Live data from Hacker News

Netflix Is Bluffing

techcrunch.com

21–30 of 48 posts

Re: Netflix Is Bluffing

#21
post #7

I wish Netflix would transition fast to an HBO model where they produce their own content. I could see them establishing a kickstarter like content crowd-funding option (opt-in) for say 15 $ / month extra where users would vote on shows, finance them & bring them to life. just imagine what/if scenarios would have played out when "Arrested development" was canceled if we had such an option back then. My point is, if k…

I'm not saying a Kickstarter type model wouldn't work, but keep in mind that one episode of a show like Game of Thrones* can cost around five million dollars to produce.

* http://www.westeros.org/GoT/Features/Entry/3988/

Re: Netflix Is Bluffing

#22
post #3

Netflix's problem is that there are no switching barriers to keep viewers loyal to Netflix. Even they admit that their vaunted queue is worth much less in the streaming world than it was in the DVD by mail world. Their strength would be the content deals they have, and their ability to obtain future content. But that right now is notoriously bad. Most of the current or best movies of any star or franchise are not ava…

I assume Amazon thinks they can build a better player and a better content distribution infrastructure for less money/time than it would cost to acquire and integrate Netflix.

I think they're right. There's nothing revolutionary Netflix is doing, and if Amazon can't compete on digital content delivery, what they hell are they doing giving Kindle Fires away at almost cost?

Re: Netflix Is Bluffing

#23
post #6

Netflix focusses on movie/tv-series subscription model (streaming+dvds), and they are laser focussed on improving consumer experience in this area. On the other hand, Apple, Google, Amazon focus on other businesses (hardware, advertising, and e-commerce). That's why I think Netflix will survive, and that's why startups survive and thrive: Focus!

The problem is for avid tv-series watcher (I admit I am one) netflix is a very bad solution. The obvious problem is that they do not have the fresh stuff. I wouldn't mind some delay, but when it's a season worth of delay, it stops being useful. This, however, is not the worst part - I also watch some old ones. But even there - netflix has way less than full collection, some seasons are missing, some episodes are miss…

This is where torrents come in handy. It's amazing how easy it is to grab a whole season of a show in 720p (if it's just aired) or 1080p (if the Blu-ray set is out). Yesterday I torrented season 3 of Downton Abbey - it won't even air (in the US) until January! I use Anigrate[0] to keep track of which shows I've watched.

0: http://anigrate.glacicle.org/

Re: Netflix Is Bluffing

#24
This article is predicated on the argument that he who owns the content gets the revenue.

Let's keep in mind that in the first part of 2013, Netflix is going to be premiering both House of Cards and new episodes of Arrested Development. If they both do well, and Netflix can get more high-quality exclusives in the pipeline (admittedly both rather large 'ifs'), there's a real possibility that Netflix might find themselves in the very compelling and potentially lucrative position of being the first network of Showtime/HBO-caliber content that really understands digital distribution.

Re: Netflix Is Bluffing

#25
post #5
post #3

Netflix's problem is that there are no switching barriers to keep viewers loyal to Netflix. Even they admit that their vaunted queue is worth much less in the streaming world than it was in the DVD by mail world. Their strength would be the content deals they have, and their ability to obtain future content. But that right now is notoriously bad. Most of the current or best movies of any star or franchise are not ava…

>Netflix's problem is that there are no switching barriers to keep viewers loyal to Netflix. That's also their biggest strength. Apple's got all their vendor lock in, amazon is trying to build vendor lock in with the kindle fire line, google is trying to build a vendor lock in with google play. If you buy into that ecosystem, it's a good way to keep you. But if you don't want to buy into any specific manufacturer, ne…

I don't think Amazon cares about vendor lock-in. They've already got your credit card number and are really, really good at selling stuff over the web. They want to "lock" you in with Prime, their recommendations engine, and the other cross-selling benefits they get from being by far the web's biggest retailer.

With the arrival of the iOS app this summer, I don't think I have a device I can't watch Amazon Instant on (TiVo, a couple of cheap Sony Blu-ray players, iPad, iPhone...)

Re: Netflix Is Bluffing

#26
This article makes a couple good points, but the assumption that competitiveness can only be measured in capitalization is stupid. Anyone who believes that need simply review the proportion of acquisitions by fortune 500's that are still competitive in their markets 5 years later.

In annoying MBA language: cost of goods for cinematic content is falling rapidly due to technological and social progress, and this is reducing the negotiation power of large integrated production and marketing companies like the big studios.

