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

Netflix is not a tech company (2019)

ben-evans.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 324 posts

Re: Netflix is not a tech company (2019)

#51

Post by barbecue_sauce »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #39
paxys wrote: post #6

While you can make that argument today, Netflix as a company is 24 years old. It got to its current position not by spending $15B/yr on original content (which it can afford to do now) but purely based on a superior and novel tech experience for its users. Of course eventually all discussions of this nature devolve into the intricate definition of "tech company", and in the absence of one that is agreed upon, bringin…

> purely based on a superior and novel tech experience for its users. I don't think this is accurate - the main value proposition of Netflix seems to have always been "streaming site with lots of mainstream content, that is also legal ". I.e. it's the streaming deals they've made that mattered, not delivery tech or their web player.

Pretty sure he's talking about the OG Netflix DVD-by-mail request-by-web model.

Re: Netflix is not a tech company (2019)

#52

Post by ajford »

soneca wrote: post #14
robertlagrant wrote: post #5

> The tech has to be good - but, it’s still all about the TV. If Netflix was only showing reruns of Frasier and Ally McBeal no-one would have signed up I think this is always a bit of a silly argument. If Netflix was showing everything, but the tech was terrible, no one would've signed up. You need both.

I disagree. The HBOGO app used to have pretty poor tech. It would logout with no reason, forget where I was in the show, sometimes freeze requiring to close and open the app multiple times, have problems with Chromecast. Still, I wanted to see GoT

I mean, I have Paramount, Hulu, and HBO subscriptions, but I'm far more likely to fly the black flag and watch it from my Plex server instead of their apps due to how painful those apps are to use.

If I was a little less honest, it would be easy to skip paying the subscription entirely. I generally use their apps now to find and try new shows, then download them to Plex once I know I like a show (so I'm not burning bandwidth fetching shows I'm not gonna watch).

Re: Netflix is not a tech company (2019)

#53

Post by rodrigosetti »

Yup. Netflix doesn’t sell tech, it sells subscriptions to scripted drama. It uses tech to expedite its business, like everyone else.

Yes, they invent a little more technology than your typical small business spreadsheet. But tech is a commodity for them because the only strategy for tech is that “it has to be good”.

Re: Netflix is not a tech company (2019)

#55

Post by Communitivity »

The author says Netflix is not a tech company, but then does not give a definition of what is a tech company. At one point he seems to say anything that sells something online is not a tech company. I disagree, using SaaS companies as one set of counter-examples.

For me a tech company is any company that offers product that is computerized hardware, software, digital asset, or digital service that they have created (so not just a case of repackaging). Netflix meets that definition because it offers a viewing experience with recommendations, watch lists, etc. By my definition many of the companies online would be considered tech companies though.

I do think Areading314 is partially correct too. Most companies today are going to be using technology. Though not most will be creating it as a product.

Re: Netflix is not a tech company (2019)

#56

Post by dralley »

Areading314 wrote: post #3

We should stop thinking in terms of "tech companies" and think of them in terms of "companies that use tech with a high degree of success". Ultimately any company that makes money is not a tech company because pure technology on its own does not make a business. Also, with the right incentives and management it is possible, although hard, for legacy companies to start using tech better to compete.

I agree. What most HN commenters seem to really mean when they say "technology" is "consumer software", or more cynically, "company is made of mostly software engineers".

There is an incredible amount of advanced technology being created and used by more "traditional" industries like manufacturing, aerospace, or animation.

Why should Facebook be considered a technology company but not Pixar, Ratheon, General Dynamics, Corning or TSMC? It makes zero sense and relies on a very self-serving definition of "technology".

Re: Netflix is not a tech company (2019)

#57

Post by cardosof »

"Tech company" used to be vendors/providers of technology components (IBM, Oracle, Microsoft, etc) but today it is a label you slap on a stock, startup or IPO to mean "monopoly potential with very profitable operations / scalable revenue streams", so demand (and price) for said stock grow up.

This is all BS of course - Netflix is a media/content company, Stripe is a financial services company and Tesla is an automotive and clean energy company. The fact they leverage technology much better than their peers (little offshoring, lots of R&D, "built here" mentality) is more relevant to the how they do it than to what they do.

Re: Netflix is not a tech company (2019)

#58

Post by MargleBlorf »

Why does industrial help language at all? The idea that Netflix is regulated differently than Time Warner is a scam. It's bad for users. Everything was an insurance company for a while. Then everything was a finance company. Now it's tech. Why not break the cycle instead of just pushing it into the next field?

Basically every company just shifts their marketing language to whatever industry has most aggree-able regulations.

I kinda think a more important conversation is about what Netflix actually is. Subscribers are the livestock, not the customer. The customer are propagandists who wanna promote something with a documentary. So many of their docs have a clear influence peddling motive.

My favorite is Fear vs New York City...a mafia doc? Well it turned into a commercial for Giuliani that was hyper-targeted at New Yorkers when it looked like he was going to get charged by SDNY. You can argue that the content is compelling but the idea is that they interviewed Rudy and Michael Chertoff and a whole bunch of real corrupt villains and...i bet netflix paid them. That's where our subscription money actually goes.

We all agree they're not a tech company but what do ya'll think Netflix actually is?

Re: Netflix is not a tech company (2019)

#60

Post by tnzk »

paxys wrote: post #6

While you can make that argument today, Netflix as a company is 24 years old. It got to its current position not by spending $15B/yr on original content (which it can afford to do now) but purely based on a superior and novel tech experience for its users. Of course eventually all discussions of this nature devolve into the intricate definition of "tech company", and in the absence of one that is agreed upon, bringin…

Definitely. The title of OP should be 'Netflix is no longer a tech company' or so.
Post reply on HN