« Netflix Signs New Release Pay-Window Deal with FilmDistrict | Main | Netflix API Strategy Webcast December 2nd at 10am PST »



Boo who....

The competition should step up or shut up.

Offer something that makes us want to pay for your services as well then.

All Hollywood does anyway is screw us the customers.

We bite the bullet and pay the expensive ticket prices and all that and it's never good enough. We fork our cash for the DVD or Blu-Ray only for a better edition to come out later.

They just have to find more & more ways to nickel & dime us.

Hollywood should not be allowed to tell us what to do.

We open our wallets to pay them for Entertainment we enjoy. If they are doing bad they are not doing the job right.

Times are changing and these big media companies needs to adept or die out.

We don't pay "support" for what we don't want too. Simple as that.


As Crow said, those companies need to offer an alternative to Netflix at a pricing model that consumers would want to pay.



That is not what they do. They try to kill the competition so they can continue as things were before. See how well that worked in the music industry? If they were to get a clue they could kill Netflix by bringing out their own service with more content at the same price. Instead they would want pay per view and it would be so locked down (DRM) that half the time it wouldn't work and they would want to charge you an additional fee for "premium" content. They seem to think $2-$5 a show is reasonable.


This reminds me how Blockbuster said movies by mail wouldn't succeed...

I was worried that Netflix might have problems with their slow start into streaming. It appeared that Hulu might corner the market until they got greedy with an overpriced Premium service.


I think Netflix has opened Pandora's box. I don't think it can be closed at this point and the studios are going to have to deal with it. Up until now, streaming video has been sub-par, sparse, and expensive, probably driven by the studios.(HULU is still dealing with this) I think there was a lot of ignorance from the consumer about what streaming could deliver. Netflix has changed that. I think a large number of consumers now see the possibilities of streaming video and realize that's what they want.


So they're colluding together to kill competition, doesn't this scream anti-competitive behavior?


This screams of collusion.


The big jump in streaming came about when Netflix offered it on more than just computers. Specifically, when it was added to Blu-Ray players, Wii, Playstation 3, and so on.

I am a great example of this. When it was only available on my computer, I watched 2 or 3 titles in total. Since I bought a Netflix-capable Blu-Ray player, my viewing has shot up to over 50 titles per month. And that's all because now I can watch Netflix on my television rather than my computer.


Ok, so Netflix understood it while nobody else did (especially the draconian studios). Well, now time to penalize Netflix! Makes total sense.


Stories like this one and the NYtimes one actually give me anxiety because I think Netflix streaming is pretty great at this moment in time and getting better every month. But what I fear are upcoming fractions where Time Waner builds their own crappy streaming service and Comcast another and you have to go back to subscribing to three or four of these services to have the rather wide range of options you already currently have with Netflix streaming.


Interesting set of articles. The studios are, as usual, a day late and a dollar short. The studios may have the content, however, with streaming through TV internet "Apps" the preferred future viewing method, the content is no good if the studios can't get the content to the audience at a price the viewer will pay. People don't want to pay outrageous prices for Cable/satellite movies on demand on their TV, and are quickly becoming used to internet streaming to their TVs using Netflix's subscription service.

People have been predicting the demise of Netflix for a decade now - Wall Street doesn't seem to be buying that prediction.

I never leave my couch to watch a movie - haven't been to a theater this century. If there's a movie I want to see I do the following. First I look to Netflix, either rental or streaming (most economical). Then I look to Blockbuster rental (next cheapest). Lastly, I look at TV movies on demand (way too expensive!).


All of you who are screaming "collusion" are forgetting that the government's dictionaries have been missing "collusion," "anti-competitive behavior," "price-fixing," "monopoly" and "Sherman Antitrust Act" for YEARS.


Hey, the studios let Netflix become what it is. If they don't like it, they can renogotiate in the future. The studios have too much to lose with Netflix.
Eventually, Netflix could be streaming everything. That means that consumers will not go to Best Buy and purchase DVDs or Blu Rays, which means the studios make no money other than what Netflix pays them.
I sense Netflix imploding in the near future, or moving to a pay per view system a la Amazon Video on Demand. The studios will not let them get away with what they are doing right now for much longer. We are all paying a flat fee and watching as much as we want. This has always had a too good to be true feeling to it. The end is in sight folks!

Chris M.

Pollardito and Josh I was saying that back when Warner Bros. first slapped the 30 day delay on Netflix and Redbox and no other company or pay per view. Frankly it makes me angry and sick to see commercials from companies touting their unfair advantage over Netflix and Redbox. Wonder if video game developers are going to got he same route with GameFly


Tough telling what the outcome of all this will be. NF movie streaming selection while better than a year ago is still full of thousands of "never-heard-of-it" titles. It's their TV content that has really taken off. I've been wondering for several years now how long these cheap subscription fees will last. I think the studios and networks are going to have a heck of a time putting genie back in the bottle, but I can definitely see price hikes down the road if we want to see more mainstream titles become available.

