« Netflix Fires Call Center Worker for Stealing Customer Credit Cards | Main | Netflix New Releases for May 10th, 2011 »


Osama Hastings

One great big giant wallstreet fraud!!!

Osama Hastings

classic Netflix deception

netflix filed sec DEF 14A on wednesday 4/20/2011 -- "notice of annual meeting of stockholders to be held on june 3, 2011".

it includes a stock ownership table -- "The following table sets forth certain information known to the Company with respect to beneficial ownership of our common stock as of April 5, 2011 by (i) each stockholder that the Company knows is the beneficial owner of more than 5% of our common stock..."

first line of table:

FMR LLC 4,247,249 shares 8.09%

the world already knows that FMR filed a 13G on friday 4/8/2011 indicating nflx position of 1,431,145 shares, 2.7%. 13G was signed on 4/6/2011.

gee netflix, "as of April 5" huh? that's fascinating! you happened to choose a cutoff date of the day before your largest shareholder dumped their position. woot woot you guys rock!

Reed-- do you think anyone is missing any of this? do you realize the degree to which this material information impacts shareholders?

complete garbage.

nflx DEF 14A: http://secwatch.com/filings/view.jsp?for...


I've been trying to figure something in my head, and maybe you can help me out, yeah? When a person is insane, as you clearly are, do you know that you're insane? Maybe you're just sitting arou... oh shit, I all ready posted this last year. Gotta think of another crazy litmus test quote fast... OK, got one!

Describe in single words only the good things that come into your mind about... your mother.


Bob E.

with apologies to Mike for feeding the troll - I still don't know what the point is of "Howdy Doody" posting here, but I'm overly sensitive to that timing - on April 20 NF posted FMR held 8% of it's stock (as of Apr 5), but on Apr 6 it only actually held 2.7% WTH? - based on the whole Berkshire Hathaway mess this seems fishy. And, well, it's almost on topic.

Osama Hastings

Another quality comment by BP. Good Job!!!

Osama Hastings

excellent article on Netflix being a $5 stock by next year and the failure of Canada expansion.



Netflix is doomed! Dooooooooooooooooooooooooomed!

Doomed to be loved by consumers that is.

Osama Hastings

We'll see once the price hikes start. Should be by 4th quarter.


This guy says it's a 3 dollar stock at most:

Was he right?

Osama Hastings

Just a game guy who likes stream? I call bull&%$#


You would be an expert in bullshit, now wouldn't you, fluffy?



And here we go.


What I don't get, Osama, is what you get out of this. These comments aren't index by search engines so the only people who will read them are the ones who read this blog, and you're just annoying us. So do you get off on annoying people, or maybe you have some problem with Netflix so you're venting and it makes you feel all better? Or is there something else? I don't buy the "saving widows and orphans from losing their life savings" BS.


"Just a game guy who likes stream? I call bull&%$#"

You got me Jolly. I also like 4chan, whiskey, and gamefly.


@IND This is fraud plain and simple that's why. Why would I sit bye and not speak up?

Because Anon says he won't respond no more to me but just can't seem to resist?
Because BP likes to try and name call me away?

These two are the trolls of this site. At least I am responding about the company and the lack of morals of Netflix execs. these two only respond to me :}


I fail to see how institutional investor positions are even remotely related to employee stock option compensation options.

The Netflix Cash/stock options plan seems well thought out for their line of business. Stock options tend to motivate creative thinking by employees in a business where timely innovation (technical, contracts with content providers, website user interface, etc.) is crucial. Also I would think the stock option approach would free up more cash for buying content, which isn't getting any cheaper.

Osama Hastings

@ CJ Let's see insider selling, dillution of the stock for two reasons off the top of my head.



