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

Update on Sharing

about.netflix.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 325 posts

Re: Update on Sharing

#181

Post by jackson1442 »

librish wrote: post #171

I feel like the moral outrage over this is a little overblown. Reading the terms it seems clear that Netflix is targeting people who are blatantly account sharing. It makes sense to worry that this will inconvenience people who have non-typical lifestyles though. Similarly, saying this is a bad business move seems without any evidence seems rash. I don't think anyone at Netflix particularly _wants_ to implement this…

Most of the backlash is because:

- one of the things you pay for in your netflix tier is the number of "screens" - 4 screens = 4 simaltaneous streams. Many people think the screens are theirs to use how they see fit

- netflix used to _encourage_ password sharing[0]

- and of course, the number one rule of the internet: never charge for what you used to offer for free

[0]: https://twitter.com/netflix/status/840276073040371712

Re: Update on Sharing

#182

Post by paxys »

Time to finally see whether the "this will make everyone cancel their subscriptions and kill Netflix" crowd knows the business better than Netflix's data analysts.

Re: Update on Sharing

#183

Post by pdimitar »

wlesieutre wrote: post #26
2023throwawayy wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup. Especially given their propensity to cancel shows on a whim.

It's become a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy, like how people didn't trust Google to keep Stadia running so why would they buy full price games on it? Why would I pay for Netflix and get excited about their shows when so many get canned with no conclusion? But as more people say that and don't bother watching until there's a whole finished story, then even more shows get canceled earlier because nobody watched the…

That's self-inflicted. They're the ones who turned themselves into a worldwide known meme. Now they're suffering the consequences of their lack of dedication.

It's not on customers to respect the corporation's whims. Customers vote with their wallets.

Re: Update on Sharing

#184

Post by crazygringo »

m00x wrote: post #173
crazygringo wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their stock went from $690 in Oct 2021 to $175 in June 2022. That's a 75% plummet, which is definitely approaching the equivalent of struggling-to-keep-the-lights-on for a modern corporation. That's three quarters of the way to bankruptcy, big red flashing danger lights. So of course this is a calculated bet to improve profitability. Virtually everything a for-profit corporation does is to improve profitability -- th…

?? They're profitable and they made 4.5B in net income in 2022. 2023Q1 they made 1.3B net income. Your analysis makes no sense. Please learn more about finances before commenting on financial matters.

Please don't be insulting by telling other people what to learn.

And if you look at the quarter before -- 2022Q4 -- they made just $55 million net income, which on revenue of 7.85B is below 1% profit.

The overall point is that Netflix is in an extremely volatile and risky industry where it's not in a position to leisurely "extract" more profit because it's a bad guy or something, but rather it's very much been forced into doing things like cracking down on password sharing and introducing an ad-supporter tier simply to stay healthy as a business. Fortunately both of those things seem to be going well, but they easily might not have.

If a company's market cap drops 75% in a short period of time, it's making big changes out of necessity, not as a comfortable choice.

Re: Update on Sharing

#185

Post by pdimitar »

hahajk wrote: post #167
joshe wrote: post #161

One tip I use is to not waste money is never be subscribed to any streaming platform. So sign up for 1 month, cancel immediately and then watch what you wish for the month. Netflix used to be a pretty good deal because they had a depth of great old content from the major studios. But now it's scattered all over the other services, and we've all seen most of their decent original content. Doing it this way I'm subscri…

I think this strategy will only work a little longer. The crackdown on sharing is only start. As the pressure increases on streaming services to turn more profits I'd expect longer contract lengths. I wouldn't be surprised to see Adobe-style "reduced price monthly payment" contracts from the more corporate services.

They're free to try that and much more. However it's not like the customers have a gun at their head. You don't need a PhD to conclude you're being squeezed. At one point people just turn their backs and make do without the service.

Squeezing the customers has soft limits and it's always hilarious to watch corporations being oblivious to them.