The cost of script-writing and conceptual development is largely constant and independent of production cost. Nearly every feature of production cost is falling rapidly, from cameras to post production technologies. Even location shooting, which you might assume independent of technological factors, is being rapidly undercut by digital backdrops (which became the norm in cinema quality television shows with shocking speed).

The net effect of all this change is that negotiation power is moving from large integrated studio ventures to original content producers. Small production companies are less dependent on the capital advances, production infrastructure and marketing channels the big studios can offer.

Netflix definitely understands this, and also understands that the current Hollywood players fail to meet significant areas of demand. You see this in their choices of what productions they've funded directly like arrested development. It's a high risk venture, but it's not just a bluff or impossible. They are hiding in the blind spot of nearly all large market players: the unwillingness to abandon or cannibalize currently profitable activities because of changing market conditions.

Re: Netflix Is Bluffing

#27
post #4

I have both Amazon Video (through Prime) and Netflix. I use Netflix infinitely more because of my Apple TV; the streaming-to-TV ease of use is the simplest I've found, and cheap (since my and my housemates all split the already-small Netflix bill.) If Amazon had a stronger solution to this use case, I'd be much more inclined to use it. But even if the content is great (and it is -- Amazon Video has a lot of stuff Net…

I have an amazon prime app on my ps3. Works great.

Re: Netflix Is Bluffing

#28
Firstly, the title is linkbait and is a total non sequitur. What's the bluff? Is Reed Hastings lying when he says Amazon is spending $1B? Probably not, as the author admits. Basically the title is meaningless.

Secondly, Kirwin (the author) is making the classic mistake of seeing all these big massive companies entering the market and thus declaring that Netflix is doomed. The problem is that for these companies, video is an afterthought compared to the main product. Netflix is completely focused on video. There have been countless cases of nimbler, smaller companies out-executing larger, broader companies. I can understand why the author makes this mistake - his background is primarily in film production and working at Paramount and Microsoft (the article says he has worked at some startups, but none that I could find on his site).

I find it ironic that Kirwin is calling out tech bloggers for being "wannabe Hollywood analysts," when it seems to me that he is a Hollywood blogger writing as a wannabe tech analyst.

Re: Netflix Is Bluffing

#29
The problem with VOD is that Hollywood holds all the cards (as the article points out). With DVD, Netflix had leverage because the movie studios sold DVDs. Fair use and first sale offered Netflix the leverage and cover to get content at reasonable prices. With VOD, Hollywood can negotiate rates to their liking. I'm sure a part of Hollywood wouldn't mind Netflix dying with the logic being that customers would buy more DVDs if that happened (I'm not saying that would be the outcome, but that seems to be the logic that parts of Hollywood might employ).

This is one of the reasons I was saddened by Netflix de-emphasizing DVDs by mail. That part of the business offered them leverage over streaming rates. "Look at it this way: you can offer us movie X for 30 cents per viewing or we can buy a DVD of it and rent it to 200 people for that $20 purchase." It provides a compelling scenario: $20 for 200 people seeing the film vs. $60 for 200 people seeing the film. However, as Netflix's customer base moves to all-VOD and Netflix itself indicates that DVD by mail is going to become a thing of the past, studios see a Netflix without an alternative to whatever rate they set. Netflix used to have an alternative rate: the price of the DVD.

I'm not exactly sure how we should deal with this situation. I don't think VOD services can realistically thrive unless they get similar footing to what DVD-rental businesses got. Specifically, that they can get a show on equal terms to their competitors (ie. Amazon, Netflix, and my hypothetical video startup can all license movie X for 30 cents per viewing or whatnot). In the meantime, exclusives, content that disappears due to renegotiated licenses, content that won't be licensed, etc. will be the status quo. These are bad ideas (it's 1 am and I'm tired), but maybe something like "you can rent by streaming X times a DVD that you've purchased" so that they could pay the DVD's price and that price would cover a number of streaming rentals or a law saying that companies must give substantially equal access and terms on their content.

Re: Netflix Is Bluffing

#30
post #4

I have both Amazon Video (through Prime) and Netflix. I use Netflix infinitely more because of my Apple TV; the streaming-to-TV ease of use is the simplest I've found, and cheap (since my and my housemates all split the already-small Netflix bill.) If Amazon had a stronger solution to this use case, I'd be much more inclined to use it. But even if the content is great (and it is -- Amazon Video has a lot of stuff Net…

There's the Roku, but that's not a solution from Amazon. It's half the price of Apple TV though.

I switched from an Apple TV to a Roku for Plex, but the Roku's usability is far worse.
Post reply on HN