not always be able to tell a very good regular Bluray from a UHD Bluray, I can easily tell the difference between a Netflix HD stream and a Nextflix UHD stream, and that's why I'm happy to pay the difference.

    11. Re:Math is about right by trawg · · Score: 1

      Hmm, I'd have assumed most of the students were using their parents' account....

      It's funny, I've probably seen the opposite more commonly - students who pay for Netflix, then go home and set it up for their parents.

    12. Re:Math is about right by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      >Why is UHD useless? do they just not have any offering?

      Because at any normal distance on any TV, almost nobody can realize any difference with 4K.

      A lot of people must have really bad eyes. Of course, many people are still much butthurt that we abandoned NTSC.

      My guess is that it is human inertia, or "it was good enough".

      As an example, my wife has the non-HD channels memorized for our locale. I've pointed out how much sharper the HD version is, have demonstrated on the same shows, and she agrees HD is better.

      But she has the channels for non-HD memorized, and doesn't want to push the button to switch to the HD channel.

      For me at least, I find the differences startling. And I feel badly for anyone who doesn't.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    13. Re:Math is about right by justthinkit · · Score: 1

      I do exactly the same thing, for a variety of reasons.

      One is that I have memorized the hundred odd channels that I like to track on a daily basis. Here are some additional reasons to not go HD, or for the latest and greatest.

      (1) the commercials also get HD'd. This is a pure negative.

      I have the older Comcast set top box at home, but test-drove the newer one at a client's residence. I don't like a number of features about the new box, but here are some of the worst things: (2) you can't minimize the broadcast to a corner while you scan through the guide. With the new box the guide takes over the screen, so you tend to use it and dismiss it. At home I bring up the guide right after I mute the sound...when the commercials start. Once the commercials are done, I dismiss the guide. A handy way of visually muting commercials.

      (3) On the old box/remote, when I hit "Last", I go to my last channel. On the new box, it brings up a list of half a dozen recent channels, and I have to spend time making decisions and selections I usually don't feel like taking the time to make. Repeatedly. At every commercial break.

      (4) The old guide has an ad at the bottom only -- much easier to ignore automatically. On the crappy new guide, the advertising segments are dispersed into the content. Slowly the frequent activity of seeing "what else is on", while the commercials play.

      (5) I only need HD for sports. For other stuff, the actual content is far more important. A crappy movie in HD is a great movie in SD.

      (6) Thinking the latest is the greatest is incredibly naive. The worst possible assumption. Windows 10 taught us that, surely.

      --
      I come here for the love
    14. Re:Math is about right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...
      (4) ..."slowly" --> "slowing"
      ...
      (5) ...A crappy movie in HD is << a great movie in SD. ...

    15. Re:Math is about right by markdavis · · Score: 1

      Going from SD to HD is a *huge* difference, but even that difference a lot of people don't notice and/or care. The difference from HD to UHD is negligible for "normal" sized TV's (50-80") at realistic distances (typically 8 to 12 feet) for just about anybody. I have actually tested other people just out of curiosity, and nobody I have tested can tell which is which (2K vs 4K, same video, 8-10' from a 75" UHD).

      UHD for TV is primarily a marketing concept to try to get people to re-buy all their equipment and content, yet again. The remainder of the usefulness is only HDR (very recent) and for very large screens (movie theaters, 120+" home projection systems, etc). Also useful for monitors, where you are going to sit 12-20" from the screen.

    16. Re:Math is about right by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Thinking the latest is the greatest is incredibly naive. The worst possible assumption. Windows 10 taught us that, surely.

      Yes, I heard the same arguments from people when we abandoned NTSC for digital. People that don't even understand things like riding and the variable bandwidth (like the red channel had less then 1MHz bandwidth.

      My favorite part of my naivety is when people tell me I don't see what I can plainly see.

      Windows 10 taught us about television signals?

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    17. Re:Math is about right by lars_stefan_axelsson · · Score: 1

      My favorite part of my naivety is when people tell me I don't see what I can plainly see.

