« Cramer on Why Netflix Stock Dropped So Far So Fast | Main | Google TV to Get Updated Starting This Weekend »

Comments

Walt D in LV

Near the end of the video, the reporter asks about the 800,000 customers Netflix lost this past quarter. I'm not scoffing at 800,000 lost customers, but does anyone else but me realize that Netflix also gained over 1 million more customers from outside the U.S., and more importantly, at the end of 3rd Quarter 2010, Netflix hit 16.9 million customers.
So, to be at 23.79 million just a year later is absolutely incredible and something to be proud of.

Netflix messed up, certainly, but nothing that won't be overcome.

Mathew Halpern

Netflix's problems are an illusion. They still have the most compelling and best product out there. Amazon doesn't compare because the have no UI, its terrible, I am a prime member and have never streamed anything from amazon. Hulu doesn't compare because of it's freemium model is confusing to consumers, what can I watch for free, what costs money? The whole thing is terrible. Netflix is simple and they keep getting better. I just bought a shit load of Netflix stock. If you have any money, do it now before people come to their senses.

paul

Netflix raised its prices so it could get more streaming content? Then why, so soon after the price raise, did I sign into Netflix last night and find that fully 10% of my instant queue is going to disappear on Nov 1?

Jenkins also says "After all, there is nothing wrong with hiking prices on customers who aren't carrying their weight." Agreed, but Netflix was profitable prior to the price increase. So it's pretty clear the customers were pulling their weight and then some. Now we're pulling the weight for Netflix's international expansion too.

It's a shame the media is so single-mindedly blaming this on the price hike. Personally I don't mind the price hike nearly as much as I mind the decreased streaming options, removed features, horrible new interface on the web site, etc. Netflix isn't just charging more, it's also giving less.

geeze

2 titles out of 125 are expiring for me

what the hell are you complaining about?

"Netflix isn't just charging more, it's also giving less."

they've added a ton of stuff in the past month...

your complaints are not valid

jheartney

Netflix expires stuff all the time, and adds more titles all the time. Good site for tracking the new stuff:

http://instantwatcher.com/titles/new

I check it every few days, especially at the beginning of a month. I'm never short of stuff to watch.

justin

i agree that their new website is awful. I dropped to streaming only anyway because I usaully let the DVD sit around while watching other stuff. Streaming has been a VERY nice complement to my tv service. Wouldn't give it up for any other current option out there (and I have explored them and tried them).

al

hope it stays in buisness .
thats all we have for entertainment and i will never go back to satellite

ts

Netflix made some missteps, pissed off a lot of customers, looked silly in the media, got a black eye and took their lumps. Hopefully it served to wake them up and get them back in the game.

All that said streaming is still a phenomenal service that isn't going away anytime soon. As long as they keep the price reasonable for what you're getting, the company will remain successful for years to come.

Jamie Abbott

Default

I Like My netflix since I don't have TV and we have had it since 2002, I feel kinda bad I haven't cancelled because I value the 1400 or so ratings I have and expected a reversal of the really bad decision they made. I am a very profitable customer because I don't maximise my at home movies by watching and returning quickly but we too have seriously considered dropping them if this doesn't get fixed.
what this doesn't address is the cost of a high speed connection and they have made the at home movies even more crippled by asking and extra fee for blue ray which don't stream . Hulu is doing OK but I am dismayed by the fact both Hulu and CBS require a Dish network log in to watch the next day . now if I were paying for commercial free I would be all over that but its not they have just as many if not more commercials than over the air and the nonsense on TV isn't worth what the asking price is.

GK

Netflix has been hacked tonight....I only came to this blog to see if I could find something out about it. For the past 45 minutes it has been redirected to tvfanfrenzy.com. I was in the middle of streaming a movie and it just stopped and redirected.

