The Reason Netflix Is Dropping Profiles

Adrian Cockcroft, Director of Web Engineering at Netflix, posted the following on the Netflix Community forum:

The Netflix site was designed without profiles, then features were added continuously for a few years, then profiles were added, but with minimum disruption to existing features, rather than a ground-up redesign, then a few more years of features were added over the top.

Now in some ways its too messy and its slowing down our ability to change and add new features, so a lot of investment is going into cleaning up the code. Part of that cleanup is to simplify and re-implement things so that we can get more interesting and advanced things done more quickly in the future. For this feature that is used by a percent or two of the user base, it will make cleanup a lot faster by removing it.

When profiles were invented, most users were on multiple-disc plans. More recently we have added one-disc plans, and a lot of users are on those plans and can't use profiles, even though they have the same needs.

Todd Yellin, a Netflix Product Manager, posted the following on the Netflix Community Blog (there are more than 750 comments on his post):

As a Netflix product manager I'm tasked with the wonderful job of helping members find movies they'll love. But today my job is more challenging as we've decided to terminate the profiles feature on September 1. Please know that the motivation is solely driven by keeping our service as simple and as easy to use as possible. Too many members found the feature difficult to understand and cumbersome, having to consistently log in and out of the website.

Continuing to maintain the profiles feature for the passionate few who use it (including myself) distracts us from the mission of presenting to all our members the easiest way to find the best titles for them from the 100k plus on DVD and the 10k plus available instantly.

We will do our best to find better ways for families to share accounts than the existing profiles feature and will continue to invest in improving the website experience in many different ways.

Several sources have suggested that around 1% of Netflix customers are using Profiles, or about 80,000 customers out of more than 8 million. Netflix has a feature, loved by a small group of users, that is slowing down the rollout of new features for 99% of their customers.

The bottom line is that Netflix kludged Profiles, and while they know they're going annoy a small (and vocal) group of customers, they want to build a new way for people to share accounts. There are other ways multiple users with one account can manage reviews, queues (DVD & Watch Instantly), ratings, and recommendations.

The one thing Netflix should have done was share the new Profiles strategy with existing users, and provided a way to migrate existing Profiles to the new system.

I will miss Profiles, but I look forward to seeing what Netflix will replace it with. What do you think?

Comments

[Billy]

They're taking away a feature I love so they can add more tools in the future? If the future additions are used by only 1% of people, can we trash them and bring profiles back?

[Alex]

I believe that if they actually have a plan it would not be a problem to share it with us. Something like... yes, we are cutting profiles, but we are completely revamping the site on September 1. We plan to add new features like Blah Blah Blah.

Then we would have the information to decide whether or not we want to stay with Netflix or start switching our secondary profiles to another company.

[TheLoneIguana]

I'm betting whatever replacement they come up with is going to end up costing more.

I still call BS on the 1%.

[RocketTech]

The reason why profile users are so voccal is because they are using it- looks like the vast majority probably don't even know it's available. I saw this news yesterday and thought to myself "Self, I bet Netflix has a good reason for doing this and/or are planning an even better implementation". I am disappointed at the anouncement- I think they should have been more clear on the reason and future intentions. This communication today is what should have been the first communication- open, honest, and a glimpse of the future. The first announcement was honest, but did not feel open nor gave a glimpse of the future.
Yeah, I'm a Netflix cheerleader, but honestly if this is the biggest 'problem' with Netflix, things aren't so bad. It would be nice to have the new features ready before the old go away. Sure, Netflix could do a beta site and confuse the heck out of everyone on the switchover. Netflix has a good track record- let's wait with anticipation and be wowed with the new features.

[noe638]

this really is just another example of netflix slapping their most evangelical fans in the face...you run out and tell somebody about the service and what it can do and they rip a feature away from you with NO alternatives, NO workarounds, NO little show of appreciation for your loss.

Netflix is a community and sometimes they shun their loved ones in an unbending fashion. There is so much they could have done...people really like transparency, tell people you are considering removing a feature and then give it a few months to manifest. It would have gone much better.

[Chet]

Nope, sorry, not letting them off the hook. Their present plan will delete customer queues and munge customer ratings.

If Netflix got hacked and the hackers deleted 80,000 customers' queues and screwed up their ratings, it wouldn't be called progress.

Revealing your history of slapdash software development does not excuse torpedoing customer relationships. At the very least, provide a reasonable migration path from a profile to a separate account. Otherwise: FAIL.

[John Burke]

I just don't want to lose all my ratings, reviews, etc. I just want there to be a way to bring my profile to my own account. Then it would be a slight inconvenience, but no gripe from me. And no loss of this member for Netflix.

