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

261–270 of 324 posts

Re: Netflix is not a tech company (2019)

#261

Post by cletus »

alberth wrote: post #258
cletus wrote: post #148

Here's the framework I use: "tech companies" are those where tech still plays a significant factor in the growth of the company such that it's important to an executive level. Example: Google is still a tech company. As much as some might view search as "solved" (just like it was when Google was founded I might add), search continues to get better. Tech still plays a significant role in the actual core business (ie a…

Is Telsa then a "tech company" by your definition? What about Jet.com (pre-Walmart acquisition) that pioneered cheaper shipping / savings by informing users to by substitute products from the data distribution center.

Tesla is interesting because even they've described themselves as an energy company masquerading as a car company. Put another way: battery tech is Tesla's core business. They just happen to make cars as a way to sell batteries.

It's a bit like how SpaceX is set to become a major player in regional Internet delivery but you wouldn't call SpaceX an Internet or a networking company. It's just a synergy between Internet as a business and reducing launch costs while proving reliability of first-stage reuse.

I'm tempted to describe both companies as "engineering companies" more than "tech companies". I just looked at Tesla spends a relatively modest (for its size) ~$1.1B on R&D.

So what's the difference? I'd say "tech" is largely about software and "engineering" is largely about hardware. Specifically, both Tesla and SpaceX are capital-intensive businesses where that capital is being used to produce physical products.

To be clear, none of this is official in any way. This is just the framework for how I think about things.

Re: Netflix is not a tech company (2019)

#263

Post by nostrademons »

Rd6n6 wrote: post #257
cletus wrote: post #148

Here's the framework I use: "tech companies" are those where tech still plays a significant factor in the growth of the company such that it's important to an executive level. Example: Google is still a tech company. As much as some might view search as "solved" (just like it was when Google was founded I might add), search continues to get better. Tech still plays a significant role in the actual core business (ie a…

> tech companies" are those where tech still plays a significant factor in the growth of the company such that it's important to an executive level. By similar definitions, aren’t almost all companies also money companies, employee companies, legal compliance companies, strategy companies, marketing companies, mission statement companies, fundraising companies, etc? That sort of definition works for giving job applic…

By definition, "almost all" companies are not whatever departmental adjective comes next. In business, you're defined by your differentiators, the things that make you different from all other companies. Finance, HR, legal compliance, etc. are commodities: pretty much everyone knows how to do them. The companies that are defined by those labels (Goldman Sachs for finance, for example, or Gusto & ADP for payroll) are those that know how to do them so much better that other companies would rather pay them than do it themselves.

So it is with tech. On some level all companies are tech companies in that you need a website, Intranet, database, etc. These are all commodities though. A "tech company" is one where your tech is so good that either you can offer differentiated consumer experiences that nobody else can offer (eg. YouTube, Apple, FB's various products, consumer parts of Google) or people pay you to handle the tech things for them (eg. AWS, Microsoft, Google Cloud).

Re: Netflix is not a tech company (2019)

#264

Post by alberth »

cletus wrote: post #261
alberth wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is Telsa then a "tech company" by your definition? What about Jet.com (pre-Walmart acquisition) that pioneered cheaper shipping / savings by informing users to by substitute products from the data distribution center.

Tesla is interesting because even they've described themselves as an energy company masquerading as a car company. Put another way: battery tech is Tesla's core business. They just happen to make cars as a way to sell batteries. It's a bit like how SpaceX is set to become a major player in regional Internet delivery but you wouldn't call SpaceX an Internet or a networking company. It's just a synergy between Internet…

Interesting take and I largely agree.

I wonder how Boston Dynamics should be characterized.

