Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Netflix Adds 5.3 Million Subs In Q3, Beating Forecasts (variety.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the better-than-expected dept.

Netflix shows no signs of slowing down. The company announced its third quarter results, adding more subscribers in both the U.S. and abroad than expected. Variety reports: The company gained 850,000 streaming subs in the U.S. and 4.45 million overseas in the period. Analysts had estimated Netflix to add 784,000 net subscribers in the U.S. and 3.62 million internationally for Q3. "We added a Q3-record 5.3 million memberships globally (up 49% year-over-year) as we continued to benefit from strong appetite for our original series and films, as well as the adoption of internet entertainment across the world," the company said in announcing the results, noting that it had under-forecast both U.S. and international subscriber growth. Netflix also indicated that its content spending may be even higher next year than previously projected. The company had said it was targeting programming expenditures of $7 billion in 2018; on Monday, Netflix said it will spend between $7 billion and $8 billion on content (on a profit-and-loss basis) next year. For 2017, original content will represent more than 25% of total programming spending, and that "will continue to grow," Netflix said.

45 of 70 comments (clear)

  1. How many are pissed Hulu ex-subscribers? by mschaffer · · Score: 1

    With how Hulu has completely bludgeoned their UI on devices like the Roku, how many of these new subscribers are simply people leaving Hulu?

    1. Re: How many are pissed Hulu ex-subscribers? by OneHundredAndTen · · Score: 1

      No one I know doesnâ(TM)t have a subscription to both

      No one I know has a subscription to both. My anecdotal evidence, for what (very little) it is worth.

    2. Re: How many are pissed Hulu ex-subscribers? by oic0 · · Score: 1

      Never met anyone either a Hulu sub. No one wants to pay for ads.

    3. Re: How many are pissed Hulu ex-subscribers? by Your.Master · · Score: 1

      I know lots of people who have Netflix but not Hulu. Not a lot the other way around. For my use-case, they don't have a whole lot of overlap. Hulu overlaps with traditional cable a lot more, so if people are stuck to the cord (eg. because of local sports) they don't use Hulu. In my anecdotal experience, I find it's Hulu that nudges people to cutting the cord. Netflix is what nudged people to stop renting movies.

    4. Re: How many are pissed Hulu ex-subscribers? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      Netflix is what nudged people to stop renting movies.

      Back when they actually had movies, anyway...

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    5. Re: How many are pissed Hulu ex-subscribers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Netflix is what nudged people to stop renting movies.

      Back when they actually had movies, anyway...

      Exactly. I used to have Netflix. I had it for about 6 years, but after a while I realized I could never find anything to watch anymore. My kids even quit watching and just use crunchyroll or youtube.
      I even had the bluray disc option for a while, but my queue stayed empty for months before I finally canceled the whole thing.
      Netflix just wants to be another network now apparently.

    6. Re: How many are pissed Hulu ex-subscribers? by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      I have their ad-free tier. There's NFW I'd get their ad-infested one.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    7. Re:How many are pissed Hulu ex-subscribers? by MrDoh! · · Score: 1

      Just cancelled my hulu sub a couple of weeks ago. Just seemed a waste. The UI sucked, management of shows I wanted to watch was random at best, and support to try and get things fixed were responded with "that's just what we're doing now, deal with it" (close enough). Another lesson on 'how to grind a viable/popular business into the ground, step 1. ignoring customers". Always had a netflix sub, but just nothing worth watching on Hulu once they lost Comedy Central. I was happy to pay the few bucks to have a central point to watch the news shows/comedy/late night shows in one place, but the ever increasing adverts (that were unskippable, non-passive, I don't want to have to answer a quiz on which film Clooney was in, dammit), the same adverts over and over and over and over. It was bad at the election, then just kept getting worse with the same 3 ads being shown non-stop. But the watchlist from Queue debacle, I shouldn't have to keep going back to find out shows that I was subbed to have no unsubbed and I need to fav/add them again (or that a late night show now has a new season, so I have to add the NEW season to keep watching the same thing I've seen the last half a dozen seasons of).
      Also, shows I used to watch, suddenly disappearing because of them arguing in the background. I don't want to then find/sub to some other online service, I'll simply give up on that show until the full thing appears on Netflix.

