Netflix To Raise $2 Billion In Debt To Fund More Original Content (techcrunch.com)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Netflix To Raise $2 Billion In Debt To Fund More Original Content (techcrunch.com)

Posted by BeauHD on Monday October 22, 2018 @11:40AM from the adding-to-the-pile dept.

According to a press release posted today, Netflix is planning to raise $2 billion to help fund new content, including "content acquisitions, production and development, capital expenditures, investments, working capital and potential acquisitions and strategic transactions." TechCrunch reports: The funds will be raised in the form of senior unsecured notes, denominated in U.S. dollars and euros, it said. This debt offering is the sixth time in under four years that Netflix is raising $1 billion or more through bonds, noted Variety, which was among the first to report the news. As of September 30, Netflix's long-term debt had reached $8.34 billion, up 71% from $4.89 billion in the year ago quarter, it said during its last earnings, Variety's report also noted. Netflix recently explained during its Q3 2018 earnings that it needs to continue to invest in original programming in order to remain competitive. "Content companies such as WarnerMedia and Disney/Fox are moving to self-distribute their own content; tech firms like Apple, Amazon and others are investing in premium content to enhance their distribution platforms," the letter also stated. "Amid these massive competitors on both sides, plus traditional media firms, our job is to make Netflix stand out so that when consumers have free time, they choose to spend it with our service," it had said.

122 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

This is my stop. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 11:43 · Score: 0

First, they came for the B-Movies. Then they started promoting "Netflix Originals". They they started rebooting shows as "Netflix Originals". Then the "Netflix Originals" took over as the primary content. That's when I stopped paying for Netflix and have one less streaming service to worry about.
1. Re:This is my stop. by CohibaVancouver · 2018-10-22 11:46 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  I'm much happier to watch 30 episodes of "Narcos" than two hours of "Hot Tub Time Machine 2."
2. Re:This is my stop. by ShanghaiBill · 2018-10-22 12:04 · Score: 1
  
  I'm much happier to watch 30 episodes of "Narcos" than two hours of "Hot Tub Time Machine 2."
  Indeed. The original content is the only thing that makes Netflix worthwhile. Everything else I can watch for free on Amazon Prime.
3. Re:This is my stop. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 12:19 · Score: 0
  
  Marco Polo made it worthwhile. Cancelled.
4. Re:This is my stop. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 13:21 · Score: 0
  
  I'm much happier to watch 30 episodes of "Narcos" than two hours of "Hot Tub Time Machine 2."
  The problem with Netflix is the licensing mess. Last time I bothered to keep a subscription they really didn't have that much stuff. TV has been around for a long time, why isn't more of it available?
  People that own content have no incentive whatsoever to ever see any of their work fall into the public domain, and with the evil of ever expanding copyright extensions who knows if it ever will, and it is NOT right. The reason they have no incentive, is they can't make money on that, or not easily, therefore your watching something they can't make money on, which is bad for their bottom line.
  Government is supposed to fix problems like this, but they don't, or at least ours doesn't. Copyright was supposed to be limited protection in exchange for unlimited public ownership after the period ends. We need to get back to that.
5. Re:This is my stop. by Freischutz · 2018-10-22 13:37 · Score: 3
  
  I'm much happier to watch 30 episodes of "Narcos" than two hours of "Hot Tub Time Machine 2."
  Indeed. The original content is the only thing that makes Netflix worthwhile. Everything else I can watch for free on Amazon Prime.
  Apart from a few of their original content shows that either get cancelled half way through for some mysterious reason or are onlyupdated at a glacial pace, Amazon Prime is a huge pile of garbage. This streaming industry fragmentation is not helping anybody, I'm not signing up for, and paying a subscription to: WarnerMedia, Disney/Fox, Apple, Google, Hulu, HBO, YouTube, half a dozen local TV channels, etc. The more this market fragments into tons of separate players who all expect you to shell out a $20, 30, 50 subscription fee for access to their streaming gateway that gets you one new original content show and a handful of movies every couple of months the more likely I am to sign up to the one that has the most interesting stuff (in my case scifi) and pirate the rest of these bozos. Mind you, I might actually subscribe to YouTube if It meant finally getting rid of the damn commercials which should concern the other streaming services if users feel they actually get more value out of watching other users unbox stuff, making their cats do tricks or show you how to paint strip antique furniture than they do signing up to the Disney/Fox streaming gateway and watching their over hyped MPAA censored movies and shows.
6. Re: This is my stop. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 14:15 · Score: 0
  
  I stopped paying for all the SJW propaganda they produce.
7. Re:This is my stop. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 14:26 · Score: 0
  
  Well I share your sentiment, the Netflix content is still better than ALL broadcast content due to the lack of commercials, and much higher quality video (it may not be 50Mbps 4K video, but it's better than the overcompressed video the cable companies run.)
8. Re:This is my stop. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 14:36 · Score: 0
  
  Because the cable companies own the content, so they are under no obligation to license it to Netflix in the US. Foreign countries? The domestic cable companies have been dropping US content left and right because they can't compete with Netflix.
  I tried to find the CW shows (eg Arrow, Flash, SuperGirl) and I can only watch them on the Seattle CW affiliate, I can't watch them on the cable companies VoD (which sucks anyway), I'm not going to pay CraveTV for the content I should already be able to watch, so fuck them I'll watch this content on Netflix that I already pay for.
  Rogers and Bell media have the rights to the majority of US content in Canada. That which isn't licensed by them is picked up by Netflix. The irony is that Netflix helps produce a lot of the CW content, so I'm more than happy to pay Netflix to watch this content without commercials. However most other content... I'm sorry I don't give enough of a shit about flavor-of-the-year-police-procedural/medical-drama/realtity-show. Hell I hate reality shows. They're all rubbish, I'd rather binge watch 13 episodes of (remember when we used to get 52 episodes of a show?) in 6 hours per day and not have to sit through filler material.
9. Re:This is my stop. by PopeRatzo · 2018-10-22 15:21 · Score: 1
  
  The original content is the only thing that makes Netflix worthwhile. Everything else I can watch for free on Amazon Prime.
  Not everything, Bill. For example, the Marvel picture, BLACK PANTHER is free on Netflix, but you'll have to pay above and beyond your Amazon Prime membership to watch it there. There are actually lots of examples of non-original programming on Netflix that you'd have to pay for on Amazon or isn't available there at all.
  
  --
  You are welcome on my lawn.
10. Re:This is my stop. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 22:00 · Score: 0
  
  A lot of TV licensing is also hampered by the music, and not just the music you might expect like when they use an actual popular song, I mean even the music composed for the show because music composers have powerful rights there and often will demand outrageous sums to permit a show to be released to home video.
  Just off the top of my head I know the 70s Wonder Woman tv series was blocked from home video release for many years until they were able to get the music rights worked out.
  The gist is it means a show has to have a good chance of wide success in home video for the corps to even take the trouble to figure it out.
11. Re:This is my stop. by gander666 · 2018-10-22 23:50 · Score: 1
  
  Agreed. Alas, I stare at my Netflix directory and it is screen after screen of utter garbage. Poorly written, shoddy cinematography, and just awful stories. My wife always wonders if they have any humans reviewing the concepts before green-lighting them. Sure, once in a great while something good sneaks through (like Narcos), but 9 time out of 10 (or 98 times out of 100 lately) it is utter crap.
  
