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

Netflix is now worth more than $100B

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 321 posts

Re: Netflix is now worth more than $100B

#241

Post by majewsky »

p10_user wrote: post #231
xapata wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> research and evidence The trouble is that income/wealth inequality is often ignored in macroeconomic models. The math gets tough and an easy way to simplify the equations is to assume an equilibrium growth path. More complex models use a dynamic stochastic general equilibrium, but an equilibrium all the same. Unfortunately, the key feature of rising inequality is that it may move the system into an unstable equilib…

I think the “us vs them” mentality is too strong here. Don’t you think these billionaires are just as against each other (if not more so) than against the common man?

If that is so, why are cartels a thing?

Re: Netflix is now worth more than $100B

#242

Post by kgwgk »

jjeaff wrote: post #208
whoisjuan wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wall Street is now comfortable with the idea of very long-term tech investing and multiple consecutive years of no profit generation... This is what Amazon has been doing for 20 years. People don't buy Netflix stock because they think it's gonna be profitable tomorrow, but rather because they expect it to be so dominant that when they start generating profits, they would be massive.

Amazon is generating plenty of profit for investors. And the best kind of profit too, capital gains. Why pay out dividends to your investors with after tax money that will be taxed again at a higher rate when you can just stash it overseas and buy more capital assets and let the stock grow in perpetuity. Same with apple. As an investor, you don't need dividends, you just sell a few shares each quarter.

Apple does pay a dividend. And gives even more money to shareholders in the form of buybacks. The total shareholder yield (dividends plus buybacks, divided by market cap) looks quite different for Amazon and Apple:

https://advisortools.zacks.com/Research/Stocks/AAPL/Sharehol... https://advisortools.zacks.com/Research/Stocks/AMZN/Sharehol...

Re: Netflix is now worth more than $100B

#243

Post by Retric »

Balgair wrote: post #203
Retric wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sustained 3% US GDP growth is overly optimistic. We have 0.7% population growth, and no obvious major investments. The computer boom is mostly over with the low hanging fruit taken. Prior to that we had IC engines and electricity, but nothing on the horizon seems to have that kind of potential to radically reshape society. And to double the economy every 25 years you need regular dramatic shits. PS: Look at the past…

The only things I can think of are: 1) AI. Somehow, we finally get the AI working, and it somehow produces a lot more jobs. I really think the opposite will happen, but who knows. 2) Climate Change. The ever rising waters and the ever worsening storms will cause nations to re/build large infrastructure projects. Think seawalls and repairing the NYC subway. I don't think that will be good, as it'll mostly just be debt…

#1 Seems more likely to destroy jobs than create them. It could be an engine for growth, but self driving for example have taken a long time and vast investment. It's useful, but seems to have limited direct benefits.

#2 is a broken window fallacy. It may create some up months, but you need increased productivity for sustained growth.

#3 Biotech has been around for a long time. It's a world of hard problems, and again you need increased effecency not novelty to drive sustained growth.

Re: Netflix is now worth more than $100B

#244

Post by textor »

losteric wrote: post #85
eldavido wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of sophisticated financial people share your thinking. The problem is there's no growth to be found anywhere. People are cheering for 3% GDP growth in the US. Interest rates are at all-time historical lows, meaning discount rates are lower than they've ever been. These macro trends have added up to an environment where people are willing to pay staggering premiums for even a remote shot at growth. It's affectin…

To what degree does income inequality, consumer debt, and rapidly rising barriers of entry to high-income fields contribute slowing GDP growth? Is there research and evidence on the subject? I'm just an engineer with basic financial survival skills... but blind intuition suggests fixing those problems is necessary for a sustainable growing economy. "Trickle-down" theory and growing inequality drains economic activity…

Not trying to invalidate your larger argument, but it's worth noting that there is no such thing as "trickle-down theory"https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2015/04/sorry-but-trickle-down.... Never was, never will be. It's a strawman through and through, originating in mockery, amounting to nothing more than "screw the poor" slogan that no self-interested economist could have endorsed. Its only purpose is to ridicule the perfectly valid – and hard – question of optimal tax policy that achieves long-term budget prificit without stifling development of businesses. Hilariously enough, some less than savvy people with conservative inclinations have defended and adopted this strawman as if it was a legitimate model, but this has more to do with meme dynamics than with economic policies.

As for your larger argument, well, this is a just-so model. There are many different ones, in favour of different policies, of course. But, realistically speaking, constant growth of a developed economy was never possible. However well you reduce inequality or deal with automation-related job loss, there are limits to attainable market expansion. Stagnation or, at best, negligible growth are something we need to learn to face.

Re: Netflix is now worth more than $100B

#245

Post by sytelus »

anilshanbhag wrote: post #19

The entire stock market feels like its in a bubble. Netflix stock gained more than 25% in the past one month. Their free cash flow (FCF) has been negative every single quarter and will be for many quarters to come. Stocks trade based on discounted cash flow(DCF). Netflix however produces no material return for investors and still majority of the analysts keep putting higher and higher price targets, its like they are…

How do you reconcile with the fact that P/E ratio is still just 56. In 2000, just before the dotcom bubble burst, Nasdaq stocks traded at a staggering price-earnings ratio of 175.

