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

Netflix is now worth more than Comcast

recode.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 142 posts

Re: Netflix is now worth more than Comcast

#61

Post by ocdtrekkie »

rhizome wrote: post #37
scarface74 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole idea of "cord cutting" hurting cable is insane. If you don't subscribe to cable and you subscribe to internet based streaming services, you're still getting content delivered to your home via either a cable "cord" or the phone company. Netflix at most gets $12/month per subscriber. Comcast will get $80 - $110/month for internet service. Comcaast also has either no competitors in their market or at most one.…

One difference with cord-cutting vs. Comcast (et al) is that I have no idea how to watch sports on broadcast unless I come across it randomly channel surfing. That is, for me, it's not about money so much as control over distractions in my home. People have been clamoring for a la carte cable for years if not decades, and since the cable services either decline or are unable to provide this, technology finds a way. T…

A la carte cable was a "grass is greener on the other side" thing. People asked why they pay $60 a month for 100 channels if they only watch a handful.

Now you can buy Netflix, Hulu, HBO, CBS All Access, Disney whatever, etc. each for $10 a month. You still end up paying $60 a month, but now you get six channels instead of 100.

Re: Netflix is now worth more than Comcast

#62

Post by gxs »

rayiner wrote: post #34
scarface74 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole idea of "cord cutting" hurting cable is insane. If you don't subscribe to cable and you subscribe to internet based streaming services, you're still getting content delivered to your home via either a cable "cord" or the phone company. Netflix at most gets $12/month per subscriber. Comcast will get $80 - $110/month for internet service. Comcaast also has either no competitors in their market or at most one.…

> The whole idea of "cord cutting" hurting cable is insane. If you don't subscribe to cable and you subscribe to internet based streaming services, you're still getting content delivered to your home via either a cable "cord" or the phone company. Right now, people pay $150+ for a package with all the TV channels, while you can get the broadband for $50 or so. Cable companies could dramatically raise prices on the ba…

Really curious to see the technology that develops in response to the latency introduced by wireless internet.

I'm not familiar with domains that have a huge dependency on latency other than high frequency trading (who are already next door), but I imagine it's a problem we'll have to solve at some point.

Re: Netflix is now worth more than Comcast

#63

Post by majormajor »

rayiner wrote: post #34
scarface74 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole idea of "cord cutting" hurting cable is insane. If you don't subscribe to cable and you subscribe to internet based streaming services, you're still getting content delivered to your home via either a cable "cord" or the phone company. Netflix at most gets $12/month per subscriber. Comcast will get $80 - $110/month for internet service. Comcaast also has either no competitors in their market or at most one.…

> The whole idea of "cord cutting" hurting cable is insane. If you don't subscribe to cable and you subscribe to internet based streaming services, you're still getting content delivered to your home via either a cable "cord" or the phone company. Right now, people pay $150+ for a package with all the TV channels, while you can get the broadband for $50 or so. Cable companies could dramatically raise prices on the ba…

The TV channels cost massive amounts to the cable company, too, though. Internet prices wouldn't have to change much. Comcast is a particularly special case because they own a bunch of channels (NBC Universal), though - others have much smaller footprints.

But agreed that the realistic threat isn't Netflix or Youtube or Sling or Hulu, it's wireless broadband. I'm not as optimistic as you, though, based on my experience with cell phone service in my apartments. :|

Re: Netflix is now worth more than Comcast

#65

Post by scarface74 »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #59
rayiner wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The whole idea of "cord cutting" hurting cable is insane. If you don't subscribe to cable and you subscribe to internet based streaming services, you're still getting content delivered to your home via either a cable "cord" or the phone company. Right now, people pay $150+ for a package with all the TV channels, while you can get the broadband for $50 or so. Cable companies could dramatically raise prices on the ba…

A basic HD cable package on top of my old Comcast Internet subscription added MAYBE $20 to the cost of my Internet plan due to the bundle discount. Oh, and Comcast threw in HBO for free, which is worth about $15 a month. To get the equivalent channel access as such a service, you've got to pay for YouTube TV or PlayStation Vue or the like, and you're looking at $40 a month there. Obviously, prices vary by where you a…

Is that a straight $20 or $20 + Broadcast fee, regulatory fee, cable box rental, "HD Technology Fee"....