I mean, my wife never rates her movies, and when she does, it's five for Made of Honor and The Notebook. I think that will look very silly with the five I give to Die Hard, Braveheart, and Gladiator.

[Umwhat]

This still sounds like... someone made a decision and they are finding reasons the decision makes sense.

Sure, it may make coding easier. Of course. What wouldn't? Just about removing any feature would.

Both Adrian and Todd have enough PR mumbo jumbo in their posts that I think they have just adopted the company line and are trying to be supportive about it.

Todd's comments are particularly unconvincing: "Continuing to maintain the profiles feature for the passionate few who use it (including myself) distracts us from the mission of presenting to all our members the easiest way to find the best titles..."

What a load.

This decision was MADE and then Todd and Adrian got on board with it. That much is completely and painfully obvious.

[memyselfandeye]

it's still a crap decision, no matter how hard they try to spin it.

[darren]

Communication is the key. If they have a plan to provide the same functionality by a different method, they should have communicated that to us in the beginning. They didn't.

They could inform customer service to reassure people that other means will be made available to replace the lost functionality.
They didn't.

They could bloody well respond to the "suggestion" emails we send.
They don't.

Then they make asinine statements that "the decision is final", intimating that they have no desire to listen to their customers. This arrogance is what prompted me to cancel my account on June 19. I expect my first movies from Blockbuster tomorrow (incidentally, the same two movies were at the top of my former netflix queue with "long wait" beside them).

[Donna]

"We will do our best to find better ways for families to share accounts than the existing profiles feature and will continue to invest in improving the website experience in many different ways."

Right. So here we have the crux of it. Families sharing accounts...not sharing queues or profiles. Accounts. That's multiple accounts, and I'm not paying for multiple accounts. I'm on the three out plan. If I drop to the one out plan on September 1, it's because I'm not going to dance the dance it will take to manage multiple types of DVDs (TV, documetary, movies) that are currently handled by the profile system.

Seriously, Netflix, you don't take a feature like Profiles, and discard it without having something to put in its place at that time.

This is basic.

[Matt]

I think I'm canceling my account.

[Dave]

My reply to Adrian:

So, let's assume you're going to piss off about 80,000 subscribers. Let's also assume (conservatively, in my opinion) that about 10% of them are going to downgrade their plan by one disc, either because they won't find it as useful without profiles, or just because they're angry. Right there you're looking at losing 80,000 * %10 * ~$7/month = $56,000/month in lost subscriber fees.

That's just 10% dropping one disc - that doesn't even count those of us who plan to leave, or potential subscribers who we're going to warn off due to being taken for granted, or just more people willing to stand against your decision. Do you really think your new features are going to recoup that subscriber base? Are you saying you can't get people who can fix your profiles code with that kind of money?

I personally don't care what lengths you need to go to to fix the problem without impacting my customer experience. That's your problem for not having implemented profiles more cleanly in the first place. Who's convenience is more important: your developers' or your customers'?

[Lisa Abeyta]

I am working on a feature article on family-friendly companies and products. Netflix was to be one of those companies. Instead, I now have the perfect example of a corporation that is choosing to throw out family-friendly features because they don't think enough customers will care. Profiles allowed parents to allow independent selection by several children, all at age-appropriate levels. It was one of the things that set Netflix apart. This is a move that will tarnish that reputation - perhaps with irreparable damage.

[danb]

I'm far less upset that they're getting rid of profiles and far more upset that they don't see a reason to provide people with a way to migrate their data to a separate account. If you want to get rid of the feature, especially for the reasons given in the scenario presented, then fine. You shouldn't punish 100k of your user base to do it, though. You're already inconveniencing them, so provide a way for them to move their data, at the very least.

I spent a lot of time rating movies in my profile. I use it to reference what I've seen and remind me of how I felt about a movie, without having to remember if it was me or my wife that saw it. Now all of that will be lost.

The data in my profile is one of the reasons why I never tried Blockbuster's service. September seems like a good time to give it a shot.

[Sam Jackson]

I still call BS on the 1%.

Prove it. Seriously, put up or shut up.

it's still a crap decision, no matter how hard they try to spin it.

No, it makes perfect sense in light of the latest info, no matter how much you want to deny reality.

Here's some ear plugs. You can go in the corner and shout "NAH NAH NAH I'm not listening!"

They're taking away a feature I love so they can add more tools in the future?

It is slowing things down NOW.

If the future additions are used by only 1% of people, can we trash them and bring profiles back?

Only if they have the same lack of critical thinking skills that you do.

