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

Netflix Is Betting Its Future on Exclusive Programming

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 113 posts

Re: Netflix Is Betting Its Future on Exclusive Programming

#51

Post by rodgerd »

dollaaron wrote: post #28
FreeKill wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that because you don't trust yourself not to watch it all in a binge situation? The shows on netflix could easily be watched one episode at a time on a regular schedule if that's what you prefer. You get both options (and hundreds of other scenarios) instead of just the one decided by someone else (or else having to record it on a DVR to make your own schedule).

It's nice to know that the other people watching a show are also at the same point as you are (or relatively close), allowing you to speculate on what might happen next in the time between episodes. I also like looking forward to the next episode, which doesn't really happen when you can watch that next episode immediately (and self imposed waiting doesn't feel the same).

> It's nice to know that the other people watching a show are also at the same point as you are (or relatively close), allowing you to speculate on what might happen next in the time between episodes.

The shared cultural experience is nice, but utterly foreign to those of us outside the US, where the discussion arrives weeks, months, or even years before the show.

Re: Netflix Is Betting Its Future on Exclusive Programming

#52

Post by anigbrowl »

kaonashi wrote: post #8
josephagoss wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A company should be allowed the freedom to do what they want when it comes to selling their own product. Why would we want more laws restricting business? What if the truth was, a one time payment to watch a show like House of Cards cost $100-$200? By offering a subscription they make it more accessible to more people (They let you cancel your Netflix subscription at any time)

> Why would we want more laws restricting business? Presumably because those laws would serve the public purpose.

I dunno, I'd love to be able to pay Home Depot $10/month and just have them deliver any tool I want whenever I want it. Obviously streaming movies don't put wear and tear on the movie, but I found the earlier poster's analogy (now deleted) rather attractive.

Re: Netflix Is Betting Its Future on Exclusive Programming

#53

Post by booruguru »

imh wrote: post #40
hkmurakami wrote: post #9

Seems like they're following in the footsteps of HBO, going from a distribution channel rebroadcasting others' content to being known primarily for their high quality original content. I like where this is headed. The competition will be a boon for content consumers.

The problem is that I pay for netflix precisely because they rebroadcast others' content.

Yes, but eventually they'll make enough of their own content you wont care if they carry anyone else's stuff.

Re: Netflix Is Betting Its Future on Exclusive Programming

#54

Post by anigbrowl »

pinaceae wrote: post #49

I guess there is another, very big reason: The Non-US markets. The US is surely important, but Netflix has launched in Europe and faces a huge obstacle that very few US Americans know about - rights licensing is far worse. Selling content overseas is a huge business, which means a giant time delay until something makes it to, say, Germany (even if not dubbed). Which worked in the past, but the Internet is forcing rea…

Good point and this is a core art of Netflix's strategy for its own content. It's not going to happen any time soon with content from studios and other distributors though, because international distributors usually buy the rights to a film for a 10 year period. Except for the biggest 6, most film distributors don't have multinational operations and even the big 6 don't have offices in every territory, so they can't just wave magic wands and abrogate existing international distribution contracts.

Re: Netflix Is Betting Its Future on Exclusive Programming

#55

Post by kibibu »

booruguru wrote: post #53
imh wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that I pay for netflix precisely because they rebroadcast others' content.

Yes, but eventually they'll make enough of their own content you wont care if they carry anyone else's stuff.

I already care that they don't carry Game of Thrones.

Re: Netflix Is Betting Its Future on Exclusive Programming

#57

Post by rhizome »

aidenn0 wrote: post #42
rhizome wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It takes much longer to steer a huge ship, or however that saying goes.

That's kind of what I'm saying; it's clear now that when I made that prediction, NF had already started going after original content.

Idealistically and technologically there was nothing preventing them from streaming directly, but realistically they had decades of contracts to re-engineer to do so, not to mention the fact that they are huge companies with a fundamental stability that prevents them from innovating.

From somewhere else (via NFLX Wikipedia):

In a 2010 New York Times interview, Time Warner CEO Jeffrey Bewkes downplayed Netflix as a threat to more traditional media companies. Bewkes told the newspaper, "It's a little bit like, is the Albanian army going to take over the world? I don’t think so." At the same time, he recognized that the company's DVD service may have contributed to a decline in DVD sales, and regarding the industry's willingness to make special deals with Netflix in the future, he added "this has been an era of experimentation, and I think it's coming to a close."

Re: Netflix Is Betting Its Future on Exclusive Programming

#58

Post by thaumaturgy »

testingonprod wrote: post #15
fsk wrote: post #10

When Netflix first started, they were able to buy the streaming rights to old movies and TV shows for cheap, because executives thought they weren't worth anything. Now those contracts are expiring, and the studios want to jack up the rates or start their own service. Netflix is also getting squeezed by ISPs like Comcast, who want to charge them for the right to deliver video to Comcast's customers who already paid f…

Speaking of exclusive content, I highly highly recommend Netflix's "Daredevil" (a TV series they developed with Marvel). It's seriously some amazing content.

Seconded. The fight choreography and photography are as good or better than John Wick if you're into that sort of thing. That hallway fight scene was amazingly well done. The casting is quite good too. (Although the actor could learn a couple of things from Chris Gorham, who did a really great job of playing a blind guy on Covert Affairs.)

Re: Netflix Is Betting Its Future on Exclusive Programming

#59

Post by aidenn0 »

rhizome wrote: post #57
aidenn0 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's kind of what I'm saying; it's clear now that when I made that prediction, NF had already started going after original content.

Idealistically and technologically there was nothing preventing them from streaming directly, but realistically they had decades of contracts to re-engineer to do so, not to mention the fact that they are huge companies with a fundamental stability that prevents them from innovating. From somewhere else (via NFLX Wikipedia): In a 2010 New York Times interview, Time Warner CEO Jeffrey Bewkes downplayed Netflix as a th…

Oh, I see what you're saying now; the "large ships" are the current content holders.

I agree, and this is why netflix has time to build up a library of original content. It's bootstrapping its success off the backs of its future competitors. I will predict though, that when Disney's current contract with netflix expires (2020ish IIRC), they won't renew.

Re: Netflix Is Betting Its Future on Exclusive Programming

#60

Post by mattchamb »

pinaceae wrote: post #49

I guess there is another, very big reason: The Non-US markets. The US is surely important, but Netflix has launched in Europe and faces a huge obstacle that very few US Americans know about - rights licensing is far worse. Selling content overseas is a huge business, which means a giant time delay until something makes it to, say, Germany (even if not dubbed). Which worked in the past, but the Internet is forcing rea…

Just to note, that even Netflix makes mistakes with global content licencing. In New Zealand (where netflix has recently launched) they have sold the rights to House of Cards so even though they own the content, they cannot stream House of Cards.
Post reply on HN