There are two[0] things, IMHO, that make Netflix's cash/SOP offering different from ones I've participated in before:

1. You figure out how much of your salary to invest in the SOP on a yearly basis; by default, you won't be investing in the SOP at all. In most other organizations I've worked, you're offered cash and SOP separately (e.g. "your salary will be $100,000 and you'll be granted 95,000 options");

2. There are no cliff grant periods. In other companies, you won't get anything if you leave before the first year; at Netflix, you start immediately. Of course, in other companies, this is used as a retention tool, so I've seen people get a new stock grant every year, because that means they won't get any of it if they leave within a year of the latest grant, so they're motivated to stick around;

3. Option price is determined on a monthly basis. I personally hate this -- I fondly remember getting a stock grant at Macromedia at around $11; three years later, the options I was getting from that grant were still at $11, but the stock was trading at $100. The monthly stock option price adjustment saves us from significant downward volatility, but -- irrespective of "Netflix will be a $2 stock with eight subscribers" fearmongering -- I don't tend to be a big believer that we WILL see significant downward volatility on the stock (it admittedly has been a little volatile over the last few months, but that just means that it's likely that if we stuck to a "options are priced at what they traded at on the day you joined" approximation, nobody who joined Netflix over the last few months would be swimming in stock value yet. That's not a terrible thing).

BTW, sorry -- just realized this response is off-topic to this "OMG insider trading" thread.


[0] for a very large value of "two"

Osama Hastings

Reed Hastings accounting gimmicks go back decades...
Shareholder Class Action Filed Against Netflix, Inc. by the Law Firm of Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP.

Publication Date: 27-JUL-04

BALA CYNWYD, Pa., July 27 /PRNewswire/ -- The following statement was issued today by the law firm of Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP:

Notice is hereby given that a class action lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of Netflix, Inc. ("Netflix" or the "Company") from October 1, 2003 through July 15, 2004, inclusive (the "Class Period").

If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests with respect to these matters, please contact Schiffrin & Barroway, LLP (Marc A. Topaz, Esq. or Darren J. Check, Esq.) toll free at 1-888-299-7706 or 1-610-667-7706, or via e-mail at info@sbclasslaw.com.

The complaint charges Netflix, Reed Hastings and W. Barry McCarthy Jr. with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. More specifically, the Complaint alleges that the Company failed to disclose and misrepresented the following material adverse facts which were known to defendants or recklessly disregarded by them: (1) that the Company knew or recklessly disregarded the fact that the Company's growth was adversely affected by substantial customer attrition; (2) that in order to camouflage the high rate of customer attrition, defendants manipulated the Company's churn rate; and (3) that as a consequence of the foregoing, defendants lacked a reasonable basis for their positive statements about the Company's growth and progress.

On July 15, 2004, Netflix reported results for the second quarter ended June 30, 2004. The press release disclosed the true number of customer cancellations suffered by the Company. Following the announcement, shares of Netflix fell $8.98 per share or 28.06 percent, on July 16, 2004, to close at $23.02 per share.

Plaintiff seeks to recover damages...


As I mentioned before the unusual qrt to qrt management by NFLX of certain P&L lines points to EPS games in any given qrt.....

The case revolved around allegations that Netflix had been misleading subscribers about how quickly it delivered movies to subscribers until Jan 15, 2005 — the date that the company made a little-noticed change to its terms of use.

The revision disclosed for the first time that Netflix sometimes delays shipments to frequent renters so it can give higher priority to customers who keep their movies longer.
Advertise | AdChoices

The practice, derided as “throttling” by its critics, helps boost Netflix’s profits because the company charges a flat monthly fee and provides postage-paid envelopes for DVD returns.

The system means Netflix makes more money from infrequent renters and risks losing money on customers who return DVDs quickly so they can get the next movie on their online wish lists.


Osama Hastings

insider selling numbers on these stock options...


Osama Hastings

Here's some more insight into Reed Hastings company...

Between July 22 and September 9, 2004, seven purported securities class action suits were filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California against the Company and, in the aggregate, Reed Hastings, W. Barry McCarthy, Jr., and Leslie J. Kilgore. These class action suits were consolidated in January 2005, and a consolidated complaint was filed on February 24, 2005. The complaint alleges violations of certain federal securities laws, seeking unspecified damages on behalf of a class of purchasers of the Company’s common stock between October 1, 2003 and October 14, 2004. The plaintiffs allege that the Company made false and misleading statements and omissions of material facts based on its disclosure regarding churn and delivery speed, claiming alleged violations by each named defendant of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder and alleged violations by certain of its officers of Section 20A of Securities Exchange Act of 1934. On June 28, 2005, the Court dismissed the action with leave to amend. Plaintiffs did so amend, and the Company filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint. Following a hearing on that motion, the Court dismissed the action with prejudice on November 18, 2005.