[Pup, MD]

I'm pretty sure a dorm room full of freshman CS majors with a few dozen cases of Mountain Dew and a few bottles of Adderall could fix all of their problems in a weekend.

[Quiet Desperation]

I'm pretty sure a dorm room full of freshman CS majors with a few dozen cases of Mountain Dew and a few bottles of Adderall could fix all of their problems in a weekend.

Or, you know, not. The days of hacking something together in machine code on some 8086 machine are long gone, my friend. I've done some web development. It can be really ponderous, especially when it needs to be cross platform, and that's *without* using Microsoft DRM. ;-)

Man, you just gave me a total craving for Mountain Dew. :-) I'm in Southern Cailfornia. It's 206 degrees and half of it will probably be on fire by Sunday.

Not to be snarky, but... well, OK, to be totally snarky, I'd really like to know how many of the loudest complainers were picking on folks like me when we protested the apparent retirement of the Releasing This Week page?

[matt]

So netflix hires 40,000 people? i read that only 1% of users use the feature and half of those are netflix employees...B.S.

Eveything i read coming from netflix boils down to bad programmers...bad code can be fixed and worked around so i dont by it that this is effecting anything upcoming/future additions or system performance...

[StC]

That profiles was a kludge on top of their existing systems was obvious. Trying to tack a multi-value system into a system that assumes single-value in the first place is always a kludge. Profiles are something that has to be done in the design phase.

But too bad, Netflix. You did it. This is reflective of your entire codebase. It is all one big giant kludge. How many times has the entire site gone down? Yeah, we know the whole mess is a hodge-podge of kludges. It's obvious to anyone who has ever designed software.

Take a big step back. Re-design it. Separate functions. Design the UI and database for things like profiles. Take six months or a year to make it. Then when it is time to happen, you put it in place on a second cluster of servers, leaving the first in place. You migrate customers to it in big blocks. As soon as the front cluster sees the UID they get the UI from the cluster (old or new) that they belong to.

You think you're the first company to ever have this problem? Give me a break. I've done this with customer data that is 100x more complicated than what Netflix manages. GIVE ME A BREAK. There is absolutely no reason for this except incompetence and lack of respect for customers.

Oh, and 1% of customers? Who each have several profiles. Each profile is a separate customer. Count each profile as an account and suddenly your talking about 5% or 6% of your best customers. Go ahead, delete 5% of your customers, they won't care.

Do the math, how much marketing money goes into attracting 50,000 new customers vs how much it costs in retention?

Amazing how a company that used to be the best thing since sliced bread, could do no wrong, had the best web interface, etc etc etc ... suddenly has bad programmers, doesn't care about it's customers, is lazy, and it's entire website is one giant kludge.

Geez, when the Lord taketh away after He has giveth, the faithful change religion awfully fast.

This is just too funny to keep reading.

[Odis]

I don't care how they spin it...it still sucks. When my wife and I moved in together, I convinced her to merge accounts with me and use the Profiles feature so we could save money. So she has already had to lose all her ratings and her queue once. Now I have to ask her to go through that again???

Thanks a lot, Netflix.

[Dave]

Correction to my comment above: I realize Netflix' margins are probably slim, so that only a fraction of subscriber fees are 'disposable', but still - are we really so inconsequential?

[Richard]

They need to be upfront about what the "replacement" is, tell us that we will be able to migrate our current profiles, and convince us that it is a viable alternative before announcing that they're going to eliminate such a useful feature. I have three profiles that are over three years old from the inception of the feature, complete with queues with over 100 disks each, as well as 100s of ratings and recommendations. Don't tell me that you're just going to scrap all of that unless you can convince me that A) you're going to replace it with something better, and B) that I can migrate all of this data. Otherwise you're just going to piss off and alienate a bunch of users of profiles. If they don't think that the feature was designed well and that it was confusing, then MAKE IT BETTER! Don't just scrap it and zap everyone's queues and ratings into cyberspace.

[Phil]

So why do I seem to always be part of a "small (and vocal) group"?? Several years ago NBC took a show called Star Trek off the air, those who liked the show were called a "small (and vocal) group". A certain retailer recently stopped carrying a certain product, we were called a "small (and vocal) group". The music industry would describe people who didn't like the music they were putting out as a "small (and vocal) group". 4 and 8 years ago we voted in a certain individual as president, anyone who oppised this was called a "small (and vocal) group". We went to war, those who disagreed were considered a "small (and vocal) group". A certain Reverand had a dream, his followers were called "small (and vocal) group". Well, I suppose if we're that small (and vocal) it won't make a difference when we downgrade or quit our accounts and go somewhere else!