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

What Netflix Could Have Said This Week

appleoutsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 114 posts

Re: What Netflix Could Have Said This Week

#31

Post by joeguilmette »

ctdonath wrote: post #27

Unified queue. Regardless of media, business structure, delivery mechanism, company name, etc. methinks what all customers want is a single place to choose & queue content, filtered by whatever options they desire, delivered on whatever medium is available and they pay for via a spectrum of contracts (from unlimited-per-month to single order). Just make sure it's all on one queue. If multi-queue, then only because on…

Don't forget ratings. Many people have years and years of ratings that drive their algorithm. That is now gone. Good job guys.

Re: What Netflix Could Have Said This Week

#32

Post by jeffool »

brown9-2 wrote: post #6

It's not just the tone of the email or the new name that bugs people - it's the complete separation of their sites, pretending that the DVD-by-mail site can't communicate with the streaming-only site, etc. People are annoyed that their ratings/suggestions won't carry over to the new site, and that the streaming-site won't let them add a movie to their DVD-by-mail queue when they search for a title and find it's not a…

I wonder if allowing an API that lets users import and export their ratings would help.

Maybe even allow non-paying members to sign up just to rate and suggest films, and constantly entice viewers with a "watch now with a Netflix subscription!" logo in the corner.

They could easily try to take share from IMDB and Rotten Tomatoes, and be "the website for movies". Every time someone makes a post on Facebook or Twitter it could be "_____ rates !"

Re: What Netflix Could Have Said This Week

#33

Post by janesvilleseo »

In order for them to survive, they have to split their customers. It sucks, big time. They don't want to do it, but those who own the content are holding a gun to their head. So they have to chop their customers into two so that 7.99 is palatable to both their customers and their bottom line. And they are playing nice so that gun doesn't get bigger and blow a larger hole in their wallet.

Re: What Netflix Could Have Said This Week

#34

Post by durga »

Terrific - couldn't have phrased it better. Only missing item is maintaining ratings/carrying them over.

I wonder if Reed hastings was drunk or high when he made these announcements and wrote that blog post. Hard to believe someone who built a business so shrewdly could screw up like this..

Re: What Netflix Could Have Said This Week

#35

Post by jobu »

brown9-2 wrote: post #6

It's not just the tone of the email or the new name that bugs people - it's the complete separation of their sites, pretending that the DVD-by-mail site can't communicate with the streaming-only site, etc. People are annoyed that their ratings/suggestions won't carry over to the new site, and that the streaming-site won't let them add a movie to their DVD-by-mail queue when they search for a title and find it's not a…

Actually, this is might be a great area for a third party to get involved. Inveni (http://www.inveni.com/) already works with Netflix, IMDB, etc as a recommendation engine. It would be a pretty short step for them to start managing your Netflix/Qwickster queues.

Re: What Netflix Could Have Said This Week

#36

Post by glhaynes »

uptown wrote: post #17
pork wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hell, remember ipad? Sanitary napkin jokes, pundits predicting doom, and a stoic Jobs? But it's almost become the "xerox" of tablets. Unfortunately, the name is the least stupid aspect of Netflix's new plan.

I'd argue that the difference between iPad, iPad, MacBook Pro and Qwickster is that it's very very easy to mis-spell Qwickster. It could be Qwickster, Quickster, Qwikster, Quikster, Qwickstr (if you wanna go the Flickr route) and probably some variations I haven't thought of. At the very least, Netflix should have made an effort to secure the domain-names for these alternate spellings to ensure their customers can fi…

Netflix should have made an effort to secure the domain-names for these alternate spellings

And the correctly-spelled Twitter name! http://twitter.com/#!/qwikster

Re: What Netflix Could Have Said This Week

#37

Post by phil »

joeguilmette wrote: post #31
ctdonath wrote: post #27

Unified queue. Regardless of media, business structure, delivery mechanism, company name, etc. methinks what all customers want is a single place to choose & queue content, filtered by whatever options they desire, delivered on whatever medium is available and they pay for via a spectrum of contracts (from unlimited-per-month to single order). Just make sure it's all on one queue. If multi-queue, then only because on…

Don't forget ratings. Many people have years and years of ratings that drive their algorithm. That is now gone. Good job guys.

We don't know that yet!

I'm quite interested to see how they handle user data in the split -- will each company get a copy? Will the Netflix side maintain a complete database of movies, even if it can't stream them, so that you can continue to rate freely and get recommendations?

There are some thorny user experience problems here for sure, but they are not unsolvable.

Re: What Netflix Could Have Said This Week

#38

Post by ktf »

AdamTReineke wrote: post #25
rumblestrut wrote: post #23

Reed Hastings makes me wonder what kind of company Netflix is. Does Netflix listen to its customers? I've hated the website redesign since it launched and from what I've read, I'm certainly not alone. I find the redesign to be much less user friendly than the old one, which I loved. I don't login as much as before to browse, review and add to my queue. I avoid the website and stick to watching stuff on my Roku. In my…

Netflix does listen to user feedback. Back in 08, the profiles feature almost got the ax before vocal user feedback convinced them to keep it. I'm sure they're listening, regardless of what the final outcome is. June 19, 2008 - Removing Profiles - http://blog.netflix.com/2008/06/profiles-feature-going-away.... June 30, 2008 - Nevermind - http://blog.netflix.com/2008/06/profiles-feature-not-going-a... (Work has any UR…

I remember vocal user feedback telling them not to ax the "friends" feature too, but that's long gone. (And sorely missed, at least by me.)

I also remember vocal user feedback telling them not to switch to Silverlight, for that matter. I was one of the many who stopped being able to use their streaming service when that change went through, until I recently bought a PS3.

Re: What Netflix Could Have Said This Week

#39

Post by crenshaw »

jfruh wrote: post #18
superkinz wrote: post #9

Would have been better if they attributed the change to getting squeezed by Hollywood. At least people could sympathize rather than make Netflix into a villain. I suspect the change came in large part due to payment terms on all accounts as opposed to accounts consuming media.

That might help with their relations with customers, but probably wouldn't endear them to the media companies they have to negotiate with. Those negotiations are no doubt already pretty tense, and Netflix shouting loudly about what jerks they are won't make them less so.

I don't even think you need to call them jerks. Just say something like, "Our new licensing deals have us moving to a model where we are charged, not for how often you stream video, but for everyone who could potentially stream video. This means that if you're not watching our instant streaming at all today, but only using the DVD service, we still have to count you as a head. So we decided that the best way to handle this was to separate our DVD from streaming service. This way we, and you, pay for the services you use, and not what you don't.

Now you may then ask, 'why the fee hike?' Simply put, the math doesn't add up otherwise. To keep $9.99 pricing we'd have to do something like $4.99 for DVD rental and $4.99 for video streaming. Compare our DVD pricing to Blockbuster -- even at $7.99/month we're still cheaper. $4.99 for video streaming would only barely cover our licensing costs. We found a reasonable price point that allows us to offer great DVD and streaming services going forward."

Re: What Netflix Could Have Said This Week

#40

Post by ShawnJG »

ctdonath wrote: post #27

Unified queue. Regardless of media, business structure, delivery mechanism, company name, etc. methinks what all customers want is a single place to choose & queue content, filtered by whatever options they desire, delivered on whatever medium is available and they pay for via a spectrum of contracts (from unlimited-per-month to single order). Just make sure it's all on one queue. If multi-queue, then only because on…

Def unified queue. They are violating a golden rule. not giving the people what they want. They've lost the Value in Value Added Service.

As of today there stock is down 40% from when this whole debacle started.

Post reply on HN