  --
  Suppose you were an idiot and suppose you were a member of Congress ... but I repeat myself. - Mark T
12. Re:This is my stop. by volodymyrbiryuk · 2018-10-23 00:02 · Score: 2
  
  You can cancel at any moment though. So basically you can cycle trough all the streaming services as they publish new content. But yeah the fragmentation is taking us back to the TV era.
  
  --
  sudo rm -r -f --no-preserve-root /
13. Re:This is my stop. by LostMyAccount · 2018-10-23 00:23 · Score: 1
  
  Complain all you want about Amazon, the fact is that it's free with a Prime subscription in my mind makes it slightly better than Netflix. My old Apple TV didn't get the Prime Video app until about a year or so ago, and before that I had to either use my clunky Blueray player to watch it or stream it via my phone. Now that it's easy to watch on my AppleTV, I find myself watching Prime as much or more then Netflix. Netflix original content is really dodgy -- there seems to be no consistent pattern to shows badged as Originals, they can suck no matter who the original producer was. Netflix itself has diluted the "Original" label by overuse and not carefully assigning it only to the best content, probably as a means of further masking how poor their content library has become. I'm not at all convinced Netflix has a real grasp on producing good content, they seem hit or miss and prone to cranking out a fair amount of low-grade genre content for every original that's got any kind of cast and budget. In this regard, Amazon seems slightly better. Their originals seem to have slightly more budget, on average better casts, with a lower amount of B-grade genre content. I do agree that the splintering of the streaming market and the desire of content owners to want to hold back for their own service stinks, but I think it will also ultimately fail. Only Disney, HBO and ESPN seem capable of pulling it off long term.
14. Re:This is my stop. by oh_my_080980980 · 2018-10-23 03:27 · Score: 1
  
  And how much are you willing to pay? That's the point. Content costs money. That's why people's cable bill exploded.
  
  People started cutting the cord and smugly proclaimed they'll "Watch Netflix Insead" - all the while ignore the fact that content costs money and it would be a matter of time before content cost would hit Netflix.
  
  Well boys and girls, it just did. "Netflix's long-term debt had reached $8.34 billion, up 71% from $4.89 billion in the year ago quarter..." is a huge whopping increase. Investors are not going to like it and your Netflix cost just went up.
  
  What you going to cut next....
15. Re:This is my stop. by oh_my_080980980 · 2018-10-23 03:30 · Score: 1
  
  It's not free. You're paying for it. I love people who think, hey it's free. It's part of the Prime subscription and a driver of cost increases.
16. Re:This is my stop. by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-23 03:56 · Score: 0
  
  The thing about Amazon is it solves the fragmentation, as their platform can deliver content that you've bought or from many subscription services. You can for example subscribe to Disney and CBS via Prime Video. You can also pay for individual movies or TV episodes.
  This is by and large the "let me choose what i want and pay only for that" model that people have been claiming to want from cable companies in action.
17. Re:This is my stop. by dyslexicbunny · 2018-10-23 07:56 · Score: 1
  
  You can cancel at any moment though.
  For now. I can imagine seeing Disney requiring a year long contract for their service and then everyone else following in because it's obviously an easy money grab. But who knows, maybe it turns into an interesting bit of ad wars between services.
  "These guys want you to pay for a year but what's the point when you've binged your shows in two weekends?"
  "Those guys don't have enough content you want to watch so they don't care if you stick around. We always have stuff year round."
18. Re:This is my stop. by CohibaVancouver · 2018-10-23 11:13 · Score: 2
  
  The problem with Netflix is the licensing mess. Last time I bothered to keep a subscription they really didn't have that much stuff.
  I know I'm not really a typical Slashdotter (I have kids and a fairly busy life outside of the home) - The notion of sitting at home watching six hours of TV is foreign to me. Nevertheless, whenever someone says Netflix "doesn't really have that much stuff" it blows my mind. To me, the library of "stuff" on Netflix is HUGE. The notion that I wouldn't be able to find something to watch is mind-blowing (and that's just little old Canadian Netflix).
19. Re:This is my stop. by pnutjam · 2018-10-24 02:35 · Score: 1
  
  I'd pay closer to cable prices for netflix, especially if they had all the content. The reason I pay for netflix is no commercials. It's also why I pay for comcast instead of AT&T. Both claim you can't skip commercials at the beginning of their on-demand shows, but comcast let's you, at&t blocks skipping entirely.
  
  --
  Cheap storage VM.
20. Re:This is my stop. by Agripa · 2018-10-26 07:04 · Score: 1
  
  You can cancel at any moment though.
  For now. I can imagine seeing Disney requiring a year long contract for their service and then everyone else following in because it's obviously an easy money grab. But who knows, maybe it turns into an interesting bit of ad wars between services.
  "These guys want you to pay for a year but what's the point when you've binged your shows in two weekends?"
  "Those guys don't have enough content you want to watch so they don't care if you stick around. We always have stuff year round."
  Or only a rotating selection will be available to subscribers so you cannot view the whole series at any given time. Didn't one of the subscription services already do this with new episodes?
Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by UnknownSoldier · 2018-10-22 11:43 · Score: 1

ELI5: Why is their long term debt so high? And isn't that a bad thing?
What are their gross and net profits?
1. Re: Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 11:53 · Score: 0
  
  Netflix isn't alone, and you're right. There's a lot of cheap credit available and corporate debt levels are high. In good economic conditions, companies can withstand the debt. When the inevitable economic slowdown occurs and servicing the debt is more difficult, we could see a wave of corporate defaults. You're right to be concerned, because it's a matter of time before the credit bubble contracts or collapses. I can't speak to whether Netflix specifically is in good financial health, but the debt in general should be alarming.
2. Re:Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 12:00 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Is it a bad thing? It depends.
  If I borrow and spend a billion dollars now, and get back $1.2 billion in a year from the things I spent the money on, the borrowing was a good thing: I made more money by borrowing the money and spending it than I would have had I not, and I'm in a position to pay back the debt if I want to. (Or maybe I can re-invest that money into other things and hope for more high returns.)
  If I borrow and spend a billion dollars now, and get back just that one billion dollars over the course of five years, I've lost money: the interest cost of the borrowings is higher than the return.
  Netflix is gambling that the content they'll spend the money on will bring in more revenue - courtesy of higher subscription numbers - than the cost of the borrowing to produce that content. They've probably done all sorts of projections and estimates to give them a reasonable degree of assurance in that gamble, but ultimately, it's a gamble. If the bet pays off, they'll get more subscribers, and the money to pay off those loans (and then some). If they don't, they're going to be in trouble - either they'll have to raise equity (offer new stock to bring in cash to pay off the loans, diluting existing shareholders), or they'll have to roll over the debt (finding some way to service that debt), or they go bankrupt.
  Evaluating all of this is made harder because it depends on their cash flow in the future, not their cash flow right now. If they produce quality content that draws in the subscribers, it can turn around their cash flow from negative to positive (assuming that's the current situation; I'm not an investor in the company, so I'm not paying close attention to their cash flow.) If they don't, well...
  But in any event, given that the days of cheap and easy content by licensing old content are gone, they don't have much choice. Either they produce their own content, or they go under - no content means no subscribers. If the content doesn't work, they'll go under, just a little bit slower than they otherwise would have.
3. Re:Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by sexconker · 2018-10-22 12:09 · Score: 1
  
  Why is their long term debt so high?
  Because they're stupid.
  
