Live data from Hacker News

Netflix is now worth more than $100B

techcrunch.com

291–300 of 321 posts

Re: Netflix is now worth more than $100B

#291
There's a bubble. A bubble of desperation. You can't put your money in the bank due to the low interest rates. Traditional businesses are not doing well. Investors are desperate to put their money to work. So we see bubbles in tech, bubbles in cryptocurrencies, bubbles in startups.

Best to watch what the legendary investors are doing. People like Warren Buffett, Prem Watsa, and the likes.

Re: Netflix is now worth more than $100B

#292
post #291

There's a bubble. A bubble of desperation. You can't put your money in the bank due to the low interest rates. Traditional businesses are not doing well. Investors are desperate to put their money to work. So we see bubbles in tech, bubbles in cryptocurrencies, bubbles in startups. Best to watch what the legendary investors are doing. People like Warren Buffett, Prem Watsa, and the likes.

Netflix generates $8B revenue with 3k staff, when Time Warner generates $28B with 25k staff. Both net income are equivalent ($3B). Both valuations are equivalent (100B). Dividends are equivalent. I don't see any bubble.

Given the right amount of capital and assets, Netflix sounds like way more capable of growing than Time Warner in the next 5 years. Time will tell.

Re: Netflix is now worth more than $100B

#293
post #258
post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not trying to invalidate your larger argument, but it's worth noting that there is no such thing as "trickle-down theory" https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2015/04/sorry-but-trickle-down... . Never was, never will be. It's a strawman through and through, originating in mockery, amounting to nothing more than "screw the poor" slogan that no self-interested economist could have endorsed. Its only purpose is to ridicule the…

You cited an article that basically says 'Trickle down doesn't exist, plebs. But hey, trickle down totally works! Here's why!'. What he describes is the policies that people refer to when they say Trickle Down.

Not sure why your getting downvoted. The article largely tries to debunk TD exists because 'no recognised economist of any school of thought has ever had any such theory or made any such proposal'

TD has been referred plenty, not under than name. You'll find a bunch of economist views (positive and negative) under supply side theories which is often steeped in trickle down theory.

And then the article promotes TD under the logic; "the sequence of payments is directly the opposite of what is assumed by those who talk about a ‘trickle down’ theory. The workers must be paid first and then the profits flow upward later – if at all." based on a couple of examples and his loose theory without any real research.

There are plenty of proper studies to the contrary available with an easy google.

Re: Netflix is now worth more than $100B

#294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only things I can think of are: 1) AI. Somehow, we finally get the AI working, and it somehow produces a lot more jobs. I really think the opposite will happen, but who knows. 2) Climate Change. The ever rising waters and the ever worsening storms will cause nations to re/build large infrastructure projects. Think seawalls and repairing the NYC subway. I don't think that will be good, as it'll mostly just be debt…

> it somehow produces a lot more jobs. Recall a few days ago some people were trying to reconstruct the genome of the first black man in Iceland. There's no way anyone could have a job doing that in anything but a very wealthy society. In other words, AI won't create jobs in manufacturing, but it will enable unexpected jobs to be created that would otherwise not be cost-effective.

> Recall a few days ago some people were trying to reconstruct the genome of the first black man in Iceland.

Recall who funded that work.

Re: Netflix is now worth more than $100B

#296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only things I can think of are: 1) AI. Somehow, we finally get the AI working, and it somehow produces a lot more jobs. I really think the opposite will happen, but who knows. 2) Climate Change. The ever rising waters and the ever worsening storms will cause nations to re/build large infrastructure projects. Think seawalls and repairing the NYC subway. I don't think that will be good, as it'll mostly just be debt…

> it somehow produces a lot more jobs. Recall a few days ago some people were trying to reconstruct the genome of the first black man in Iceland. There's no way anyone could have a job doing that in anything but a very wealthy society. In other words, AI won't create jobs in manufacturing, but it will enable unexpected jobs to be created that would otherwise not be cost-effective.

Automation reduces costs. As long as those costs savings are passed on to the consumer that's a good thing.

Re: Netflix is now worth more than $100B

#297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only things I can think of are: 1) AI. Somehow, we finally get the AI working, and it somehow produces a lot more jobs. I really think the opposite will happen, but who knows. 2) Climate Change. The ever rising waters and the ever worsening storms will cause nations to re/build large infrastructure projects. Think seawalls and repairing the NYC subway. I don't think that will be good, as it'll mostly just be debt…

4) Unmanned mining in space - as automation and machine learning progress capturing the right asteroid could bring in a few Billion or Trillion worth of nickle or whatever.

Honestly, I'm bearish on space mining. The Earth has a lot of unexplored volume left. The oceans' floors are relatively unexplored in terms of mineral wealth, even just 100 miles offshore. Antarctica is also a giant mystery, with many potentially rich mountain ranges sitting under 1/2 mile of ice. Heck, in Australia people will buy land, walk around, and just find nuggets of gold sitting on the dirt, it's something of a 'thing' there [0] So, 10k/lbs flight costs aren't cheap enough yet to justify the very hazardous environment and delta-V costs. Maybe in a century, but for now it's a ways off.

[0] http://www.mining.com/this-australian-man-just-found-a-massi...

Re: Netflix is now worth more than $100B

#298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The problem is there's no growth to be found anywhere. Cryptocurrencies and ICOs. Applied neural networks. Automation. Good electric cars. To the point where people are prepaying for something that might be built in a few years. Good cheap batteries.

> Automation It seems like this is the opposite of growth - as more jobs are automated, fewer people will be able to buy the products that are created by the automation.

Instead of thinking in money you should think in widgets.

Do you want more money but the same amount of widgets or do you want the same money but more widgets?

Re: Netflix is now worth more than $100B

#299

The entire stock market feels like its in a bubble. Netflix stock gained more than 25% in the past one month. Their free cash flow (FCF) has been negative every single quarter and will be for many quarters to come. Stocks trade based on discounted cash flow(DCF). Netflix however produces no material return for investors and still majority of the analysts keep putting higher and higher price targets, its like they are…

I think that it’s important to keep in mind that posts consisting of feelings like these can be described as memetic. Posting opinions like this can be a way for nations to try and influence the independent actors that make up other nations. Economic or political attacks can occur with fake news type meme opinion spreading.

Re: Netflix is now worth more than $100B

#300
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are more people going to subscribe to Netflix because of this? Will they be distracted from the core business? Building a streaming video service is very different from building games of any sort, do they want to dilute their talent by going out and hiring for this? Sorry but I just don't see how this in any makes sense other than, "hey Netflix is doing really well, why don't they pull a Google and start throwing spa…

Do they ever actually hire people directly to make any of their content? I assumed it was all contracted out to production companies, I know it is for some shows. They could do the same thing for games just acting like a distributor. I think it's more likely to keep people subscribed then generate new subscriptions. No one person is going to like all the content they make. Personally I'd really enjoy having some fun…

We made a Stranger Things mobile game for Netflix that is free and devoid of IAP. It's just freely available on the app stores though, and does not require a Netflix subscription. https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/stranger-things-the-game/id1... and https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.bonusxp.le...
Post reply on HN