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

101–110 of 113 posts

Re: Netflix Is Betting Its Future on Exclusive Programming

#101

Post by whichfawkes »

r00fus wrote: post #25
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…

No kidding about Comcast - Streampix? Talk about derivative naming. And it's priced to kill Netflix at $5/mo for cable subscribers. I'm not so sure about the pirating scene - while big content providers likely will never kill it, they seem to have lawmakers in their pockets, and so will criminalize it as much as possible - expect draconian measures to destroy the most dangerous threat to big content providers.

Just like the drug market with all its weird research chemicals that are technically legal, I'm pretty sure the piracy scene can move faster than draconian measures can take them down.

It's hard to compete with free. At the moment, Netflix does a pretty good job. HBO might too if they can fully disentangle from cable. If prices get higher, or the content individuals want gets spread across too many streaming services people will watch less and/or pirate more.

Re: Netflix Is Betting Its Future on Exclusive Programming

#102

Post by soylentcola »

pdaddyo wrote: post #79
kitsune_ wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can also recommend 'Bloodline', mainly because of Ben Mendelsohn's performance.

Bloodline is absolutely fantastic, I've been recommending it to all my friends. I can't praise it enough - also glad there's a second season coming in 2016. Apparently the creators (KZK) have a 6-season arc planned...

I'm almost finished with the first season and had to force myself to go to bed at like 1am because I wanted to keep watching more.

It's not quite "Breaking Bad" levels of tension and machination but it's a good, slow burn that really picks up as it moves along. Doesn't hurt that I just got back from my first visit to the Keys right as this came out.

Re: Netflix Is Betting Its Future on Exclusive Programming

#103

Post by tobylane »

panglott wrote: post #94
sschueller wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Netflix is making the same mistakes. They sold the rights of "House of Cards" to Sky Television preventing anyone from watching season 3 in most of Europe.

Does House of Cards licensing have anything to do with the fact that it was originally a UK show?

Probably not. BBC made the UK series, GP says Sky licenced the US series.

Re: Netflix Is Betting Its Future on Exclusive Programming

#105

Post by soylentcola »

panglott wrote: post #93
sriramk wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean when Netflix streaming started - they've been around for a long time doing DVDs :).

I don't understand why people forget they have the DVD business. That's why I subscribed, and I've always been a subscriber. Everything comes out on DVD eventually, so you can watch almost anything through Netflix if you're willing to wait. And there's plenty of media there to fill the time.

I guess what it often comes down to for me is that I don't really need a video rental store (online/shipping or brick and mortar) too often. For the one or two movies I consider "must see" each year, I go to the theater. For the ones that I still definitely want to check out later, there are on-demand streaming rentals that allow me to decide what to watch and have it there immediately.

Then as films get farther and farther from their release windows, they turn up on HBO or Netflix streaming, etc. It's just a smaller niche for me between wanting to see it at release and not caring when I get around to watching it.

Since Netflix added streaming it's essentially taken the place of basic cable for me (rather than replacing Blockbuster). With basic cable you can't always count on something being on at a given time but you can usually skim through the options and find something enjoyable. That's how I am with Netflix. The only difference is that Netflix costs $10/mo whereas basic cable costs $50+.

I like the fact that a company is managing to compete with cable networks without actually being a (traditional) cable network. Their shows may not always beat the best of HBO but they sure as hell beat USA, TBS, and the long list of "random shows and movies" cable channels.

Re: Netflix Is Betting Its Future on Exclusive Programming

#106

Post by Spooky23 »

mreiland wrote: post #90
EnderMB wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've only watched a handful of their shows, but I'm yet to watch a Netflix show that isn't great. House of Cards is fantastic, Daredevil as you say is amazing, Bojack Horseman is hilarious, and Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt is a breath of fresh air.

season 3 of house of cards is trash imo. The rest was brilliant, and it hurts. I went from watching characters with an actual goal struggling and overcoming obstacles to meet that goal to watching a soap opera.

They went beyond updating and Americanizing the British show, and ended up with contrived drama and bad Putin impersonation. Writing a good show is hard!

Re: Netflix Is Betting Its Future on Exclusive Programming

#107

Post by untog »

panglott wrote: post #93
sriramk wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean when Netflix streaming started - they've been around for a long time doing DVDs :).

I don't understand why people forget they have the DVD business. That's why I subscribed, and I've always been a subscriber. Everything comes out on DVD eventually, so you can watch almost anything through Netflix if you're willing to wait. And there's plenty of media there to fill the time.

I don't understand why people forget they have the DVD business.

Presumably because it is becoming a smaller and smaller part of their business. That's the reason they wanted to spin it off as Quikster. DVD rental also isn't available on the subscription package that most users have.

Re: Netflix Is Betting Its Future on Exclusive Programming

#108

Post by tomjen3 »

mreiland wrote: post #90
EnderMB wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've only watched a handful of their shows, but I'm yet to watch a Netflix show that isn't great. House of Cards is fantastic, Daredevil as you say is amazing, Bojack Horseman is hilarious, and Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt is a breath of fresh air.

season 3 of house of cards is trash imo. The rest was brilliant, and it hurts. I went from watching characters with an actual goal struggling and overcoming obstacles to meet that goal to watching a soap opera.

Agreed. I also hated the newest season of Orange is the new black.

Maybe they are too focused on their new exclusive shows to stay on top and make sure the new old ones are also good?

Re: Netflix Is Betting Its Future on Exclusive Programming

#109

Post by mreiland »

joshuapants wrote: post #100
mreiland wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

season 3 of house of cards is trash imo. The rest was brilliant, and it hurts. I went from watching characters with an actual goal struggling and overcoming obstacles to meet that goal to watching a soap opera.

I don't want to spoil anything so I'll be vague. The problem is that the main character went from being a conniving underdog to the top of the stack way too quickly. Now the stakes are much lower because he already got what he wanted, and it's much less interesting to watch. If you look at the British series, it's much shorter, and for good reason.

I feel like they butchered the character by making him 'angsty', and I personally hated the way the 3rd season ended. It exemplified everything I disliked about the 3rd season.

The opening scene for the season 1 had me hooked. They defined that character so well with that opening scene and I was immediately interested to see what this character was willing to do.

Then season 3 happened and I find he's turned into every other character in every other modern show.

I wish they had taken the approach of just making him ruthless towards the other nations in achieving the US's goals instead of the direction they went in.

Re: Netflix Is Betting Its Future on Exclusive Programming

#110

Post by dennisgorelik »

sschueller wrote: post #69
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…

Netflix is making the same mistakes. They sold the rights of "House of Cards" to Sky Television preventing anyone from watching season 3 in most of Europe.

The viewers are better off without watching House of Cards season 3 - the show deteriorated quite significantly by now.
Post reply on HN