  And isn't that a bad thing?
  Very bad, unless they can keep the ROI ahead of the interest.
  
  What are their gross and net profits?
  https://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/...
  Or check out that cash flow, quarterly: https://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/...
  They're spending bigly.
4. Re:Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by sexconker · 2018-10-22 12:29 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  The core problem is Netflix's original content costs grow without bounds the more successful it is. Netflix's subscriber count is asymptotic.
  The more popular a Netflix series is, the more it costs to continue it for another "season". The same goes for the movies & sequels. Actors, writers, etc. tend to point to the success of a past project and demand a bigger paycheck to churn out another.
  In the old model, success yields ticket sales, ad dollars, toy sales, etc. In Netflix's model, success yields nothing. The people who made it a success by watching it are already subscribed. You don't get more money for a second "season" or a sequel. Nor do you get more money by developing other content they might like, because their single subscription gives them everything. Nor do you get ad dollars since there are no ads.
  Once you hit a certain point where everyone interested in Netflix has Netflix (or has a friend with Netflix), putting out MORE Netflix or BETTER Netflix doesn't generate more money.
  In the long run, Netflix will have to run ads, charge a premium for certain content, stretch releases of "seasons" out over time (they're doing this with certain things already), keep increasing subscription costs, or some combination thereof.
5. Re:Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by known_coward_69 · 2018-10-22 12:53 · Score: 1
  
  They sell debt and repay it with membership fees. It's like lending money in reverse. The shows will be watched for years to come so it's like a capital expense which will be used for years to come and it doesn't make sense to pay for it from retained earnings.
  If they paid for content from their cash reserves they wouldn't be able to fund all the content they have now and would still be paying more license fees
6. Re: Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 12:57 · Score: 0
  
  They won't have to do any of that. Owing $8B at approximately 4% on $12B in revenue is something that wouldn't phase any company.
  You do also realize that investors currently value the company at about $150B, too, right? Is $5K in credit card debt going to force me to sell my house? Maybe, but only if I'm an idiot.
7. Re: Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 13:00 · Score: 0
  
  Except that their long-term debt is tiny at about 5% of market cap. Most Americans should envy such a position
8. Re:Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by AvitarX · 2018-10-22 13:09 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  HBO does fine with the model of subscription only.
  They seem to be way better at picking winners than Netflix is, and they spend far less on content, but it's definitely a sustainable business model if run well.
  It'll be interesting to see if Netflix's model of tons and tons of mediocre content works. I'm not sure it will, because the whole season release model means people aren't so much in sync and therefore shows are less discussed and less of a cultural phenomenon even when they are great (and sone are).
  If GoT was on Netflix for example, everyone would be totally out of sync, and there'd be a lot less talking about it, which in turn makes it harder to turn a great show into subs.
  
  --
  Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
9. Re: Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 13:23 · Score: 0
  
  This is true. Also, Netflix is probably going to see people maintaining their subscription while cutting other entertainment expenses as it is still relatively cheap.
  Or expensive for what you get, they have very little content and the means to find interesting shows is terrible.
10. Re:Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 14:34 · Score: 0
  
  Thanks for the explanation. The question in my mind was why is the debt long term. The content won't be worth much in a couple of years. If the return for promoted content is not immediate then this would appear to be a bad business decision. Certainly a bad investment decision as the destination of this investment gravy train is obvious and bad. Netflix will never have as entrenched a position as cable content. Cable is an overall package with a constant vector to promote premium content. The internet is pretty much the opposite. The prevalence of cable has made offerings like Netflix a short term reasonable choice but that will end as cable withers and cable WILL wither. Cable is just too ridiculously expensive. Netflix will never be able to supplant cable channels by acting the same only less competent and efficient. More competitors with less entry barriers suggests a price drop rather than increase and Netflix is obviously hurdling towards attempting to cost MORE than cable offerings. Won't happen. It's too easy for someone else. Youtube Red could always become viable if they wished and likely gave much better management.
11. Re:Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by aaarrrgggh · 2018-10-22 14:59 · Score: 1
  
  They are funding a portfolio, not a handful of shows. The portfolio grows over time and adds value. By making the debt long term, every dollar you spend only needs to be reasonably guaranteed to return $0.05-10. Of course, hopefully on average you do much better, but it is essentially seed capital for the portfolio.
  What the tech companies are essentially trying to do is vertically integrate creativity, finance, production, marketing, and distribution. Not sure it will work, but they are spending a lot of money to make it happen.
12. Re:Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 19:30 · Score: 0
  
  I mean, it was always obvious that the ability to replace cable with some array of ad-free streaming options costing a tenth as much was a severely temporary thing. While there is some legitimate cost savings in terms of reduced infrastructure maintenance, the vast majority of cable's ad and subscriber revenue goes to people and corporations who never had any intention of taking a pay cut purely for the sake of consumer happiness. Either quality must take a massive dive, or subscription rates and advertising presence will eventually skyrocket to the point that the financial advantage over cable becomes basically nil.
13. Re: Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by MachineShedFred · 2018-10-22 20:32 · Score: 1
  
  Content begets subscribers. Make good content, you get more subscribers looking for that content. And then they discover other stuff you have already done, staying around and paying fees for stuff you are only paying bandwidth to serve.
  That's the game, and it's one Netflix appears to be good at - others are trying to replicate it (Amazon, Apple, HBO, Cinemax, etc.)
  