      Well, first it's of course a situation of diminishing returns. Our eyes aren't getting any better, so there is a limit of where it's "good enough".

      And of course there's a difference between SD and HD. It's clear here in PAL-land even though we had significantly better resolution than NTSC from the get go. But when it comes to 1080p I'm not convinced that better resolution is the next useful step. I'd much rather see higher refresh rates (60Hz makes a difference), and less compression. More resolution with more vissible compression artefacts from even more cramming into the available bandwidth, isn't something I'm looking forward to.

      P.S. And I know of no married man that's allowed to sit close enough to the TV to take full advantage of 1080p, let alone 2k or 4k. If you buy a bigger set, the sofa get's moved. Every time. :-)

      --
      Stefan Axelsson
    18. Re:Math is about right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The fovea centralis has a resolution of 31.5 arc seconds. This gives 1920 pixels a maximum viewing angle of 16.8 degrees for no added benefit to possible (33.6 degrees for 3840 pixesl). This is tiny compared to a human field of view of 114 degrees for binocular vision. To say nobody can realize a difference for 4k or even 8k is simply wrong. Diminishing returns, certainly. At $400 for a 4k monitor for pc gaming, the difference is very noticeable, and imho way worth it. While ocular resolution drops off quickly out side the fovea centralis, this portion of the eye is processed by 50% of the visual cortex.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fovea_centralis

    19. Re:Math is about right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some science so you have better ammo than anecdote.

      The fovea centralis has a resolution of 31.5 arc seconds. This gives 1920 pixels a maximum viewing angle of 16.8 degrees for no added benefit to possible (33.6 degrees for 3840 pixesl). This is tiny compared to a human field of view of 114 degrees for binocular vision. To say nobody can realize a difference for 4k or even 8k is simply wrong. Diminishing returns, certainly. At $400 for a 4k monitor for pc gaming, the difference is very noticeable, and imho way worth it. While ocular resolution drops off quickly out side the fovea centralis, this portion of the eye is processed by 50% of the visual cortex.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fovea_centralis

  4. Computer Fraud and Abuse Act... by matbury6017 · · Score: 2

    Sharing passwords/login credentials? I thought that sharing online passwords is a crime under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (1986): https://motherboard.vice.com/e...

    1. Re:Computer Fraud and Abuse Act... by CrankyFool · · Score: 1

      What if the online service has no problem with it? http://www.businessinsider.com...

    2. Re:Computer Fraud and Abuse Act... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What fraud? This is how Netflix works.

  5. Dorms. by jxander · · Score: 2

    Aren't many college students living in dorms, frat/sorority houses, or other shared space?

    Makes sense that one roommate would have the Netflix account, and they all could use it. Wouldn't even require simultaneous logins, if the player was in the shared living room.

    --
    This signature is false.
    1. Re: Dorms. by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Not just downs. Generally college students are the probably the most likely to have roommates while renting apartments and homes as many live away from their parent's home but at the same time have the least financial means to afford their own place.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  6. Before you know it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    College students will be inviting dozens of their friends over to drink beer and watch Netflix.

  7. Bout what u spect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gibs me that free shit! bernie could have won!

    1. Re: Bout what u spect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      tell you what you come over to my house and want to watch a dvd you better buy it before you come watch it at my house. all that said back in the day that wass a big issue in the movie industry becouse each person was not buying a ticket for the theater.

  8. 10% pirate everything. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    90% seem to try to do thing semi-legally, while the remainder don't care.

    The numbers check out.

    (I'm proud to be part of that 10%.)

    Word verification: reprints

  9. And this comes as a surprise? by Pollux · · Score: 1

    When I was in college between '99 and '03, the "jocks dorm" as it was called (next to the football field, kitty-corner from the athletic center, and never a morning without empty bottles in the dumpster) got its cable shut off by the police back in 2001. The local cable company knew there were more watchers than subscribers, and with the cooperation of the college, went room-to-room to see how many illegal splices there were. For what I believe was 112 rooms with cable, only 8 had paid subscriptions.