      And the UI was just clunky. As in 'slower than the huffingtonpost' levels of slow.

      Shame, it used to be so good, if we could go back to the content/usability from 3 years ago, I'd have been more than happy, but asking for more money for less of a service? see ya.

      --
      Waiting for an amusing sig.
    8. Re:How many are pissed Hulu ex-subscribers? by DeVilla · · Score: 1

      Actually, with the latest update, I finally use Hulu on Roku. I have a family of 5 and the prior UI was unusable. We had to share a single profile/watchlist and anyone in my living room could change account settings that automatically changed what got billed to my credit card.

      The current Hulu UI on Roku is unconventional at best, but we can at least use it now. Beats the hell out of Prime. It still has a single watch list for the family to share and you can't search for what is available on Prime without it mixing in rentals and purchases in the list. I want to see what I'm already paying for. All I get is constant up-sell attempts. At least Prime lets us block purchases with a code.

      Before Hulu updated their UI Hulu & Prime were on similar footing for "first to cut" when considering dropping a streaming service. Hulu's now moved to a safer place on that list. The UI is awkward but all the show stoppers are pretty much gone. (I still dis-like that the "no-ads" option still has ads for certain shows, but I don't watch them. Well I watched one, but I watched it on Netflix before Hulu became usable. When that series picks back up I'll continue to watch in Netflix.)

  2. agree about Hulu UI. we're now Netflix and Prime. by turkeydance · · Score: 1

    no Hulu no more.

  3. Now if they wou;ld just by bobstreo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Add more content. There is over 100 years of movies and over 75 years of television they could add pretty cheaply.

    There seems to be less content now than there was when I first subscribed.

    1. Re:Now if they wou;ld just by rmdingler · · Score: 1

      Add more content. There is over 100 years of movies and over 75 years of television they could add pretty cheaply.

      There seems to be less content now than there was when I first subscribed.

      It's not as if we weren't grateful for your tens of dolllars in subscription revenue, loyal user, but in order to capture market share to bring you the best programming money can buy, we were forced to sacrifice a temporary bit of content. You're welcome.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    2. Re:Now if they wou;ld just by thereitis · · Score: 4, Insightful
      If Netflix were going to add 75 years worth of content, they'd really have to improve their search, discovery, and add filtering features. Even now it's quite a chore to find something new and interesting and no way to filter out what's not interesting.

      Let me search by one or more of director, by movie rating, actor/actress, publish date, rotten tomatoes score, etc.. There's no reason they couldn't do that other than dumbing the interface down for the masses. Give me an "advanced" option at least.

      I can't tell you how many times I've had someone over and we're like hey let's watch a movie. Then spend the next 20 minutes flipping through Netflix and giving up.

      Netflix is the best option out there, but once someone comes up with a better search and quality content, they're going to eat Netflix's lunch.

    3. Re: Now if they wou;ld just by ytene · · Score: 1

      Could not agree with you more...
      Even simple features, such as the ability to filter out anything I have already seen, would be welcome. In fact, if Netflix would just go out and hire a couple of UI design experts, that would be a start...

    4. Re:Now if they wou;ld just by Tukz · · Score: 4, Informative

      I can really recommend https://www.justwatch.com/

      It got filters for searching in several streaming services.

      --
      - Don't do what I do, it's probably not healthy nor safe. -
    5. Re:Now if they wou;ld just by thereitis · · Score: 1

      That is really useful - thanks!

    6. Re:Now if they wou;ld just by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      Last I checked, netflix had actually taken features out of the gui but was still supporting them in URLs. you could put in search and view options which were no longer clickable anywhere. I haven't tried to do that in ages though, because I now watch Netflix almost exclusively on Amazon Fire Stick, where all the interfaces are terrible

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    7. Re:Now if they wou;ld just by TheCastro1689 · · Score: 1

      Patriot ACT logic...