Re: Netflix is now worth more than Comcast

#66

Post by AdamM12 »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #61
rhizome wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One difference with cord-cutting vs. Comcast (et al) is that I have no idea how to watch sports on broadcast unless I come across it randomly channel surfing. That is, for me, it's not about money so much as control over distractions in my home. People have been clamoring for a la carte cable for years if not decades, and since the cable services either decline or are unable to provide this, technology finds a way. T…

A la carte cable was a "grass is greener on the other side" thing. People asked why they pay $60 a month for 100 channels if they only watch a handful. Now you can buy Netflix, Hulu, HBO, CBS All Access, Disney whatever, etc. each for $10 a month. You still end up paying $60 a month, but now you get six channels instead of 100.

Not sure this is a fair comparative metric. One could argue that filtering on theme (crime dramas, docs, etc.) are effectively channels. More accurate comparison would be content count or hours of programming. I've not had cable in 3 years and between HBO, Netflix, and Amazon I don't ever feel like I'm at a loss for content.

Re: Netflix is now worth more than Comcast

#67

Post by ocdtrekkie »

scarface74 wrote: post #65
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A basic HD cable package on top of my old Comcast Internet subscription added MAYBE $20 to the cost of my Internet plan due to the bundle discount. Oh, and Comcast threw in HBO for free, which is worth about $15 a month. To get the equivalent channel access as such a service, you've got to pay for YouTube TV or PlayStation Vue or the like, and you're looking at $40 a month there. Obviously, prices vary by where you a…

Is that a straight $20 or $20 + Broadcast fee, regulatory fee, cable box rental, "HD Technology Fee"....

Inclusive. It used to be cheaper to have TV than to not have TV because of the bundle discount (which is why I had initially gotten it, despite never watching TV on the actual box), particularly before I upgraded to HD. The broadcast and regional sports fees are really what brought it up to costing an extra $20 or so, they raised those fees a lot in the last couple years.

(Insert pet peeve about paying a regional sports fee if I don't watch sports here.)

Re: Netflix is now worth more than Comcast

#68

Post by scarface74 »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #61
rhizome wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One difference with cord-cutting vs. Comcast (et al) is that I have no idea how to watch sports on broadcast unless I come across it randomly channel surfing. That is, for me, it's not about money so much as control over distractions in my home. People have been clamoring for a la carte cable for years if not decades, and since the cable services either decline or are unable to provide this, technology finds a way. T…

A la carte cable was a "grass is greener on the other side" thing. People asked why they pay $60 a month for 100 channels if they only watch a handful. Now you can buy Netflix, Hulu, HBO, CBS All Access, Disney whatever, etc. each for $10 a month. You still end up paying $60 a month, but now you get six channels instead of 100.

Best article I've read about the topic....

http://cdixon.org/2012/07/08/how-bundling-benefits-sellers-a...

Re: Netflix is now worth more than Comcast

#69

Post by dragonwriter »

rayiner wrote: post #34
scarface74 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole idea of "cord cutting" hurting cable is insane. If you don't subscribe to cable and you subscribe to internet based streaming services, you're still getting content delivered to your home via either a cable "cord" or the phone company. Netflix at most gets $12/month per subscriber. Comcast will get $80 - $110/month for internet service. Comcaast also has either no competitors in their market or at most one.…

> The whole idea of "cord cutting" hurting cable is insane. If you don't subscribe to cable and you subscribe to internet based streaming services, you're still getting content delivered to your home via either a cable "cord" or the phone company. Right now, people pay $150+ for a package with all the TV channels, while you can get the broadband for $50 or so. Cable companies could dramatically raise prices on the ba…

> The idea that cable providers can raise prices to compensate for lost TV revenue is predicated on the assumption that there are no alternatives.

Which is increasingly correct, since the same entities that sre cable operators not only largely own the fixed consumer internet connections, they also largely own the mobile broadband providers and satellite broadband providers, and, even if they didn't own the pipes, they own a lot and are in the process of buying up more of the video content channels and the content itself.

Re: Netflix is now worth more than Comcast

#70

Post by ocdtrekkie »

AdamM12 wrote: post #66
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A la carte cable was a "grass is greener on the other side" thing. People asked why they pay $60 a month for 100 channels if they only watch a handful. Now you can buy Netflix, Hulu, HBO, CBS All Access, Disney whatever, etc. each for $10 a month. You still end up paying $60 a month, but now you get six channels instead of 100.

Not sure this is a fair comparative metric. One could argue that filtering on theme (crime dramas, docs, etc.) are effectively channels. More accurate comparison would be content count or hours of programming. I've not had cable in 3 years and between HBO, Netflix, and Amazon I don't ever feel like I'm at a loss for content.

Many channels do not filter on "theme". Major networks like CBS, ABC, NBC, etc. are a good example of this.
Post reply on HN