Couple this with internet providers wanting their piece of the pie due to increased bandwidth usage I think the total cost of receiving streams is going to go significantly northward. The consumer is caught square in the middle of a three way tug of war (NF, entertainment industry, internet providers). Our only hope is they work it out in such a way that content doesn't suffer and prices remain reasonable. That, I fear, may be expecting too much.


I'm curious as to how many people like NF streaming because it has all these obscure titles. Me and my coworkers love the fact that we can watch European, Asian and Latinamerican movies and then talk about them at work and make suggestions. As long as NF offers a robust selection of indie and foreign films, I'll be happy.

Perkins Cobb

The studios will not surrender their most popular content to Netflix for streaming. They'll either try to do it themselves and fail, or they'll prop up a competitor that will stream videos on their terms.

Probably none of that is a good thing, even though at this point I think Netflix deserves to fail as a streaming provider simply because it has settled for so much inferior content (I'm talking about image quality, not selection) in order to bulk up its volume.


A company deserves to fail because they don't meet your arbitrary bullshit standard of quality despite offering a service that millions of others use and, dare I say, enjoy?

Fuck you. God, it's people like you that make me hate Americans more and more every damned day.


@ Perkins Cobb

Last time I checked, the studios own all of the content. So how can you make the assumption that netflix settled for inferior content? I imagine that the studios would give NF more HD content at a much higher price. Would you be willing to pay more for it? With so many complaining about the latest NF price increase, most won't.


How did the studios survive before home video & rentals?


They will never do this to Gamefly because it takes over 30 days just to get a title returned to you.


Bah, the studios need to be protected from themselves. When the Starz deal was made, netflix wasn't even at the point where it touted 20% of its members streamed 15 minutes for the month. Now all of a sudden Starz was ripped off because they only get 15 cents per subscriber. They got a lot more than that when they signed the deal, and they only offered SD programming which some won't even watch. All the studios who sign deals with Netflix will experience this. Ohh Epix got a billion dollars, blah blah, just wait until Netflix surpasses Comcast, goes global and has 250 million subscribers world wide. The studios will make more money than they have ever made, and we will still be paying under $20 a month.


I wonder how long it will be before studios pay off the Obama Administration / Democratic Party enough for them to bring a bogus antitrust suit against Netflix like the Clinton administration did with Microsoft.


It's a shame, Perkins, that you have such a gift for prognostication, but your moral code won't let you bet against a company (at least an American one).


@Jorge "...how many people like NF streaming because it has all these obscure titles"

Count me in. In fact, that is my primary reason to continue my NF account (DVD's or streaming.) I have my Blockbuster account for the typical Hollywood TV/movies.

Edward R Murrow

If the content owners really want to contain Netflix, then the content owners can just let the current contracts expire and refuse to license any content to Netflix for streaming going forward.

Streaming video is trivial; not sure why the content owners haven't done this themselves yet.

When this happens, Netflix reverts to the DVD by mail biz model.


Ten years from now we may look back to 2010 and realize that was when the getting was good.

When you can get content digitally, the amount you spend on physical product declines, sometimes dramatically. I keep precise records of my spending and can tell you I spent $5,500 on music CDs between 1997 and 2004. Since 2005 I've spent all of $81.

I'm not opposed to buying physical product but I can't cope with the pricing for what you receive. How can I justify buying another music CD for $12 when I already have 600+ discs? I cannot devote enough time to that additional CD to give up my $12, not when $12 can buy a month and a half of unlimited Netflix streaming. Making matters worse is that I purchased about 80% of the CDs before I've even listened to the music on the disc, i.e. purchase was based on genre or a band's previous output, recommendations, etc. So naturally a bunch of CDs I paid for are stinkers.

Now you tell me, how consumer-friendly is that?

What I want and what everyone wants is a subscription model where you pay some flat fee every month, and you can watch or listen to anything, unlimited. If you stop paying, you lose access to everything. Doing this is completely feasible from a technical perspective but it is incredibly disruptive to existing content-provider business models.

The problem for the studios is we took a sip from the Grail and we ain't giving it up, we're not going back to buying $20 DVDs every week and spending hundreds of dollars each year for physical product that largely sits and collects dust.

So now we are in the Gravy Train Years where $10/month gets you all the streaming you want and a DVD rental delivered each week (if you desire). How great is that? Since I am spending nothing on physical product it frees up my budget for other items, like housing, energy, food, health care and all those other things that keep rising faster than our incomes.