On October 19, 2004, Doris Staehr and Steve Staehr, shareholders claiming to be acting on the Company’s behalf, filed a shareholder derivative suit in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Santa Clara against certain officers and certain current and former members of the board of directors, specifically Reed Hastings, Barry McCarthy, Thomas R. Dillon, Leslie J. Kilgore, Richard Barton, Timothy Haley, Jay Hoag, A. Robert Pisano, Michael Schuh and Michael Ramsay. The plaintiffs claim that the named defendants breached their fiduciary duties by allowing allegedly false and misleading statements to be made regarding, among other things, churn. They also claim that the named defendants illegally traded the Company’s stock while in possession of material nonpublic information. In addition, the plaintiffs assert claims for abuse of control, gross mismanagement, waste and unjust enrichment. The lawsuit seeks, on the Company’s behalf, unspecified compensatory and enhanced damages, disgorgement of profits earned through alleged insider trading, recovery of attorneys’ fees and costs, and other relief. Following a request for dismissal by the plaintiffs, the Court dismissed the action without prejudice on January 18, 2006.


You seriously need to fuck this guy up, Mike. You had to moderate your blog seriously once before, it's obvious you need to do it again.

If that means banning me as well because I don't play as nicely as others then so be it. For the health of this blog, its commentator populace and the free discourse contained within, it's time you did something about jv42/fluffy/Osama/etc.



He hasn't gotten nearly as bad as Manuel yet, but it is really irritating. He shouldn't be allowed to spam *every* thread. If only there were some way to suppress off-topic posts.


I happen to think Jolly makes a lot of comments that I both agree with and hadn't thought about. BP really doesn't add a whole lot to this site.


Agreed you should ban BP after being asked to stop he still makes innappropriate comments. At least the other guy makes comments but is somewhat respectful. I would never allow any of my children to read this site knowing this guy is lurking on here.


Here's a good question for you... Why did Jay Hoag (NFLX exec) just dumped $2 million worth of shares into the open market...Why is he selling????


BP if you looked at the topic it's about Netflix's financials so I would say Jolly is on topic and once again you are being a giant douche!!!

New Netflix website


@ totrue;

If you're talking about the topic of this thread it's not about Netflix's financial's, it's about the unusual compensation that Netflix gives it's employees.

I do agree with your "douche" comment though.


@ Tester




Congratulations BP, you've made a post where you didn't make personal attacks.


Do you make a habit of getting butthurt by what people on the internet say? It's probably unhealthy.

Whether you like it or not I contribute to this community. I have no problem interacting with members who are not out and out trolls or overly sensitive girly men.

Still, I accept that some people don't like what I write, which is why I said that if it takes me getting banned for fluffy to also go away, so be it. Not trying to be a martyr, but there won't be any discussion community for me to participate in anyway if Mike continues to let fluffy do his best to destroy it.

This is Gorgeous, signing off.



I banned myself Bp!! But i had to say one thing you need to seek help you are a moron!! You just sit there and make these foolish remarks what a jerk get a life you moron and stop making people sick! I have stopped and will never make a remark again! I was wrong to go after peolpe with what I hate streaming! I still like to read this post and will keep reading!


JV42--if you've stopped why are you still posting?

I wish BP would clean up his language and not make personal attacks, but I think he's got some valid and insightful points.

Very tired of Osama/fluffy cut and pasting lengthy articles instead of just stating an opinion; s/he obviously has some kind of issues with NF and is on a personal vendetta.

Still think this site is great for NF news; you go, Mike.


BP is a troll cut and dry. He hasn't had a thing to say about anything but his personal vendetta.



Do you get yourself off by trying to act like a big, bad man on the internet? You really seem to have a complex you need to deal with.

Word of caution, don't try doing to someone in person what you do to some others here because if you do they will probably wind up in jail for what they do to you.


BP is a troll.
"Not trying to be a martyr," No, your not trying to be anything but an annoyance.


People used have respect for BP now he's just an obnoxious cartoon character with nothing of value to add.


@ Tester

No, I get myself off by having sex with my wife.


The comments to this entry are closed.


Third-Party Netflix Sites