Re: Netflix is not a tech company (2019)

#265

Post by jabroni_salad »

maerF0x0 wrote: post #205
cletus wrote: post #148

Here's the framework I use: "tech companies" are those where tech still plays a significant factor in the growth of the company such that it's important to an executive level. Example: Google is still a tech company. As much as some might view search as "solved" (just like it was when Google was founded I might add), search continues to get better. Tech still plays a significant role in the actual core business (ie a…

> Netflix isn't a tech company anymore They're still solving some interesting problems like how to watch the same content, in sync, with your friends. Interestingly my gf and I noticed that when we watched NFLX together using a video call to see eachother's faces/commentary our video would skew by noticeable amounts across the span of a movie. (eg even a 0.5% speed difference would give a 3 second skew in 10 minutes,…

Is one of you on NTSC and the other PAL? One of them is slightly faster.

Re: Netflix is not a tech company (2019)

#266

Post by Rd6n6 »

nostrademons wrote: post #263
Rd6n6 wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> tech companies" are those where tech still plays a significant factor in the growth of the company such that it's important to an executive level. By similar definitions, aren’t almost all companies also money companies, employee companies, legal compliance companies, strategy companies, marketing companies, mission statement companies, fundraising companies, etc? That sort of definition works for giving job applic…

By definition, "almost all" companies are not whatever departmental adjective comes next. In business, you're defined by your differentiators, the things that make you different from all other companies. Finance, HR, legal compliance, etc. are commodities: pretty much everyone knows how to do them. The companies that are defined by those labels (Goldman Sachs for finance, for example, or Gusto & ADP for payroll) are…

> A "tech company" is one where your tech is so good that either you can offer differentiated consumer experiences that nobody else can offer(…) or people pay you to handle the tech things for them

It’s a decent definition. It has some implications though

Almost no companies really differentiate via tech that nobody else can offer

Almost no game or app companies meet that bar. Most game companies have tech that another company can reproduce for example. Almost all apps use fairly commonplace tech.

Re: Netflix is not a tech company (2019)

#267

Post by omegalulw »

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…

> but purely based on a superior and novel tech experience for its users.

I mean they were the pioneers in offering tv and movies via streaming. The tech is really not that dramatic.

You can think of streaming tech in three parts: video quality, recommendations and UI.

Arguably video quality is the most important, but other platforms have already offer similar/better quality (albeit a lil more data).

Their recommendations and UI are better than others but I honestly don't care about these two as they are still not good enough for me to discover content I would want to watch, for that I still have to go to reddit/curated articles.

So I would say Netflix's contribution was more in pioneering tv streaming as opposed to tech. They are now competing mostly in terms of their originals, so I would label them more like Disney/HBO rather than tech.

Re: Netflix is not a tech company (2019)

#268

Post by kenhwang »

NordSteve wrote: post #227
maerF0x0 wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Netflix isn't a tech company anymore They're still solving some interesting problems like how to watch the same content, in sync, with your friends. Interestingly my gf and I noticed that when we watched NFLX together using a video call to see eachother's faces/commentary our video would skew by noticeable amounts across the span of a movie. (eg even a 0.5% speed difference would give a 3 second skew in 10 minutes,…

Target and Walmart are still solving some interesting problems around online ordering and fulfillment. Are they tech companies now?

I'd say AWS is what gives Amazon the "tech" credentials, not Amazon.com which Target and Walmart are working on becoming.

Re: Netflix is not a tech company (2019)

#270

Post by kenhwang »

Rd6n6 wrote: post #266
nostrademons wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By definition, "almost all" companies are not whatever departmental adjective comes next. In business, you're defined by your differentiators, the things that make you different from all other companies. Finance, HR, legal compliance, etc. are commodities: pretty much everyone knows how to do them. The companies that are defined by those labels (Goldman Sachs for finance, for example, or Gusto & ADP for payroll) are…

> A "tech company" is one where your tech is so good that either you can offer differentiated consumer experiences that nobody else can offer(…) or people pay you to handle the tech things for them It’s a decent definition. It has some implications though Almost no companies really differentiate via tech that nobody else can offer Almost no game or app companies meet that bar. Most game companies have tech that anoth…

Within gaming, there's Unity, Unreal, Crytek, and the like which I would classify as tech, but otherwise, most gaming companies are far more creative-focused much like film.
Post reply on HN