Also, Netflix revenues have been growing at staggering rate too: https://ycharts.com/companies/NFLX/revenues. Remember market responds to change in revenue over time, not the absolute value of revenue. I think it wouldn't be fair to say that stock prices are completely out of sync with revenue growth.

Re: Netflix is now worth more than $100B

#246

Post by vitorgrs »

Johnny555 wrote: post #221
bufferoverflow wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The problem is there's no growth to be found anywhere. Cryptocurrencies and ICOs. Applied neural networks. Automation. Good electric cars. To the point where people are prepaying for something that might be built in a few years. Good cheap batteries.

> Automation It seems like this is the opposite of growth - as more jobs are automated, fewer people will be able to buy the products that are created by the automation.

But these products will be way cheaper :)

Re: Netflix is now worth more than $100B

#247

Post by jedberg »

azemetre wrote: post #227
jedberg wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Netflix has assets too. They own a whole bunch of original shows and movies. For comparison, The Big Bang Theory has been worth a couple billion to CBS just in syndication. They also have a worldwide CDN capable of delivering high definition video around the world. And lastly, they have 20 years of movie viewing history. Their prediction models alone are probably worth many billions to the movie studios.

Netflix doesn't even own a studio, they pay others to produce their content. They don't syndicate their shows, they don't sell much merchandise, and they don't sell their "prediction models" or user data. Don't get me wrong, Netflix does a lot of things right but the way they manage their entertainment divisions is extremely odd. We have over a 100 years of lessons from Hollywood and paying others to produce your con…

> Netflix doesn't even own a studio, they pay others to produce their content.

They have a very large studio actually:

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-netflix-bronson-201701...

http://variety.com/2017/digital/news/netflix-expands-lease-h...

> They don't syndicate their shows, they don't sell much merchandise, and they don't sell their "prediction models" or user data.

The OP said "Amazon has assets". But using your argument, Amazon doesn't use any of their assets either, except for themselves.

The point is they have things they could sell that have value if they had to, just like every other public company's assets.

Re: Netflix is now worth more than $100B

#248

Post by vitorgrs »

mschuster91 wrote: post #25
dvt wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

N different services still come out cheaper than cable. I pay for Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon Prime (which comes with Video) so let's say ~ $30 a month. Compared to Cox Cable, it's not even close -- $30 is Cox' entry level cable offering (and I can't share it with my family, nor watch shows at my own leisure). My bet is that there's plenty of cash still left. Until cable companies wise up (which is probably never), Net…

> N different services still come out cheaper than cable. For the US which is used to pay triple digit sums a month for basic TV yes, but for Europeans? No way. For Germans, for example, it's the (mandatory) public-broadcast fee of 18€/month/household and maybe 20-30€ if you really really want pay TV (add another 30-40€ for the premium sports but these can be streamed all over the net). So basically the delta between…

Always found that interesting in Europe. In Brazil, you don't pay for "public-broadcast" (as we call here, open TV). But could you tell me more about private channels on public TV?

Re: Netflix is now worth more than $100B

#249

Post by vitorgrs »

1123581321 wrote: post #6
ebbv wrote: post #2

Can we infer from this that at the end of Q3 they had ~25 million subscribers? I am not planning to cancel Netflix but I am frustrated at how terrible most of the content is, and how hard it is to find anything with the current interface. I hope they're rethinking their UX and reconsidering their current approach of "License a bunch of really cheap awful content to make it seem like there's a lot of stuff to watch."

Netflix is focused on original content. Their interface is designed to emphasize it as well as licensed movies and TV they think you’ll like. If your home screen is like mine, they barely have room to recommend licensed B-content anymore. It’s not my favorite way to display information, but they manage to display enough interesting material I haven’t seen yet to get me to choose one. Anything beyond that isn’t actual…

Yeah, it's more like a marketing/sales recommendation, and I guess it works for general people.

Re: Netflix is now worth more than $100B

#250

Post by vitorgrs »

e40 wrote: post #41
ioquatix wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing that bothers me is how long it takes for content to come to Netflix. For example, in NZ, I still don't have access to season 2 of The Expanse. Remind me again why I'm paying monthly for this service!?

The Expanse is not their content, so it will always take longer to get to Netflix (if it ever shows up). Amazon had a teaser for The Expanse, and season 1 was free. I ended up buying season 2, because I couldn't find good subtitles for the torrent I downloaded. I did this with Mr Robot, too. I can't hear as well as I used to and subtitles are really important to me.

In some markets, it's considered original content. Just like Designated Survivor, Riverdale it's considered original content too (in some countries, it may not be. Here in Brazil Riverdale it's exclusive to Warner Channel for example, and it will just go to Netflix when it ends on Warner I guess). Here all (almost all?) BBC series go to Netflix as "original content". When it ends on BBC, then they release as original on Netflix.
Post reply on HN