  --
  Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
14. Re:Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 21:52 · Score: 0
  
  If I borrow and spend a billion dollars now, and get back $1.2 billion in a year from the things I spent the money on, the borrowing was a good thing: I made more money by borrowing the money and spending it than I would have had I not, and I'm in a position to pay back the debt if I want to. (Or maybe I can re-invest that money into other things and hope for more high returns.)
  You are the ace in the (ass) hole with that thinking. It's f***king debt. It's never a good idea to piss in the swimming pool. Sooner or later, you're drinking hooker peepee, real hooker peepee not that cnn crap you drink.
15. Re: Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by orlanz · 2018-10-22 21:54 · Score: 1
  
  Long term debt just means it won't be covered by net current assets. It won't need to be paid off in under 12 months.
  It sets an expectation to investors that this debt will be on the balance sheets and serviced in cash flows for many years. Investors would review how well the debt is being serviced rather than how quickly it will be paid off. And future lenders would consider it as a pending liability that comes before servicement of the debt they will be issuing.
16. Re:Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by Hodr · 2018-10-23 01:27 · Score: 1
  
  This ignores the fact that at some point they will be producing enough new content per year that they more than satisfy the demands of the typical subscriber. At that time their costs (for content) should stabilize, while they will continue to collect revenue from old subscribers.
  It is also likely that at some point they will have such a large catalog that they can significantly reduce the new offerings and concentrate on a couple of popular properties (like HBO) to keep the subscribers interested.
  My wife has been subscribed since the DVD only days, she watches maybe a couple of episodes of something a week at most. But she doesn't unsubscribe because their may be one new show a year she is interested in.
17. Re:Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by cjjjer · 2018-10-23 02:31 · Score: 1
  
  HBO does fine with the model of subscription only.
  HBO also has a Cable deal, Netflix does not.
18. Re:Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by oh_my_080980980 · 2018-10-23 03:33 · Score: 1
  
  Because that's how financing works. When you issue stock, it's considered long term debt.
19. Re:Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by oh_my_080980980 · 2018-10-23 03:36 · Score: 1
  
  LMOL. People are fucking stupid. Repeat after me CONTENT COSTS MONEY. Why do you you think cable bills kept going up? The driver of the cable bill is content! Jesus christ people wake the fuck up. It's pretty fucking easy. ESPN paid the NFL $15 Billion dollars to carry Monday Night Football for 10 years. What do you think happened to people's cable bills.
20. Re: Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by AvitarX · 2018-10-23 03:41 · Score: 1
  
  I don't think the cable deal is necessary though.
  I'd assume that's break even (they probably get cable money to be available, but give a cut of the sub), and I doubt cable is needed for subs bow adays.
  I'm also pretty sure Netflix is on cable now.
  
  --
  Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
21. Re: Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by oh_my_080980980 · 2018-10-23 03:41 · Score: 1
  
  It's called diminishing returns moron. How much are you willing to pay for the content you watch on Netflix? We've already seen that with cable. People's cable bills got so high that subscribers cut the cord. Switched to Netflix and the like. But now content costs for Netflix are increasing. Netflix is taking on more debt, a huge amount. They need to make the money back. So subscriber rates are going to increase.
  
  Which means you are back to where you started.
22. Re:Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by oh_my_080980980 · 2018-10-23 03:46 · Score: 1
  
  LMOL. Really? And how much is that content going to cost? What are the production costs? And debt needs to be paid back.
  
  What do you men by content costs should stabilize? Why? Content costs increase year over year. Just look at what any of the networks charge cable and the like to carry their content. So Netflix works in a magical world where production costs don't operate the same?
  
  Moron.
23. Re: Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by oh_my_080980980 · 2018-10-23 03:50 · Score: 1
  
  Try this number US$559 million in 2017. That's their profit or net income. $12 Billion is revenue not profit. Profit = revenue - expenses.
  
  People need to study finance before making inane comments.
24. Re: Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by oh_my_080980980 · 2018-10-23 03:52 · Score: 1
  
  And market cap is meaningless. It's not actual earnings. They've also increased their debt by 71%. So they better hope to get a boatload of new subscribers.
25. Re:Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by oh_my_080980980 · 2018-10-23 03:56 · Score: 1
  
  LMOL someone who doesn't understand the economics of it. The reason Netflix took on more debt is to create NEW CONTENT. That means Netflix will need to continue to make NEW CONTENT. That's how it works. You attract and retain customers with new content.
26. Re:Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by Kjella · 2018-10-23 05:27 · Score: 1
  
  But you seem to be starting out on the assumption that Netflix pays as much as they can for the first season. What really happens is that there's a lot of aspiring actors, directors, writers etc. so they'll start low and go *shrug* there's a hundred more in line behind you if you don't want the offer. And they will threaten to write you out of the script if you demand too much for the next season, they'll figure that out before the series is renewed. They'll keep renewing the shows that are profitable, not necessarily because they're popular if the costs get out of hand. And the last bit is a bit duh, if making "more or better" Netflix doesn't give any value it's just waste. If "more or better" gives value, then naturally you can charge more for that value. From a for-profit company's point of view, if you're not willing to pay for it it's not valuable.
  
  --
  Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
27. Re:Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by sexconker · 2018-10-23 12:21 · Score: 1
  
  The content won't be worth much in a couple of years.
  Not on Netflix, which is why they're already syndicating their shows elsewhere. Bojack Horseman is coming to FX / FXX (or was it AdultSwim?), for example.
  Either they sell it for big bucks and try to cash in immediately, or they sell it cheap and negotiate for a chunk of the ad revenue on each run?
28. Re: Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by sexconker · 2018-10-23 12:27 · Score: 1
  
  Content begets subscribers. Make good content, you get more subscribers looking for that content.
  Netflix subscriptions have plateaued. More good content won't get more subscribers.
  
  And then they discover other stuff you have already done, staying around and paying fees for stuff you are only paying bandwidth to serve.
  That's the game, and it's one Netflix appears to be good at - others are trying to replicate it (Amazon, Apple, HBO, Cinemax, etc.)
  No, people on Netflix already know everything Netflix has to offer. It's a pretty thin library. And with the binge model, you can sub for a month, see everything that even vaguely interests you, then cancel for 11 months.
  Netflix is slowly learning to ape HBO and others. HBO gets by because people stick around for 3 months to catch 10 weeks of Game of Thrones, then stick around for 3 more months to catch 10 weeks of Westworld or whatever else. (I for one couldn't get through the second season of Westworld.) Even when the full back catalog is available, most people want to watch the new shit ASAP. Netflix is starting to drip feed some content in that traditional scheme in order to keep people from routinely stoping and restarting their subscriptions.
29. Re:Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by sexconker · 2018-10-23 12:37 · Score: 1
  
  But you seem to be starting out on the assumption that Netflix pays as much as they can for the first season. What really happens is that there's a lot of aspiring actors, directors, writers etc. so they'll start low and go *shrug* there's a hundred more in line behind you if you don't want the offer. And they will threaten to write you out of the script if you demand too much for the next season, they'll figure that out before the series is renewed. They'll keep renewing the shows that are profitable, not necessarily because they're popular if the costs get out of hand. And the last bit is a bit duh, if making "more or better" Netflix doesn't give any value it's just waste. If "more or better" gives value, then naturally you can charge more for that value. From a for-profit company's point of view, if you're not willing to pay for it it's not valuable.
  I'm not assuming that.
  90% of "Netflix Originals" are shit. 90% of those are low budget shit. Those can be safely ignored. They don't contribute significantly to cost OR subscribers.
  The problem is when one of those "Netflix Originals" becomes a hit. Then the costs skyrocket. Netflix has a pattern of axing its most successful content after 2 or 3 seasons because no matter how much people like it, they can't bear the ever-increasing costs.
  Sometimes Netflix skips the cheap phase because they're hunting for awards. See Stranger Things, Bright, the shit with the Obamas. These are HUGE spends on BIG names just to get notoriety that are far removed from actual subscriber increases. These projects wouldn't get the attention they do WITHOUT spending the big bucks on the people involved.
30. Re: Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by MachineShedFred · 2018-10-23 14:48 · Score: 1
  
  If you want me to read anything you post, you probably shouldn't just start with insults and name calling.
  Grow up and have an adult discussion.
  