    And now 34% have paid subscriptions to Netflix? They should consider themselves lucky.

    1. Re:And this comes as a surprise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and never a morning without empty bottles in the dumpster)

      Were they a bunch of Felix Ungers?

      How do they manage to be so neat and tidy that they fill the dumpster with empty bottles every morning before they go to class. I just left them strewn all over my room until the end of the semester.

      Pro-tip: Bottles take up much less space when they're broken.

      Captcha: Nonsense

    2. Re:And this comes as a surprise? by Imrik · · Score: 1

      He didn't say they filled the dumpster. All it would take would be one person that tossed their bottles on a weekly basis as that's usually how often dumpsters get emptied.

  10. Ok? by Ryanrule · · Score: 1

    You are allowed to share accounts across devices, more at higher pay levels. My parents use my account.

  11. Thats. How. It. Works. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's seriously like the journalists that talk this up have never actually used Netflix.

    You are literally paying to be allowed to do this. They have different pricing tiers with a different number of simultaneous screens allowed. They're not "turning a blind eye", they're providing the service they sold.

    If you try to have more people watching on your account simultaneously than you have paid for then it doesn't let you. It's simple. I don't know why journalists have so much trouble with this idea...

  12. This will be the end of streaming by rmullig2 · · Score: 1

    The content providers are going to wake up one day and realize the money isn't coming in the way it used to. Soon afterwards Netflix will be reduced to its own content plus reruns of "The Facts of Life".

  13. What else is news? by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    During my tour through college in the early 1990's, I always asked my roommates who wanted to have cable TV. Everyone raised their hands. I then asked who wants to pay for cable TV. Everyone put their hands down. We never had cable TV.

    During my second tour through college after the dot com bust, I had my own apartment and still couldn't get cable TV. Not that I couldn't afford to get cable. It's just Comcast refused to open an account unless I went down to the office to prove I wasn't the last tenant who didn't pay the bill. Nearly 12 years later, I still don't have cable TV.

    1. Re: What else is news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, great story. You must be a lot of fun at parties.

    2. Re: What else is news? by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Wow, great story. You must be a lot of fun at parties.

      I made 17 dozen deviled eggs one holiday season. Nothing impresses a woman than a man's deviled eggs. ;)

    3. Re: What else is news? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, between deviled and shaved I guess shaved would always win with the ladies.
      Now obviously 17 dozen shaved eggs would be 202 too much.

    4. Re: What else is news? by Talderas · · Score: 1

      I made 17 dozen deviled eggs one holiday season.

      This only raises more questions. One egg can be turned into two deviled eggs. How the heck did you end up with 17? I'll guess you poorly filled the egg whites and had one sad egg white remaining? What happened to the other three eggs from the dozen?

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    5. Re: What else is news? by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      One egg can be turned into two deviled eggs. How the heck did you end up with 17?

      Local store had five dozen eggs for $3 each that holiday season. I went through seven of those.

  14. Netflix and ramen by audi100quattro · · Score: 1

    also, chill

  15. I only bother keeping netflix by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    for my kid in college. Take that away and I wouldn't bother keeping it. For the occasional anime I watch on it it's not worth it.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  16. over 90% what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    where has this statistic come from?

  17. Why should they care? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Its the same mount of paying accounts.

  18. Yes by jon3k · · Score: 1

    College kids are poor, this is not news.

  19. The reason the policy is lax by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Students may well be using someone else's account now, but when they finish college they will be used to getting Netflix, and be likely to pay for an account later.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re: The reason the policy is lax by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Who says that there are not paying for their account now? If I had a roommate in college who was using my account, I think it's fair that they split the bill with me like with all the utilities.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  20. Given Netflix's subscription model... by atrex · · Score: 1

    ...they have very little reason to care about password sharing. They explicitly sell their subscriptions based on a number of screens that can simultaneously watch content. No single person is going to watch 4 screens at the same time, so obviously Netflix already views their account subscriptions as "family" accounts, not single person accounts.