51–60 of 164 posts
That's where the future is heading, me thinks. And yes I have Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, etc. Sure the cost pretty much equals what I would pay for cable but I prefer this way.
Redbox likes to advertise "not on netflix for years" on certain titles.
And they are right.
For someone who never goes to theaters like me, I hope redbox stays in business.
Don't know if the catalogue is the same here in the UK than in the US, but in the UK Netflix is only good for TV shows. The movie offering is very light. The other thing is the lack of offline viewing, which is useful when travelling. The media industry is so backward. I can't believe most of them still live in the 90s and these problems haven't been solved yet.
Netflix has a different catalogue for each country they serve.
Even netflix support don't realise this.
The only thing that the TV networks might have had going was to produce their own drama. They didn't - they just produced home improvement shows in the 90s, and really bad reality TV in the 2000s. Very little in the way of drama, and what was created was dross.
So, goodbye TV! Hello Netflix!
Don't know if the catalogue is the same here in the UK than in the US, but in the UK Netflix is only good for TV shows. The movie offering is very light. The other thing is the lack of offline viewing, which is useful when travelling. The media industry is so backward. I can't believe most of them still live in the 90s and these problems haven't been solved yet.
Brit here wondering how this shift within the industry will affect the BBC. We own a screen, Netflix subscription and Chromecast, and do not pay for a TV License. While this setup is not even remotely commonplace yet, it could be a real threat over the next decade, especially as iPlayer usage is free without owning a License. I would like to see the TV License flipped on its head: you pay a subscription that gets you…
The BBC has other sources of income too. Here in Australia, there is a ton of BBC content on Netflix Australia, which presumably Netflix paid the BBC for (eg River, for which Netflix acquired exclusive international streaming rights: http://deadline.com/2015/10/netflix-bbc-river-stellan-skarsg... ) In Australia, our ABC is funded directly out of general taxes, rather than an explicit TV License. I can imagine Britain…
While the BBC may have broadcast River, Endemol Shine Group has the distribution rights, which is who Netflix would have paid.
I don't know all the details, but unless River was a wholly internal BBC production, I'd suggest Endemol probably contributed to the production budget in return for the distribution rights.
This happens with a lot of BBC programmes. The majority of the rights reside with BBC Worldwide, a wholly owned commercial subsidiary of the BBC. BBC Worldwide bids on distribution rights like any other TV sales and distribution company. Any profits from BBC Worldwide's activities are invested back in the public BBC, thus reducing licence fee rises to some extent.
However, other companies like Endemol and All3Media also produce programmes broadcast on various BBC channels or work with independent production companies to fund productions, in return for distribution rights, regardless of where it is broadcast domestically.
BBC Worldwide has also been investing in independent production companies in order to increase their distribution catalogue.
Disclosure: I worked for BBC Worldwide for 9 years and then ran my own post-production company for a few more years.
So here's the catch 22. The Hollywood content producers and deliverers won't just sit back and let Netflix and Amazon eat their entire lunch. They will fight back, and presumably with their own streaming services. So we will have a proliferation (more so than now) of services to get specific content through. Usually this is a good thing. People want choice and choice breeds competition which is good for consumers. Ho…
Eventually, content producers will realize that their delivery is usually horrible, and causes a lot of pain for consumers (I have to pay Comcast $300/month to watch the occasional football game? Sorry, not watching football.) and come up for better, more convenient ways for consumers to pay for the content they consume.
Don't know if the catalogue is the same here in the UK than in the US, but in the UK Netflix is only good for TV shows. The movie offering is very light. The other thing is the lack of offline viewing, which is useful when travelling. The media industry is so backward. I can't believe most of them still live in the 90s and these problems haven't been solved yet.
>The media industry is so backward. I can't believe most of them still live in the 90s and these problems haven't been solved yet. Part of the problem is the broken status of international copyright law and the many incompatible local laws and regulations. If the international community could at least settle for an standard approach to digital distribution over the internet, the world would be a happier place for con…
Content publishers make separate deals with distributors (cable & satellite) along their service-area borders, and can therefore sell the same content multiple times over to different regions, most likely charging pricing based on income levels and audience size, etc.. And no doubt a lot of these deals are exclusive, or at the very least timed exclusives..
I know this isn't news to anyone, but I feel like this whole "sell the same thing over and over" must have a much bigger impact on the very slow internationalization of media, rather than any kind of legal hurdles.
To me, the absence of commercials definitely makes the experience far more enjoyable, and I can better relate to the stories and characters when the experience isn't constantly interrupted.
What is the purpose of this article? Was it really some random person SO EXCITED about a video streaming company? I struggle to find a thesis here. Do people need an entire essay that just says "Netflix is making money and producing content"?
Three-day holiday weekend. There are currently two separate posts on the front-page about 1999's "Age of Empires 2" being a nice video game.