  --
  Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
31. Re: Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by MachineShedFred · 2018-10-23 14:50 · Score: 1
  
  Could be. I have no knowledge of overall subscriber trends. I know that I have to keep my account or my wife will have a small household coup if she didn't have access to the 20+ seasons of network sitcoms she seems to love...
  The netflix monthly streaming charge is a small pittance in comparison to that.
  
  --
  Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
32. Re: Long term debt .. am I missing something here? by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-29 09:33 · Score: 0
  
  Sounds like you should study some finance. Or maybe just math.
  $320M $559M.
  Profit is only passingly relevant in the corporate bond market. The ability to service the debt is far more relevant, as is how well the bonds are secured. My current mortgagor, for instance, couldn't give the slightest shit about whether I actually earn any money ever again- the equivalent of profits. As long as I figure out some way to make the payments- say, by selling my investments or coin collection or whatever- they're happy. Even failing that, the fact that their loan is secured by an asset worth now 4X the balance and that they get their money AND expenses first off the top, means that they're completely unconcerned about it.
  Also to the point, your equation itself is inane. Try this:
  Profit = revenue - (interest + other expenses)
  Or were you arguing they're gonna pay $559M in interest per year on this new $2B in financing?
Oh boy by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 11:45 · Score: 1

Are they gonna bring back quantum leap?
Sounds Like Trump/Republican Financing by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 11:46 · Score: 0

Get the $ for the bottom line. Debt is something poor people pay off.
Maybe they could finish by bobstreo · 2018-10-22 11:50 · Score: 3, Interesting

Forever
or
Terminator: The Sarah Conner Chronicles
I see they're doing the new season of Lucifer...
I'd also like a sequel to Bright
Just say no to more movies from Adam Sandler though.
1. Re:Maybe they could finish by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 12:42 · Score: 0
  
  Bright should be called Dumb. Not a so good movie. Turning a typical black male into an alien does not turn magically a film a better one, quite by the contrary.
2. Re:Maybe they could finish by rtb61 · 2018-10-22 14:02 · Score: 2
  
  Don't forget really cheap to produce content, like scenery channel lopped from various locations with generic music. Then various music video channels, again buy cheap early and loop over and over again.
  People will pick the one the fills the most spots with the most content. Fuck sports that is for jock strap douche failures and with mind control levels of advertising, your sports stars, your team, the play for you, yeah fuck off, the mostly are jock strap douche fwits that chase the highest money and seeking to be masturbated by as many people as possible, hey morons, prostitutes get paid and you idiots pay.
  Producing your own content is smart and there is a lot out there to produce. Autotune et al has completely fucked up modern music with real generic celebration of narcissism crap and shallow worthless performance artists who know nothing about music, so there is a lot of scope there (simply advertise for bands and create videos, one time payment).
  Content creators of course do not want exclusive, it is death, they become unknowns outside of that subscription serves because there is no longer an advertising channel, free to air, to push their content out. Content creators want their content on all the subscription services because that is the only way to get known. Free to air with its endless shitvertising model is dying, along with corporate propaganda news, the main ways to waffle shit about pseudo celebrities and stars, yeah narcissist with egos as big as entire suns, what a pack of fwits. So will Netflic release content to other subscription services, probably on an exchange basis, we give two seasons of what ever for one season of what ever.
  Big money is sport is coming to an end, they have lost the saturation marketing hook, getting children to believe in utter bullshit sporting heroes, heroes my arse.
  
  --
  Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
3. Re: Maybe they could finish by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 20:41 · Score: 0
  
  Did a professional athlete drop a deuce in your corn flakes? Damn you are bitter and salty about sports programming. Don't like it? Don't watch. And also don't pretend you are somehow better than other people because they like to watch different shit than you. It makes you sound like a smug cunt.
4. Re:Maybe they could finish by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 20:44 · Score: 0
  
  Forever
  or
  Terminator: The Sarah Conner Chronicles
  I see they're doing the new season of Lucifer...
  I'd also like a sequel to Bright
  Just say no to more movies from Adam Sandler though.
  They should finish
  Terminator: The Sarah Conner Chronicles,
  The Good Place,
  and
  Final Space
  I ONLY watched Paradise PD (kind of stupid) and Disenchantment (kind of boring) because I've finished Final Space (great) long ago
5. Re:Maybe they could finish by AmiMoJo · 2018-10-22 22:59 · Score: 1
  
  Or un-cancel Luke Cage and Iron Fist. I really enjoyed the former, Iron Fist season 1 was not the best but I hear season 2 is a great improvement.
  And for the love of his noodliness don't cancel The Expanse.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
6. Re:Maybe they could finish by AmiMoJo · 2018-10-22 23:03 · Score: 2
  
  The whole idea with Netflix is that they should be able to make better quality programming by relying on the long tail for viewing, and not having to worry about the whims of advertisers. Otherwise what is the point, it's just the same drek as other streaming services.
  I'd love to see some really good documentaries, like the BBC used to make in the 70s/80s. Informative and in-depth, none of this Brian Cox gazing at the sky and breathlessly whispering about how amazing it all is. Making a Murderer was pretty good, as was that thing about OJ.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
7. Re:Maybe they could finish by Hodr · 2018-10-23 01:31 · Score: 1
  
  I watched every episode of both those series, kept holding my breath waiting for them to get good In my opinion they never did. And these are the types of shows that I like most, and I am incredibly easy to please (hell, I liked ALL of the mortal kombat movies).
8. Re:Maybe they could finish by Hognoxious · 2018-10-23 05:31 · Score: 1
  
  Informative and in-depth, none of this Brian Cox gazing at the sky and breathlessly whispering about how amazing it all is.
  
  I know. A fucking pop star who did that song that New Labour used.
  And don't get me started about Sky At Night. The new presenter is a black woman who can't read!
  Froth froth dumbing down froth froth green ink froth froth political correctness gone mad froth froth Belgians.
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
9. Re:Maybe they could finish by AmiMoJo · 2018-10-23 07:10 · Score: 1
  
  You mean Dr. Maggie Aderin-Pocock? Fairly sure being able to read is a prerequisite for getting a PhD.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
10. Re:Maybe they could finish by Hognoxious · 2018-10-24 22:09 · Score: 1
  
  Well either there are two people with that name or one of us doesn't know what dyslexia is.
  P.S. I'll see your Brian Cox (fnarr fnarr) and raise you Hannah Fry gazing wistfully into the distance... though I can sort of put up with that.
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
11. Re:Maybe they could finish by AmiMoJo · 2018-10-24 23:36 · Score: 0
  
  So... You called her out for being black and having dyslexia. That is your objection to her presenting The Sky At Night?
  I want to be really clear about this.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
12. Re:Maybe they could finish by Hognoxious · 2018-10-25 02:28 · Score: 1
  