    8. Re:Now if they wou;ld just by Baron_Yam · · Score: 2

      >Let me search by one or more of director, by movie rating, actor/actress, publish date, rotten tomatoes score, etc

      Genre, recommended viewer age, content (violence/sex/swearing/whatever) year (with +/-), director, actor, writer, studio, nation or geographic region of production, box office, major award wins... and except for year, multiple simultaneous selections and/or exclusions for each.

      Maybe I want to see a historical porn comedy with no horror elements made in approximately 1985 in Europe but not Germany.

      And I can see that happening with a pretty damn simple GUI, too.

    9. Re:Now if they wou;ld just by ebyrob · · Score: 2

      Could it be the major movie studios quit selling movie rights to Netflix and greatly delayed release to Netflix past normal home releases? Oh my goodness, is that why Netflix had to start making their own content? Looks like someone woke up a sleeping giant.

      If Netflix had a problem with *only* getting $10.00 per subscriber per month, I think they'd find a way to ask for more. I get the feeling they're not too concerned about it though seeing they have a spare $8 billion to throw around making content every year.

    10. Re:Now if they wou;ld just by ebyrob · · Score: 1

      IMDB is the search for movies we should all be using.

      The only problem is now you can't go to blockbuster to get the latest movies on video, instead you have to check 10 different services to see which one might have it this week.

      The way things are going, the fragmentation is only set to get worse. I'd hope for copyright reform, but after the DMCA making security research a criminal offense I shudder to think what the next round of "reforms" might bring.

    11. Re:Now if they wou;ld just by thereitis · · Score: 1

      A side benefit for Netflix (if they implemented these suggestions) is they'd build up a finely grained data set of the types of movies people are looking for just by looking at users' search history.

    12. Re:Now if they wou;ld just by bobstreo · · Score: 1

      Better Search:

      http://instantwatcher.com/

      Netflix and Amazon searches....

      I don't even bother with Netflix search, it could be so much better, and maybe even useful.

  4. Re:agree about Hulu UI. we're now Netflix and Prim by lucm · · Score: 1

    How do you watch prime? Did you buy the remote thing? I think they have good series but I was disappointed in the streaming options.

    --
    lucm, indeed.
  5. Re: Subs as in subscribers, huh? by slazzy · · Score: 3, Funny

    It would take quite awhile for netflix to download that many subtitles from thepiratebay.

    --
    Website Just Down For Me? Find out
  6. While content decreases by sdinfoserv · · Score: 3, Interesting

    While # of "subs" and monthly cost continue to climb, actual content has deceased. In the 2 years 2014-2016, number of movies and TV shows decreased by 33% and 26% respectively.
    http://time.com/4272360/the-nu...
    Just this August, Disney has announced it's pulling it's entire library OFF Netflix in favor of its own streaming service.
    What really torques me is that shows I should be able to see, I can't in the US due to greedy lawyers, but the shows are readily available to netflix in other countries (ie: Startrek Discovery)

    1. Re: While content decreases by sglewis100 · · Score: 1

      Thatâ(TM)s not greedy lawyers stopping you from watching Star Trek on Netflix. Thatâ(TM)s CBS, who made a distribution deal. Because... money! They decided letting Netflix have it internationally but keeping it to themselves in Canada and the US was a good balance of making lots of money and giving them a brand to increase All Access subs with. I donâ(TM)t care for it either so I havenâ(TM)t subscribed to All Access.

    2. Re:While content decreases by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      There was an old BBC series, made for but not by them, called Ashes to Ashes that I wanted to see. I was on Netflix for a few years, then vanished.

      I've been trying to figure out the economics of that. It's dirt cheap to buy on disc, I can't imagine they make much money that way, so why not get a bit of revenue from Netflix viewings too? Is Netflix a really bad deal for them, worse than the physical sales?