Re: Update on Sharing

#186

Post by mynegation »

nocoiner wrote: post #21

I really dislike how every corporate communication regarding an “update” now means “here’s how we’re making things worse for you.” I know honesty has never really been the fundamental value of public relations initiatives, but it would be refreshing to occasionally see a company saying that they’re putting the squeeze on customers because they need to protect their margins or even just because they can. The formerly-…

I do not see anything dishonest here. No lies, no broken promises. If anything it is a bit passive-aggressive, but essentially the message is: “many of you are breaking terms or service and we are going to le you know we know who you are, as a warning”.

Re: Update on Sharing

#187

Post by gathersnow »

I was a member of Netflix from 90s to about 2021. The beginning of the streaming era was great. But since then Netflix has a long history of being user-hostile that I said goodbye to them many years ago. I got sick of their stupid auto-play feature that couldn't be disabled.

They used to seemingly care helping you find new movies you like based on a star rating. Remember the Netflix challenge? Now I suppose there's a thumbs up, but really they probably just gauge based on if you watch or not.

Instead of adding tools to help people find a life-altering hidden gem of a movie they took them away. When their catalogue got exposed for being mostly garbage they just made it harder to stray from the most popular movies on the service. They had a social component I liked but they got rid of it a decade ago. Imagine if it were like letterboxd and you could have people you follow whose taste you liked and could trust to recommend movies? A company the size of Netflix would find this trivial to implement and yet they haven't because they want to make their service as stupid as possible. What about something like a faux-cable experience for people that don't want to pick from a list of 30k things? They refused to do that so now Pluto exists.

There are tons of ways that I think you could add community value-add but Netflix never did because they take their users for granted. I am sure this is literally a play to boost subscriber numbers based on how it went down in other countries. We'll see how it works but I for one have zero loyalty based on the contempt they show for the people that consume their product.

Re: Update on Sharing

#188

Post by crazygringo »

mikeortman wrote: post #155
crazygringo wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The logic seems pretty clear to me, both in terms of financial necessity (keeping Netflix in business) and in terms of policy for households. And Netflix is a private company, so however dependents or health insurance or voting or phone plans are defined is irrelevant. Also, all of those definitions are different from each other anyways , so it's not like there's any consistency in the first place.

This isn’t about keeping Netflix in business, they are doing just fine. This is about squeezing out every last drop of exponential growth expected by shareholders.

Their stock plummeted 75% between Oct 2021 and June 2022. That's not "doing just fine" by any standard.

So no, this isn't about squeezing out every last drop, this is about making necessary structural changes to remain viable in the long-term.

Re: Update on Sharing

#189

Post by notatoad »

i see the thread is full of people predicting that this is going to be a bad decision for netflix, because they personally cancelled their accounts or are going to. and i cancelled my netflix account too - recent changes to pricing and policies made me re-assess whether it was worth it for me, and i decided it wasnt'.

but it's always good to remember that our own actions aren't necessarily the same as everybody else's. netflix has been rolling this out in a slow and cautious way across their territories, surely monitoring the impact, and decided to continue. and earnings are up, they've beaten or at least met projections the last couple quarters. whatever they're doing seems to be working.

Re: Update on Sharing

#190

Post by bombcar »

hahajk wrote: post #167
joshe wrote: post #161

One tip I use is to not waste money is never be subscribed to any streaming platform. So sign up for 1 month, cancel immediately and then watch what you wish for the month. Netflix used to be a pretty good deal because they had a depth of great old content from the major studios. But now it's scattered all over the other services, and we've all seen most of their decent original content. Doing it this way I'm subscri…

I think this strategy will only work a little longer. The crackdown on sharing is only start. As the pressure increases on streaming services to turn more profits I'd expect longer contract lengths. I wouldn't be surprised to see Adobe-style "reduced price monthly payment" contracts from the more corporate services.

"The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers."

As it is right now it's cheaper for me to hit up Disney+ for a month rather than rent or buy a new release elsewhere, but as that gets harder the less I'll consume.

Post reply on HN