  I'll call you out for being a liar, an aspie or having appalling reading comprehension.
  You can choose more than one if you like.
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Huge Mistake! by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 12:04 · Score: 0

Netflix has so far failed to impress me with 99% of their "original content"! In a word, Netflix "original content" SUCKS!!! Netflix should spend its time and money getting the content that its customers want!! Netflix recently lost me as a customer because they just didn't have as many of the TV shows and movies that I want to see as other streaming services. If they ever want to get me back as a customer, they will have to stop creating crap content, and get the content that I want. There are some movies and TV shows that I have yet to see on any streaming service. Like Hogan's Heros, Johnny Quest, and there are many more!
1. Re: Huge Mistake! by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 15:38 · Score: 0
  
  Look when they started making a whole bunch of crappy Adam Sandler movies like 4 or 5 years ago, your assessment was correct. You're right that not all their original content is good. I'm certainly not the right target for it, but some of the shows and movies they have produced have been quite brilliant. I find the issue is generally choice fatigue and many things being to similar, but that's the exact same issue I had with movies a d shows in general before Netflix. I've read enough books, watched enough movies and shows and seen enough in life that unless it's pretty damn special I'm probably going to feel that way. Some teenager who hasn't experienced the things I have will have a completely different opinion and might be blown away by the things that bore me. Etc. Etc. Etc. I think Netflix is the best option and has proven to be a real market disrupter. I thank them for what they have done. The price is good enough. I wouldn't pay anymore when I only watch a few hours a week though. Shit watching paint dry can be more interesting than looking at a screen sometimes. For me the biggest thing they are competing with for my attention is written media. Here I am fucking wasting my time on Slashdot not watching Netflix for example. There are so many forms of free entertainment and not a single one will ever get a cent out of me because if they try, I'll go for a walk or down to the beach for a swim... You know... Life.
2. Re: Huge Mistake! by MachineShedFred · 2018-10-22 20:45 · Score: 2
  
  Yeah, they should just force content owners to license to them... Somehow...
  It's not Netflix's fault that every content studio under the sun tanks their licensing in order to give their own streaming operation a go. It does suck for us though - no way I'm subscribing to that useability and payment nightmare.
  
  --
  Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
One Remaining Movie in Every Categtory by BrendaEM · 2018-10-22 12:04 · Score: 2

Nextflix has done everything in their power to go out of business. They devised a bogus rating system. They are doing away with reviews altogether. They put movies in categories where they don't belong. There are fewer movies, now. There are hardly any cult moves, hardly any classics. They've alienated studios by creating their own content. What more can they do and still keep the lights on?

--
https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
1. Re:One Remaining Movie in Every Categtory by zamboni1138 · 2018-10-22 12:29 · Score: 1
  
  You're talking about Dvd.com, not Netflix. Oh, wait....
2. Re:One Remaining Movie in Every Categtory by RuiFRibeiro · 2018-10-22 12:44 · Score: 1
  
  Their interface is very well designed and they integrate quite well with Android, webOS, Chromecast and iOS...
  However, working well does not suit them any better if they are only carrying two year old series and movies, at best.
  And it is a shame...
3. Re:One Remaining Movie in Every Categtory by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 13:26 · Score: 1
  
  Work well? I can rarely find anything that interests me to watch on Netflix. The options for search are terrible and the recommendations are barely any better. If I'm lucky, i'll stumble across a series that interests me, but usually not.
  I wouldn't have a subscription at all if I had to pay for it.
4. Re:One Remaining Movie in Every Categtory by omnichad · 2018-10-22 13:44 · Score: 1
  
  Two years old is meaningless. Any content I haven't yet seen is fair game. As it is, I've switched around my own TV recording habits and watch shows one season at a time, a year after it airs. If you're not paying to watch it two years ago elsewhere, it's just as fresh as anything.
5. Re: One Remaining Movie in Every Categtory by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 14:02 · Score: 0
  
  DVD.com is the bees knees
6. Re:One Remaining Movie in Every Categtory by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 15:38 · Score: 0
  
  Get all the seasons of Game of Thrones. That should keep people busy for awhile.
7. Re:One Remaining Movie in Every Categtory by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 19:41 · Score: 0
  
  EVERYBODY look at MEEEE!!! I've got my attention whoring text on!!
8. Re:One Remaining Movie in Every Categtory by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-23 00:09 · Score: 0
  
  Nobody watches netflix more movies. You're living in the stone age. They have 13 hour series movies instead.
9. Re:One Remaining Movie in Every Categtory by AmiMoJo · 2018-10-23 00:37 · Score: 1
  
  Netflix needs original content to survive. The other studios are setting up their own streaming services now, and removing their content from Netflix. Original content is the only reason I subscribe any more.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
10. Re:One Remaining Movie in Every Categtory by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-23 05:23 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah, I tend not to bother with a series until it has a couple seasons up.
11. Re:One Remaining Movie in Every Categtory by darkmeridian · 2018-10-23 06:17 · Score: 1
  
  Well, the studios were going to screw Netflix anyway by creating their own streaming services so Netflix made a heads-up move by getting into content production.
  
  --
  A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
DareDevil ROCKS... apk by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 12:06 · Score: 0

See subject: Never liked it much as a kid growing up reading comics 5-14 BUT love it now - good show, & I admire (yes believe it or not) The "KingPin" & Vincent D'onofrio portraying him (he does great) as BOTH a phyiscal villain the 'hard way' getting there + the 'brainiac villain' (far more dangerous) - "SiNiStEr" is THE word for it.
* Their other films have been SURPRISINGLY good on 9/10 of my choices from their menus (too many to list in fact).
APK
P.S.=> Wishing them continued success on all fronts - I like the service & PRICE? Hey - way, Way, WAY right... apk
What I want to see from Netflix by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 12:14 · Score: 0

R-Rated Spawn animated cartoon series in the same vein as the old HBO cartoon series. That style of spawn using newer age animation and updated to a more modern setting would be GREAT.
Continuation of the SiFi original mini-series "The Lost Room".
Those are two on my wish list.
Enjoy while it Lasts by Roger+W+Moore · 2018-10-22 12:29 · Score: 4, Insightful

Their content is great but their business model is beginning to look something like a Ponzi scheme. They have to borrow more and more in order to make more new content to both attract new subscribers and maintain their existing ones. However, at some point, they will no longer be able to increase their subscription base fast enough to cover their ever-increasing debt at which point things are going to get very bad very fast as they will haemorrhage subscribers like crazy.

They really need to find a way to pay for the new content from our subscriptions. I would much rather have a lower rate of quality shows over the next 30 years than a huge glut of new material for a few years followed by nothing because their business model has imploded.
1. Re:Enjoy while it Lasts by AvitarX · 2018-10-22 13:21 · Score: 1
  
  They profit a billion a year or so.
  I'm not sure their cashflow situation (but with so much debt it may be negative).
  They'll need to slow down the borrowing soon, but they also will be able too.
  Someone signing up today already has a pretty big back catalog, in three more years, it'll be even more.
  