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:While content decreases by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      I've been trying to figure out the economics of that. It's dirt cheap to buy on disc, I can't imagine they make much money that way, so why not get a bit of revenue from Netflix viewings too? Is Netflix a really bad deal for them, worse than the physical sales?

      You know how The Beatles and Taylor Swift just recently relented and licensed their material for online sales? Smart people told them that fifteen years ago, the economics never changed, but the economic luddites were only recently convinced.

      I canceled my Netflix earlier this year (joined fifteen years ago) with the latest price increase and the drastically falling catalog. Maybe in ten more years the market will have stabilized and the catalog will be back and micropayments among producers and distributors will have been formalized.. The reason Netflix doesn't care about people like me is that I want "to watch X" but most people want "to find something to watch", so they're way better off doing what they're doing than to pandering to my eclectic wants.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    4. Re:While content decreases by Glarimore · · Score: 1

      The reason Netflix doesn't care about people like me is that I want "to watch X" but most people want "to find something to watch", so they're way better off doing what they're doing than to pandering to my eclectic wants.

      I'm not so sure. Everyone else wants "to watch X" as well, it's just that they don't know what X is yet. So, they end up having "to find something to watch" in order to identify it.

      Your issue is that you enjoy watching different content than most people. Content that Netflix does not have.

  7. But they're doomed! by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Funny

    I heard here on Slashdot that they were doomed since they were removing content and raising prices! This is unpossible!

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:But they're doomed! by Spy+Handler · · Score: 1

      In a normal world, removing content and raising prices *would* lead to your doom.

      However this is not a normal world, and your competitors are even worse than you... far worse. Cable companies and telcos (like AT&T which have been buying up cable TV-like entities such as DirecTV) are the most despised entities on the planet. Well maybe with the possible exception of mafia and drug cartels. But it would be safe to say that cable companies are the most despised organizations that operate within the limits of the law.

    2. Re:But they're doomed! by Kjella · · Score: 1

      I heard here on Slashdot that they were doomed since they were removing content and raising prices! This is unpossible!

      1. Forecasts for next quarter are much lower:

      Note that the results do not include the effects of Netflix's price increases in the U.S. and other territories, which took effect for new subs in early October and will roll out to existing members through the fourth quarter.

      2. It's quite unlikely they'd capture market share that way unless the competitors do even worse changes, but the market can still be growing. For example if old people don't use Netflix and young people do you'd see a ~1m growth/quarter (323/78/4) just from plain aging. Replacing "traditional" products like say landlines, dead tree newspapers, buying CDs and cutting cable often have a clear age profile where people are convinced by other people in roughly the same age group, say +/- 5 years. So this year 25yos are cable cutters, then next year 30yos, then 35yos, then 40yos... like a wave rolling upwards in the age brackets.

      As for the international market, it's probably fueled by a ton of people getting high speed enough Internet to do streaming, where the ISPs often don't have any original content and don't have the same incentives to curb use. Netflix is just a product that drives consumers to sign up, same way as MP3s, torrents and YouTube. I've actually seen it used as a LoC measure for Internet speeds, with this fiber connection you and your SO and your X kids can stream Netflix 4K at the same time.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    3. Re:But they're doomed! by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      But Netflix better scramble for content. It probably could have outright bought backcatalogues of old movies and such a decade ago far cheaper than today.

      When I see Netflix add more old bad shit, I say "look, Netflix is adding more old bad shit", not "hey look, Netflix has all the content!" They already do that about as quickly as they can get that crap at the price it's actually worth. But they have chosen to spend their money developing new content, which is a far wiser decision than spending much on a bunch of bad old content that is cheap because nobody wants to watch it.

      Meanwhile, Netflix still has bar none the best client, which is admittedly saying next to nothing. The Youtube client is kind of OK, but most of the others are horribly incompetent — notably HBO, holy crap. This is true on every platform I've tried it on so far. That it occasionally mungs its cache and you have to log in again is annoying, but minor compared to the other clients just sucking all the time.

