Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Netflix plans to spend $8B to make its library 50 percent original by 2018

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 82 posts

Re: Netflix plans to spend $8B to make its library 50 percent original by 2018

#51

Post by deegles »

dcole2929 wrote: post #15

I think it's important to note that this is not by choice, but rather the only path left to Netflix now that studios have realized the value of their catalogs to streaming. Netflix originally made a bunch of content deals that made them the sole streamer of entire backlogs of syndicated material. It worked out great for them and pretty decently for the studios too, but after Netflix's success the studios now realize…

What I don't understand is why Netflix never released a "white label" streaming service for studios. Yes, it's a crappier experience for the consumer to have to subscribe to N different services, but Netflix could have made a ton of revenue hosting everything. Maybe they still could.

Re: Netflix plans to spend $8B to make its library 50 percent original by 2018

#52

Post by kenhwang »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #40
hyperhopper wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is though, is that by doing this it is no longer the service that originally attracted many users: a one stop service to watch the things I want to watch. It is just becoming the internet equivalent of an unlimited on-demand cable channel.

True, but the reality is: Disney is going their own way. HBO, DC, CBS are all going their own way. The idea of a "one stop shop", also known as a monopoly doesn't make sense as soon as the market is large enough for multiple players. Netflix doesn't want to pay the prices they'd have to in order to remain a one-stop shop, it certainly isn't practical at $9.99 a subscription. There's no way the $100 a month cable subs…

HBO is owned by WB, DC is leveraging WB to build their streaming service. Disney and WB both have a stake in Hulu.

So the realistic remaining players after the dust settles would be Disney+Hulu, CBS, Netflix, and Amazon. And of those 4, CBS lacks the capital or content to compete with the other 3 and given their relatively friendly relationship with WB, I can see them integrating into the Disney/Hulu heavyweight.

Re: Netflix plans to spend $8B to make its library 50 percent original by 2018

#53

Post by paulcole »

AFNobody wrote: post #36
Afforess wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right, but I am not sure this is the end. We are entering a "streaming content desert" where every content-maker tries to make their own Netflix. Consumers will buy subscriptions to the top 3, at best. Most probably won't go beyond Amazon Prime and Netflix. In five or ten years, when the data finally rolls in that these disparate services are not making anything, have shoddy reviews from hastily-coded backends…

The hilarious thing is this is going to drive people back to engaging in piracy on various levels (i.e. ripping streaming shows for personal use and/or organized piracy groups). The main reason for piracy's decline is $20/month for a couple streaming services is less hassle for most people in the 1st world. They are restoring the incentives that led to its rise. Its quite hilarious. I mean if eztv hadn't been taken o…

> The hilarious thing is this is going to drive people back to engaging in piracy on various levels

People aren't "driven to piracy". Piracy's a conscious decision to take what they want without paying for it.

Re: Netflix plans to spend $8B to make its library 50 percent original by 2018

#54

Post by ocdtrekkie »

kenhwang wrote: post #52
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, but the reality is: Disney is going their own way. HBO, DC, CBS are all going their own way. The idea of a "one stop shop", also known as a monopoly doesn't make sense as soon as the market is large enough for multiple players. Netflix doesn't want to pay the prices they'd have to in order to remain a one-stop shop, it certainly isn't practical at $9.99 a subscription. There's no way the $100 a month cable subs…

HBO is owned by WB, DC is leveraging WB to build their streaming service. Disney and WB both have a stake in Hulu. So the realistic remaining players after the dust settles would be Disney+Hulu, CBS, Netflix, and Amazon. And of those 4, CBS lacks the capital or content to compete with the other 3 and given their relatively friendly relationship with WB, I can see them integrating into the Disney/Hulu heavyweight.

What you 'see' lacks a lot of understanding.

- CBS remains the dominant power in network TV, shows like NCIS, Big Bang Theory, etc.

- CBS has always been the standout in refusing to offer their shows over Hulu, feeling they have enough independent value of their own.

All Access has it's weaknesses, but it's also one of the cheapest offerings ($5.99 to watch with commercials), and CBS easily has the content to work with. Discovery alone is worth the cost of admission, and for anyone who also watches CBS' network shows, it becomes an easy sell.

Again, at the end of the day, these businesses are based on a $100 a month cable package model. All of this content is not going to keep being made at $10 a month offerings. Either you're going to end up with ten services, or the three or four services you see 'consolidating' will end up costing $25 a month each.

Re: Netflix plans to spend $8B to make its library 50 percent original by 2018

#55

Post by cameronhowe »

Paul-ish wrote: post #24
hyperhopper wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is though, is that by doing this it is no longer the service that originally attracted many users: a one stop service to watch the things I want to watch. It is just becoming the internet equivalent of an unlimited on-demand cable channel.

> It is just becoming the internet equivalent of an unlimited on-demand cable channel. With no commercials. All in all, That's still an improvement over traditional cable.