Does anyone see the long-term outlook on digital distribution? The studios would love to make more digital deals with several providers. What they are doing now is to allow other companies use their own cash to try different business models and technologies out to see what will provide a profitable model. The studios own the content, always will. They are looking for a distribution model that will work. If that is Netflix, then fine. There are other players in the game (Microsoft, Amazon, Google, etc.) who will also play the game. The studios should license (this is the most important word here)their content and allow these other players pay for the trials to discover what really works. Patience and short-term money on the table will pay off is spades over the long term. This is just the beginning of the electronic distribution business. Things will get better for everyone, we just need for the right model to be built and acted upon.


Eh I use other digital rental places besides Netflix. Like Vudu & Amazon. Usually on weekends depending on the deals they have. Sometimes RedBox.

I really don't see what these studios are worried about.

Instead of trying to contain Netflix they should offer some other services....Or help the others out too?

When will Music labels start bitching about services like Mog which offers all you can listen (stream or download) for $10 a Month.

Or Game companies with GameFly or On-Live.


The flip side to how "consumer-friendly" digital distribution is would be the fact that, one day, in a world of nothing but digital distribution, the companies could control literally everything, from the production to consumption.

Look at eBooks. With Kindle, you don't own the book. They can retract it at any time. First sale doctrine doesn't apply - you can't sell it to your friends or to a resale shop when you're done. You can't loan it to your friend for however long you/they want. You also pay only slightly less for far less of a product. The product is controlled, from start to finish, by the company. You have no say in anything, and no other competing choices, because everything's digital distribution and they've locked everyone who won't play by their rules out.

Imagine this with movies. With music. Yes, NOW it's an impossibility. But what if the music industry or film industry decided to play ball with their sights on the far future? Going all gung-ho with digital distribution. Allowing movies or music to ONLY be rented or "sold" digitally at a discounted price (as with iTunes or Amazon). One day everything would be digital. With DRM. You can't just make a copy of your CD, DVD or blu-ray. You can't just break the DRM, because it's illegal or impossible. Imagine fifty years from now when you can get all the music and movies you want from the 20th century from "BitTorrent" (or its 2060 equivalent) but nothing past 2020 is available because the studios and labels wised up, played ball and then trapped us behind DRM and digital distribution.

Physical product has its advantages. For one, I own it. So do digital products. Just be careful what you wish for. If you think our government would ever protect us from the above, then you're kidding yourself.



I like Netflix mainly because of the non-mainstream stuff. Most Hollywood movies/TV I can get elsewhere, but I finally subscribed to Netflix four or five years ago primarily because of their deep selection. I also thought the unlimited streaming for a flat fee was too good to believe. Hope Netflix can keep that model going and not move to a $5 or $6 a pop method like my Comcast on demand.


Lol @BP. The sky is falling...

I think we'll be okay with digital distribution. Ownership is overrated, its all about the experience.

By the way Orwell got it wrong. Big Brother is incompetent. Its Little Brother you need to watch out for.


These tards just don't get it!?!?
That is the Studios, and any Network that produces video content for the public to consume.

The public has evolved to waiting to watch movies until the DVD comes out. The reason? It may not be worth seeing in the theatre so I'll wait for it to come out on DVD. So to thwart that consumer choice by manipulating a market share that never existed. The DVD purchaser gets to watch the DVD before the renter, which is fine and dandy; I can wait. But, and yes there's a butt. The next tactic is to eliminate the special features of the rental DVD's. The special features availability would be on the purchased DVD. Hello, is anybody there?

Is this Effiing greedy or what???

Who's running these organizations anyhow? If they want to make money they need to get on board and work deals with Netflix to establish a window for streaming. The cable and satellite networks won't lose everything, there the only ones that provide the access.

So, what's the solution?

Make better programing and when you have better programing don't pull it because the audience isn't smart enough or too smart for the advertising you fill the slot with. Or because you spent billions making a crap movie that's only good for one viewing. What happened to art anyway? Do you guys remember art?

I'm amazed at how freaking stupid the so called Executives of the Studios and Networks are and how stupid they think we are. Without us they have know business and allot of featureless DVD's. So my advise for all the Studios and Networks is simple; Snap Out Of It Boy's and Girls and smell the coffee.

Here's one other point of interest why didn't the Studios and Networks get uptight when large screen Televisions priced for everyone. What did they think? Cheap TV's Cheap viewers will stay home and watch it on the big screen with there ultra surround sound. Unbelievable.

The comments to this entry are closed.


Third-Party Netflix Sites