      I watch more and more Youtube, but Netflix is still my main goto for content longer than about twenty minutes.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  8. Re:HOW?! by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

    Despite the language, I agree.

    --
    Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
  9. Re:agree about Hulu UI. we're now Netflix and Prim by Gilgaron · · Score: 1

    It is a frustrating extra step, but you can usually cast it from your phone to whatever streaming box or stick you have on the TV.

  10. Re:HOW?! by Gilgaron · · Score: 1

    It is interesting comparing it to HBO... we sub to HBO Now off and on for Game of Thrones, and there isn't really a whole lot on HBO compared to Netflix. The content is, as you point out, all top tier, but I imagine that Netflix wants the perceived depth of library so you keep your sub year round versus binging GoT and Westworld and cancelling for 9 months. It is still cheaper than HBO Now.

  11. T-Mobile by JestersGrind · · Score: 3, Informative

    There is currently a T-Mobile promotion that pays for Netflix for their members. I wonder how many of those 5 million are coming from that.

    1. Re:T-Mobile by dysmal · · Score: 1

      There is currently a T-Mobile promotion that pays for Netflix for their members. I wonder how many of those 5 million are coming from that.

      I wish i had mod points for this. +1

    2. Re:T-Mobile by jlv · · Score: 1

      I agree, I came here to same the same thing. Mod +1.

      I'm one of these new 5.3M subs this quarter. I never had a Netflix account until T-Mobile told me they'd pay for it (and I'd only just jumped ship to T-Mobile the month before).

      Given the benefit for Netflix, I'd go so far to wonder if T-Mobile paid Netflix or Netflix paid T-Mobile.

    3. Re:T-Mobile by EndlessNameless · · Score: 1

      T-Mobile zero-rates your bandwidth to Netflix if you've opted into BingeOn, so they've already made a tacit acknowledgement of Netflix's popularity and value.

      I wouldn't be surprised if T-Mobile pays Netflix a deeply discounted rate. Netflix gets virtually guaranteed subscriptions and word of mouth, and T-Mobile can probably reduce advertising buys just by luring people with the Netflix promotion.

      --

      ---
      According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
  12. Netflix Wins ! by JimSadler · · Score: 1

    It is no wonder that Netflix is making large gains. The programming at Comcast has been so lousy for the last year that people are seeking better choices.

  13. Re:Dont be so easily fooled by EndlessNameless · · Score: 1

    Given Netfilx's trend to add more garbage SJW/PC/Feminist content

    Netflix has some content that pisses off liberals.

    Trust me, I've heard all about how their teen-suicide show (can't recall the name) will lead to more suicides. Also the whining about how House of Cards features a power-hungry, corrupt Democrat as its lead character.

    You end up with billions of breached accounts on Yahoo. Thank you Marissa Mayer.

    The breach happened on her watch, but I seriously doubt the vulnerable infrastructure was designed or built during her tenure. A modern CEO/CIO/CSO can expect to inherit a security nightmare these days. Very few organizations put serious effort into IT security---although this is gradually improving, it is still not the norm.

    You hear about rigging of Trending & Landing page of Youtube by its Brand & Diversity officer, Earnest Pettie.

    Who cares? If you don't like the service, don't use the service.

    If they're manually tweaking their recommendations, the suggestions could become better or worse. People will try to game any automated system (e.g., google bombing), so manual intervention and tweaking are always going to be necessary. Decide whether it's adequate, and leave if it isn't.

    --

    ---
    According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
  14. Try Instantwatcher by cshay · · Score: 1

    I use this once a month when they modify their content and add stuff to my watch list:

    http://instantwatcher.com/sear...

  15. Re:Now if they would just by Baron_Yam · · Score: 1

    More than that, when the movie ends you should be offered the chance to agree or disagree with the categorization and offer suggested changes.

    95% of exit polls agree on a category? Auto-update the database. Easy-peasy.