  --
  Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
2. Re:Enjoy while it Lasts by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 15:15 · Score: 0
  
  Amazon sure looked like a ponzi scheme too by your definition. (Your definition is wrong BTW). Yet I would love to have more Amazon stock!
3. Re:Enjoy while it Lasts by Roger+W+Moore · 2018-10-22 17:12 · Score: 1
  
  Amazon sure looked like a ponzi scheme too by your definition.
  Amazon's business is very different though. Their investments built a massive structure to support what is essentially an online shop. If they stop making new investments their money stream is not going to rapidly shrink because people will still keep on buying things from their existing infrastructure. Netflix is very different. If they suddenly stop making new content then their subscription base, and hence money stream, will rapidly collapse because those of us who have been subscribers for several years will suddenly have very little reason to continue since we have seen all their existing content that we want to watch.
  
  ...and no, it is not strictly a Ponzi scheme since that only really applies to investment schemes. This is why I only said that it is _like_ a Ponzi scheme in that they are currently borrowing at an unsustainable rate supported purely by the promise of increasing subscriptions. This is simply not sustainable: at some point, their subscription growth is going to slow and this will mean the flow of new content will also have to slow possibly greatly. If this triggers a collapse in subscribers then content will slow even more, causing more subscribers to flee and the whole house of cards could come tumbling down. The key will be managing their transition from insanely rapid growth to steady, stable operation and that transition is going to be far harder to get right for Netflix than it was for Amazon.
4. Re:Enjoy while it Lasts by AmiMoJo · 2018-10-22 23:10 · Score: 1
  
  They have to borrow more and more in order to make more new content to both attract new subscribers and maintain their existing ones.
  That's the normal way business works. They have a product that is successful and profitable, so people are willing to invest more money in them to expand it.
  The next big step for them is to get direct-to-stream movies given the same consideration as those shown in cinemas. Movies are ripe for disruption just like TV was, but it's a little harder because a lot of critics and awards won't look at anything that doesn't get a theatrical release, they consider them equivalent to straight to DVD trash.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
5. Re:Enjoy while it Lasts by Gilgaron · 2018-10-23 02:14 · Score: 1
  
  Eh, with HBO for example, you can subscribe for a month or two a year and watch everything you were interested in. Netflix is trying to keep you subscribed all year.
6. Re:Enjoy while it Lasts by syn3rg · 2018-10-23 04:34 · Score: 1
  
  It may be time to separate content from delivery, like the US did in 1948.
  
  --
  The contents of this message have been doubly encrypted by ROT13
7. Re:Enjoy while it Lasts by Roger+W+Moore · 2018-10-23 05:05 · Score: 1
  
  That's the normal way business works.
  Absolutely correct but Netflix is not like a normal business. In a normal business you borrow money to build infrastructure that will continue to have a value long after the original investment because it can still make/sell widgets. However, with Netflix the value of the content they create rapidly declines because their subscribers will only watch it once or twice. The result is that Netflix's income is related far more closely to the rate of investment than the total amount invested so, if their rate of investment is unsustainable it is likely to be far more damaging for them than for a typical company where income is more closely related to the total value invested.
8. Re:Enjoy while it Lasts by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-23 17:48 · Score: 0
  
  The content on netflix is getting way too political to maintain a wide audience. For example:
  Orange is the New Black explicitly state that babies born to poor mothers are likely to be criminals and thus better off aborted.
  Ozark represents republicans as hicks, and makes claims such as that background checks on existing gun sales are a sham.
  The casting for Witcher 3 is outraging fans by race bending characters from a fantasy medieval Poland.
  All of these types of scenes - which are utterly unnecessary to the underlying stories - just exist to annoy and alienate 1/2 the people watching and put a bad taste in their mouths. This type of crap is why television ratings are plummeting, and same will happen to netflix if it keeps happening.
I can see it working but ... by your_mother_sews_soc · 2018-10-22 12:40 · Score: 3, Insightful

I can see it working but it's a big gamble. In a nutshell there are a few categories of funds needed by a business: startup costs (building, enhancements, equipment, etc), fixed costs (your monthly bills including payroll, utilities, service contracts, etc.), and variable costs (depends on the interest, but here it would be the costs to make a film or series - the more films/series, the more it costs). The revenue then goes against these expenses, and there's a break even point where you make X number of widgets and take in enough revenue (from sales, licensing, etc.) to cover the costs.

You would think that Netflix has saturated the market by now, so how does throwing more money at content generate more revenue? Netflix has obviously done some thinking.

More original content would mean less licensing films and TV shows from other companies. And they need a bootstrap to produce enough to begin to be free of other studios and distributors. But then where do we go for all the shows that brought us to Netflix? Maybe it's Plan B.
br/> Original content is still key, but perhaps Netflix knows about other markets, like PPV. I don't have any idea how much people pay for films that were recently in theaters and are now in PPV. It could be that Netflix wants to do more films that are either screened broadly or maybe limited run and then charge a few more bucks to watch them.

Whatever they do it's a lot of money and a big risk. The markets are not looking favorably at tech right now, either. I'd be cautious.

--
My user name was a mistake. Input wasn't restricted, my bad.
1. Re:I can see it working but ... by omnichad · 2018-10-22 13:48 · Score: 1
  
  You would think that Netflix has saturated the market by now,
  Which market? They have original series all over the globe. Plenty of them are enjoyable with English subtitles if you don't like dubs.
2. Re:I can see it working but ... by aaarrrgggh · 2018-10-22 15:01 · Score: 1
  
  It reduces content acquisition costs, and ensures ongoing access to new content. Their own content is much easier to predict future costs on-- licensed deals not so much.
Addendum: I liked the original film too... apk by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 14:25 · Score: 0

See subject: Re - watching it right now & I couldn't IMAGINE the power of knowing if someone's guilty or innocent by meeting them live.
* Once again noting Kingpin: The late (great as John Coffey too) M. C. Duncan is excellent.
APK
P.S.=> DD underestimated his TRUE VALUE to society as really the ULTIMATE lie detector (he could've played THAT power, better)... apk
Acquisitions by Only+Time+Will+Tell · 2018-10-22 15:37 · Score: 1

At this point, Netflix should seek out media company acquisitions to bring some established IPs in-house. With Disney and Comcast gobbling up everything in sight, there may not be a lot of low-hanging fruit left, but they could try and pick up a smaller movie & TV studio like Paramount or Dreamworks so that they can establish some exclusivity around big IPs. They have some decent self-made programming, particularly their comedy specials, but it feels a lot like a moving conveyor where nothing sticks or is that special.
Not a Ponzi Scheme by rsilvergun · 2018-10-22 16:16 · Score: 2

they need a back catalog to keep subs. As everyone and their dog jumps into the streaming services market Netflix needs their own content.

As for, why debt, the answer is taxes. They'll write it off as a business expense.