Can people stop saying this. There are plenty of ads in netflix/amazon/whatever shows.

They just make them unskippable by integrating them into their shows.

And I know other shows and movies do it as well, that is no reason to pretend you're not getting brainwashed to crave fast food and soda when watching these shows instead.

Re: Netflix plans to spend $8B to make its library 50 percent original by 2018

#56

Post by coldtea »

kodablah wrote: post #37
smacktoward wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that there is also a vanishingly small audience of people who want to watch old Italian films (or old films from anywhere, really). The mass audience only cares about the new releases. This has been true since the dawn of home video; anyone who ever browsed the shelves of a Blockbuster store will remember how lopsided the selection was -- entire walls filled with copies of the latest releases, a few sh…

I agree the audience is currently small, but I don't agree it is getting smaller. People rediscover eras and genres. The good part for Netflix vs Blockbuster is that this is a one-time cost and it will be digitized forever. You don't have to market it to a mass audience or attempt to determine the number of VHSs you'd have to create. I don't think they need to market it at all. Just do it. Surely it is only a fractio…

>I agree the audience is currently small, but I don't agree it is getting smaller. People rediscover eras and genres.

Slowly enough to not matter and always stay a niche endeavour.

Re: Netflix plans to spend $8B to make its library 50 percent original by 2018

#57

Post by 8ytecoder »

Afforess wrote: post #29
dcole2929 wrote: post #15

I think it's important to note that this is not by choice, but rather the only path left to Netflix now that studios have realized the value of their catalogs to streaming. Netflix originally made a bunch of content deals that made them the sole streamer of entire backlogs of syndicated material. It worked out great for them and pretty decently for the studios too, but after Netflix's success the studios now realize…

You're right, but I am not sure this is the end. We are entering a "streaming content desert" where every content-maker tries to make their own Netflix. Consumers will buy subscriptions to the top 3, at best. Most probably won't go beyond Amazon Prime and Netflix. In five or ten years, when the data finally rolls in that these disparate services are not making anything, have shoddy reviews from hastily-coded backends…

Amazon Prime has a way to "add" channels to your subscription[1]. This is an interesting idea IMHO. I liked the Prime app (which is still worse than Netflix) more than HBO Now and subscribed via Prime. There's a third possible path forward, one where you don't have to subscribe to tens of services and use tens of apps but still get content from a wide variety of providers - one where the content makers don't have to give up their entire catalogue.

[1]https://www.amazon.com/b?_encoding=UTF8&filterId=OFFER_FILTE...

Re: Netflix plans to spend $8B to make its library 50 percent original by 2018

#58

Post by ascorbic »

dewey wrote: post #39
kodablah wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I regularly use https://www.justwatch.com for looking up movies. But its scraping abilities leave a lot to be desired; they are often wrong. And the data is not very transparent (e.g. historical data). I have considered creating an alternative. And have the client choose the streaming services they have like JustWatch. However, for unavailable movies, have a "I'd watch this if it were streaming for me" button. Then I…

> But its scraping abilities leave a lot to be desired; they are often wrong. If you spot any mistakes, especially ones that are consistent and happen frequently (wrong price on a provider,...) feel free to email us at data-police@justwatch.com and we'll take a look. We are very responsive when it comes to that and are constantly improving our scraping infrastructure to stay as accurate as possible. Unfortunately it'…

Filtering by Metacritic scores please! They're more useful than Rotten Tomatoes for TV shows.

Re: Netflix plans to spend $8B to make its library 50 percent original by 2018

#59

Post by blacksmith_tb »

smacktoward wrote: post #33
JustSomeNobody wrote: post #7

I get why they feel they need to do this, but I hate the trend of everyone taking their ball and going home. I loved how with Netflix, I had most of the content I would want right there on a single service. Note to content providers: I'm not going to have Disney, Netflix, HBO, CBS, Hulu, etc subscriptions. It's just not going to happen. I'll do without first.

> Note to content providers: I'm not going to have Disney, Netflix, HBO, CBS, Hulu, etc subscriptions. It's just not going to happen. The history of cable TV, in which people happily paid $100+ for a bundled content package, suggests otherwise. My guess is that eventually streaming content will go the same route. When the providers realize that there's not enough dollars out there to support everybody having ten $10/…

I think the argument is not that people can't imagine paying for multiple services (though I would expect there is a breaking point, since you're already paying your ISP), but that the friction of having multiple bills, multiple accounts, multiple apps on your devices (if they're all supported, etc.) will make the whole arrangement unappealing.

Re: Netflix plans to spend $8B to make its library 50 percent original by 2018

#60

Post by sloxy »

well, if their catalog grows to 50% original content, here's hoping netflix adopt more UK/HBO style formats for tv shows.

have a clear defined arc lasting ~3 seasons with 6/8 episodes in each season..and then just stop.

point in case, house of cards should have been a 2 series show with frank never becoming President.

Post reply on HN