MA

I prefer Netflix content and prices to 2.99-6.99 per movie at Amazon. (Prime offers very little of interest, which is probably why it's free.)

jesus ramone

mcdonald's cheeseburgers went up from $1.00 to $1.19. i hate that.

rjm

redbox price increase:

New Daily DVD Rental Price

Redbox is making an announcement about its prices today, and we want to make sure that you hear it from us first.

Starting on Monday, October 31, the daily rental charge for DVDs will change to $1.20 a day.* The price change is due to rising operating expenses, including new increases in debit card fees. Daily rental charges for Blu-ray™ Discs and video games won't change.** Additional-day charges for DVDs rented before 10/31 won't be affected, either.

In order to make the transition easier, Redbox will discount the first day of all online DVD rentals to $1.00 from 10/31 through 11/30. Additional rental days will be $1.20.***

If you have any questions, please visit redbox.com/pricechange. There, we've provided additional information.

This marks our first price change in more than eight years as we work hard to keep prices low for our customers.

Thank you,

Redbox

Gobotron

Haha, I've been expecting Redbox to raise prices.
The fact that Netflix cancelled the Qwikster plan proves the company will at least correct mistakes, despite making a stupid one in the first place. I actually jumped from one-out (with streaming) to two-out as a form of appreciation when they ditched that idea. The positive stuff like adding more shows and deals like the "Red State" one outweigh the few negative things that have happened. Any alternatives are just more costly or more inconvenient.

GeeEmm

The Redbox hike was in the 16% range, not 60%, so not such a big deal - though I rarely use it, because selection is so limited. And it always will be, as there are built-in limitations to the vending machine model. I still prefer NF for DVDs. Like many who stayed with NF, I'm glad that Hastings ditched the ridiculous Netsplit plan. General streaming still can't beat a physical disc for quality and clarity.

I am curious: how is the Red State deal a deal? It can be streamed from several online sites, in addition to Netflix. Wonder how much NF forked out for that 'exclusive' acquisition . . .

http://www.amazon.com/Red-State/dp/B005KGPC4S/ref=sr_1_1?s=instant-video&ie=UTF8&qid=1319482002&sr=1-1

http://www.blockbuster.com/download/catalog/movieDetails/494411

http://www.vudu.com/movies/#!content/207886/Red-State

C'mon NF, don't feed us a line, hoping it will gloss over the mistakes. (Especially a line with such limited appeal!) Just work on delivering the best service you can, make the best deals you can afford, and maybe, just maybe, listen to the needs/requests of your subscribers from time to time.

GeeEmm

Sorry. Don't know why I suddenly became math-impaired. (I'll blame it on the headcold.) Redbox increase is clearly 20%, not 16% - don't know where that number came from.

Art Artistry

You're comparing Netflix including the movie into a 7.99 monthly service that lets you watch it as much as you want to paying 9.99 to watch it over a 24 hour period on Amazon, a 3.99 1 time watch on Blockbuster and 3.99 if you want crappy SD watch on Vudu? I think you're missing the point entirely. Try watching Red State and The Fighter on any of the 4 services in question, how much will it cost you. Now add Gulliver's Travels and Captain America. I bet Netflix is the cheapest of all of those.

Gobotron

How was the "Red State" deal a deal, someone asked? I almost paid the $10 to watch it through Amazon but held off and then it popped up on Netflix streaming and DVD where I'm already paying a membership fee. A lot of other Netflix users surely did the same.

Stuart Malan

Netflix may not be doomed but it does have a very serious problem that is almost completely out of its hands. This article does a good job of examining Netflix's streaming content problem.

http://blog.thebriz.org/2011/10/netflix-streaming-a-bad-deal-for-netflix

Quick summary for those who don't want to read it: Netflix needs better streaming content, so they raise their prices. However because they raised their prices the studios have also raised prices for their licenses.

So blame the greedy studios. I think to get good streaming content Netflix has to make it so studios are gaining enough that they'll charge less.