--
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
1. Re:Not a Ponzi Scheme by Roger+W+Moore · 2018-10-22 17:20 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, they do need their own content but that content needs to be paid for by existing subscribers. At the moment it is being paid for by borrowing money plus subscribers. The problem is that if their subscriptions stop growing, they will not be able to borrow more and then the rate of content production will drop to what the subscriptions (minus debt repayments) will support. This drop in rate will mean that they are likely to lose existing subscribers further reducing the rate of new content, causing more to leave etc and your positive upward spiral fuelled by debt suddenly becomes a negative downward one.
I don't think they need adverts by rsilvergun · 2018-10-22 16:18 · Score: 3, Interesting

but they do need content, not to get new subscribers but to keep the old ones. You need a series of shows you can either go back to or discover. It's not even that big a deal if they're not finished. My kid watched a ton of cheap, unfinished shows on DVD back in the day when she was laid up sick. But the point is to have enough content that folks want to keep the subscription.

--
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Competition... by VeryFluffyBunny · 2018-10-22 16:18 · Score: 1

All this competition between subscription services means that a lot of great content that people want to see gets made. That's great for us but unsustainable as we can see from the amount of debt they're racking up. It looks like they're all going for market dominance or broke. This isn't going to last & we'll soon be going back to reality TV, game shows, & re-runs.
However, all these competing services mean that the good TV & movies that we might want to see are fragmented across several providers & also vary from country to country, e.g. Canada only gets a fraction of Netflix's catalogue, because of licensing restrictions.
I say our best bet under these circumstances is a VPN & piracy. Enjoy it all while it's good!

--
Debate is a form of harassment. Do not question my truth.
Huh huh by OrangeTide · 2018-10-22 16:23 · Score: 1

I guess Netflix shouldn't have burned piles of cash with four Adam Sandler movies that were worse than garbage.

--
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
1. Re:Huh huh by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-23 06:38 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah, I never saw the appeal of that guy.
2. Re:Huh huh by OrangeTide · 2018-10-23 06:57 · Score: 1
  
  He made a great comedy album when he was young. And was pretty good as a writer on SNL. But he never really seemed to carry on his success in Punch-Drunk Love, I think it was just a really well written script and he was in a particular frame of mind to be a serious and natural actor. Whatever acting capabilities he had in 2001/2002 seems to have vanished.
  
  --
  “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Sexless Clunker the nazi is jealous of netflix by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 18:39 · Score: 0

Everyone already knew it, he has no personal business model or job and just likes to pretend he's a CEO. What a dumbass lol. His mother ate his homework.
Netflix stops being Netflix by thegarbz · 2018-10-22 21:14 · Score: 1

and starts being the cable companies they hated so much.
1. Re:Netflix stops being Netflix by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-23 00:12 · Score: 0
  
  No ads bro
2. Re:Netflix stops being Netflix by phantomfive · 2018-10-23 14:41 · Score: 1
  
  Netflix never hated the cable companies. Users hated the cable companies, but Netflix just wanted to win.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Transgender Dragons by geekymachoman · 2018-10-22 21:16 · Score: 1

That's what I want to see next. Where is it ?

No seriously. I struggle 30 minutes every time I put netflix on to find something that's not absolute shite or mediocre at best. Every possible title I put in IMDB the ratings are between 4.8 to 5.8, and sometimes when I go for it... I find the score to be more or less precise. Netflix content is mediocre, with couple of things that stand out but not so much. People talk about some things for a month, and then after 5 months nobody even remembers it existed anymore.

Netflix is McDonalds of the entertainment industry... the only thing that's 'saving it' is convenience for "older" generations with kids, and the fact that new generations that are used to new superhero movies every month have an attention span of a gold fish and would never even be able to watch anything other than emotionally charged superficial drama, over the top action or stupid CGI that creeped in every genre of movies and tv shows. Even freaking Comedies have CGI for god sake!

The only thing that's good on netflix is the "Classic" section, and other movies that they have right to stream that are not theirs.
1. Re:Transgender Dragons by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-23 01:32 · Score: 0
  
  How many good movies and TV shows are even made? I've looked around and the selection isn't better anywhere else. So on what service are the bulk of amazing movies and TV shows hiding?
wah wah wah..netflix is PUBLIC by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-22 21:56 · Score: 0

what did you think was going to happen? In 2002, they had their IPO, of course it's changed hands into the "public" (a few big powerful shareholders that have no interest in the company's original merits).
Great, just what we need! by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-23 02:02 · Score: 0

50 more shows showing the struggle of a family guy who has perfect hair and a dainty feminine wife who when unarmed can defeat an entire regiment of soldiers in some alternate dystopian future.
Do something besides watching by Sir_Eptishous · 2018-10-23 02:53 · Score: 1

Long time Netflix subscriber here.

I started with them around 2002, when it was optical media only.
It was great to not have to go to the movie rental places anymore and just choose films online.
And as the years went by their catalog got better, right up to and during their initial venture into streaming.

Holy fuck those were the days.
A halcyon era of choice, where they had an amazing catalog of classics, b films, foreign films, all the new stuff as well as all kinds of great stuff to stream.

Then it started to slowly morph in on itself.
The catalog shrank and the original programming took over.
We all know the reasons for this: GREED

So I'm still a NF subscriber, and maybe 2-3 times a week I will watch it for an hour or two.
I still get the Blu-Rays for things I can't stream(better quality anyway).

But here is the interesting thing that has happened. Since NF has devolved and all the other greedy fucks have gotten into the game creating an ultra-balkanized media landscape, I have grown tired of the whole thing. Tired of the all the different services, tired of the menus, tired of the weak original programming, tired of the hassle of trying to find something cool to watch.

So the end result is that I watch less "tv". I "do" more now.
Because of the rat race that this has turned into, I find myself just doing things besides watching.

--
We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
Netflix has the data by HyperStasis · 2018-10-23 03:33 · Score: 1

Netflix knows what is popular. They have years of aggregated data showing what people watch and re-watch. Any shows they produce should be a reflection of that. I really hope that this will produce more good series than the current ten fold recycled garbage available on network based tv.
A Vast Wasteland by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-23 04:04 · Score: 0

Netflix's content, original or bought from others, is a vast wasteland. 99.9% of it is utter garbage. Meanwhile the UI is designed so as to show you the same choice of garbage over and over and over. It's like a rummage sale, where the bins of merchandise never change, except for 0.1%. You cannot say "I never, ever, EVER, want you to show me the option of that piece of unmitigated dung again."
Instead, Netflix says "We have a fine menu of items to offer you today, sir. Would you care for this refried turd that you rejected 100 times before? No? Well, then, how about this unmitigated reheated vomit you weren't interested in for the past year?"
Re:Cool by Anonymous Coward · 2018-10-23 05:58 · Score: 0

WTF are you talking about?
THE CHEAPEST FINANCIAL OFFER by Anonymous Coward · 2018-11-01 05:59 · Score: 0

The best price offer and the fastest execution time in Poland is the basis for our customers' full satisfaction. The problem is not to present a good offer to the client, but to make it cheaper than the competition. Do you want to know how we do it? Call and check!