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

Netflix's New Chapter

stratechery.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 314 posts

Re: Netflix's New Chapter

#221

Post by BiteCode_dev »

tzs wrote: post #201
BiteCode_dev wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unlike netflix, Disney+ has a good incentive to never become profitable. It pays enormous licensing fees to its parent company. This means the profits flows to there, and they don't pay a cent of taxes. Now you are going to say, but doesn't "The Walt Disney Company", the parent of Disney+, then pay all the taxes? No, because this company is located in Delaware, which means it's virtually exempt of taxes as long as it…

That might make it virtually exempt from Delaware taxes, but what about Federal taxes?

They still have to pay it, but skipping on the state taxe an is already a huge break, espacially since no vat is paid in the transfert.

Re: Netflix's New Chapter

#222

Post by ska »

ghaff wrote: post #34
darth_avocado wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It’s Disney’s content That is partly the problem. You spend hundreds of millions to make blockbuster movies and then release it on Disney+ in a few months for free (or sometimes directly). That costs money. Add to that over reliance on only Disney content creates two problems: 1. You can’t have enough new content every month, subscribers therefore don’t keep the subscription year round. 2. You have to pay money to…

>You can’t have enough new content every month, subscribers therefore don’t keep the subscription year round. I suspect that, in addition to ad-supported tiers, we'll see more annual subscriptions or at least subscriptions where annual is sufficiently cheaper on a monthly basis that it's essentially an offer a lot of people can't refuse.

Isn't this basically what amazon does via prime membership? Apples and oranges I guess because it isn't "just" streaming, but does anyone pay this monthly?

Re: Netflix's New Chapter

#223

Post by WalterBright »

LarryMullins wrote: post #199
WalterBright wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I don't understand about the movie business is the cost of making them. The most important ingredient to the success of a movie is the plot. We've all seen low budget movies that made lots of money - because of the plot. Casablanca, Psycho, Blair Witch Project, Cloverfield, Primer, ... Star Trek TOS was a very low budget affair, and produced excellent results, because they hired the best scifi writers. When they…

All substance and no style can work, as your examples prove. But it's also possible to find examples of successful movies which were all style, no substance. For instance the first Avatar (I haven't seen the recent sequel.)

Yeah, well, I saw the first Avatar, too. It was completely boring. Didn't bother with the sequel.

Re: Netflix's New Chapter

#224

Post by prewett »

gumby wrote: post #18

I had never heard this part about Blockbuster: > Blockbuster ... started with Blockbuster Online, an entity that was completely separate from Blockbuster’s retail business for reasons of both technology and culture...a test version went live on July 15, 2004 — the same day as Netflix’s quarterly earnings call Blockbuster really snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. The corporate incentives had become completely b…

I don't think Google belongs in that list of "oldline" companies... GE, Sears, and Boeing are all over 100 years old, and made/shipped actual physical products. Regardless of whether Google's internal incentives are backwards, they are certainly not a stalwart manufacturer. Google is in the business of selling ads, but they keep trying to branch out into selling products/services. Heh, I'd say the fact that they haven't really succeeded in that (aside from maybe Android) is empirical evidence that they are not an oldline company!

Re: Netflix's New Chapter

#225

Post by andrewprock »

TylerE wrote: post #138
no_wizard wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disney+ got around this problem by just adding disclaimers to the content. They did this for all their questionable content, and if people reported it (IE they missed something) they were quick to add it. It seems Disney+ isn't scarred by this at all (it definitely doesn't dominate the public conversation around it), so perhaps there is a lead in here?

Sort of. Disney as a company still tries extremely hard to pretend Song of the South never existed.

Unless you go to Disneyland and ride the ride. Although it is called Splash Mountain, it is 100% Brer Rabbit, Brer Fox and Brer Bear.

Re: Netflix's New Chapter

#226

Post by ska »

thedrbrian wrote: post #74
tootie wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, D+ is churning out an enormous volume of what would be considered prestige content at other services. All the Star Wars and Marvel shows are star-studded and larded with top-tier visual effects. And some of them aren't really getting a lot of viewers from what the rumors say.

>All the Star Wars and Marvel shows are star-studded and larded with top-tier visual effects. I'm just going to throw this out there. What if these shows just aren't that good?

> What if these shows just aren't that good?

What if they aren't that good in a very calculated, lowest-common-denominator way?

Any really big $$ production has to have really broad appeal to succeed. Maybe the safest way to do that is just to target some minimum threshold for ticket buying on a rainy thursday.

Re: Netflix's New Chapter

#228

Post by iforgotpassword »

skydhash wrote: post #108
horsawlarway wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They lost me this year. I had been a subscriber for 12 years. Between the ads and the complete inability to let a show run more than 2 seasons unless it's a global hit... I'm no longer interested. I've had a kid - and my viewing habits have changed. I can't always watch a show right when it drops. The reality of my life is that I have other things going on, and I rarely have 10+ hours of uninterrupted time. But now..…

I dont have a kid, but between work, chores, and other hobbies, I can only have 1 or 2 hours a day to watch anything. I can only slot a movie or a single episode within that time frame. Also, it’s something I do together with my partner so we always pick something that suits us both. And our backlog is getting bigger as we are adding older movies. The cancellation of 1899 was a big blow for me. It’s the kind of show…

That's actually the cancellation that pushed me over the edge. I'm also not subscribed anymore because of 1899.

Re: Netflix's New Chapter

#229

Post by hawski »

voisin wrote: post #153
867-5309 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

sound the Octo-Alert!

Ok, totally off topic, but am I the only one that hears “Explore, Rescue, Rrotect” rather than “Protect” in the intro? See here at 0:40ish: https://youtu.be/mR_Ui_3Iz2o

If I can go on another tangent I would just like to recommend Octonauts. It is charming, funny and clever show. My 5 year old daughter loves it and she would like to have a Tweak costume.

I can't stand many kid shows, but this one even I can love. It is incredible for me how Octonauts are not pretentious, like so many "science!" shows for kids are.

Re: Netflix's New Chapter

#230

Post by silisili »

no_wizard wrote: post #7

I'm gonna attempt to break this down: - Netflix has 5-6 Billion USD free cash flow, and because they got what debt they do have under favorable terms, they are positioned to retain most of that free cash flow - Disney, Comcast (Peacock), CBS/Viacom and other media corporations are saddled with debt, and are all losing money on their own independent streaming businesses. Likely untenable in their shareholder model - T…

I don't understand why every single company needs to maintain their own. And there's more than what's listed of course, Paramount, Hulu, and whatever that new one is with Lifetime.

It seems like at some point they'd rally behind whoever has the best interface and willing to accept deals - probably Hulu. Just charge for access to the content and forget about doing your own CDN and app dealings?

Post reply on HN