GeeEmm

I meant how is Red State a deal for Netflix, which has billed the deal as an exclusive one - meaning they get to be the only company with streaming rights - in the US.

"... available now exclusively to watch instantly in the US on Netlix ..."

Clearly, it is not.

If those are the kinds of 'deals' NF is making, no wonder it is in hot water.

Art Artistry

I guess I look at streaming and Pay Per View as different things. Streaming would be netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime, Blockbuster's new thing, and from what I understand Crackle. Also most on demand things with your cable or satellite that are included in your plan and you don't pay a per use fee for.

GeeEmm

Perhaps you are right about that, AA. But I do think it's kind of a semantics game. And misleading. Content on ppv sites is streamed, just like it is on subscription (unlimited) sites. 'Exclusive' is meaningless in such contexts. It's like when networks use the word 'premiering' to announce a film or program in their lineup that everyone has seen many times over elsewhere. A premiere is a first time performance, a maiden performance, if you will, and when used in the context of per/network showings, it becomes a non-distinguishing term, something you tune out. Who is ever impressed when they turn on the TV and hear "Premiering on XYZ: The Wizard of Oz"?

I doubt that anyone who doesn't have a NF subscription will sign up because of the Red State deal, when they can easily see it by going to the nearest Red Box for a buck (or buck-twenty, now). Those who do have NF aren't going to be that impressed, overall, with such a deal. Anyone who is queued up to watch it probably doesn't care where else it is, or isn't, available. They are just glad it's now an instant (and DVD and BluRay) option on NF.

In the end, I don't think it's about who has the most 'exclusive' - and therefore most costly (great for studios, potentially crippling for video rental services) - content at all, but who has the best selection of content.

Art Artistry

By your logic, you're telling us that no content Netflix gets is that big of a deal. because it's not going to bring in new customers, and the customers who already have the service don't know enough about whats going on to think its worth it?

I don't think Netflix is all of a sudden going to start making crippling investments in content. They've always been smart with how they handle that. You've got a very glass half empty view of things here.

I would also say that the premier of a show moving down a tier in the network ladder is notable. If you see a show go from HBO to FX or TNT thats noteable because thats a new demographic that it is available to.

GeeEmm

Never said no content was that big a deal, or that no content would bring in new customers. Consider, for instance, that NF promised subscribers The Wonder Years was going to begin streaming on March 31. That was hugely popular and made a lot of members very happy. But, it didn't actually become available until October - a full six months after the announcement, and after it became available on Amazon. If NF had made an exclusive deal for TWY (not saying it should have, this is just an example), then it might have had a measurable positive impact on both current and prospective subscribers.

Of course, not all content will have the same appeal for all members - which is why variety is key over exclusivity, in most cases.

As far as making crippling investments, well, time will tell. The Dreamworks deal, which is just for the animated features, was very, very pricey, and may have upped the ante, as far as contract costs, such that all video rental services will have a hard time paying the (studio) pipers. Of course, maybe that deal will prove, in time, to have been a very shrewd one. Too soon to know.

I concede that my view of the premiering of content may have been too shortsighted, and I agree that moving down the rungs is beneficial to both networks and viewers - though I have more often seen it done laterally: basic cable and satellite channels offering the same content at different times/seasons, some of which may have already been available on subsidiary, or even local, networks. But then again, I'm older, so I've been around long enough to have seen a lot of content from a lot of sources . . .

mrmanmac

I believe the fact that content costs are going up is less likely to hurt netflix as it will HBO, Showtime, and the traditional pay TV channels in the future. Imagine, HBO has to pay more when their current contract with studios runs out because if they don't Netflix will. HBO has been losing subscribers, and adding costs for years. I paid more for HBO in 1980 than I do now, and back then it only had one channel, and didn't have to share any revenue with the cable company. HBO GO is a new service they had to add in order to compete at NO extra cost to the subscriber. How are they paying for all this?

The comments to this entry are closed.

Sponsors

Third-Party Netflix Sites