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

Netflix loses 1M users in Spain over password policing

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 966 posts

Re: Netflix loses 1M users in Spain over password policing

#541

Post by erehweb »

dcow wrote: post #458

What I truly don’t understand is why everyone decided they needed their own streaming platforms. What’s the strategy there? Why does Disney need to invest resources into Disney+ when they can just sell the rights to their content to one or two Streaming platforms and make more money? Did they think it would be cheaper to build their own platforms? Same for all the others. Who cares if Netflix owns the streaming user-…

Disney is very protective of its brand, so having its own platform makes it very easy to control how its content is distributed / recommended / categorized. Plus they get to see micro details on how people engage with it - is there a spot in a film that is too tense, and kids stop? Or where action flags, and people take a break?

Re: Netflix loses 1M users in Spain over password policing

#542

Post by tmpz22 »

mikeryan wrote: post #313
Jenk wrote: post #79

Netflix have really dissapointed me. I've been a subscriber since before streaming, and have even been content paying the subscription fee during the "breaks" of not using their service for up to months at a time because I so badly want(ed) them to succeed. I also understood the difficult situation they were facing when the producers of content were makkng ridiculous demands on their distribution, or worse, just pull…

When Reed Hasting left and Ted Sarandos took over he had a bit of power shakeup and handed over the content reins to Bela Bajaria - who was brought in to head up international over Cindy Holland who was in charge of US content. Holland had brought in House of Cards, Orange Is the New Black, Stranger Things, The Crown, Ozark and Narcos. Holland seemed to focus more on developing fewer shows of higher quality content w…

Do any of these executives deserve credit for the hits when Netflix earned a reputation for greenlighting just about anything?

Re: Netflix loses 1M users in Spain over password policing

#543

Post by fundad »

usefulcat wrote: post #540
pier25 wrote: post #483

Netflix really messed this up. They shouldn't have tried to tackle password sharing. Instead they should have enforced concurrent streams and let people pay for more concurrent streams. Psychologically it's very different and people paying for the premium plan of 4 streams would probably not be affected.

Did they? This should certainly reduce their expenses related to their streaming infrastructure. And if most of the affected people weren't paying anyway, it will have little or no effect on their revenue. It will result in less word of mouth, and possibly a bit of negative press. If subscriptions don't go up afterwards and streaming infrastructure costs are a sufficiently small portion of their total expenses, then…

Yes this sounds like 1M potential customers for the ad-supported tier which makes more than a paying paid customer for now.

Re: Netflix loses 1M users in Spain over password policing

#544

Post by londons_explore »

pier25 wrote: post #483

Netflix really messed this up. They shouldn't have tried to tackle password sharing. Instead they should have enforced concurrent streams and let people pay for more concurrent streams. Psychologically it's very different and people paying for the premium plan of 4 streams would probably not be affected.

They could have done smart things like telling you have hit the stream limit at a key moment in a show - perhaps 10 mins from the end. When you really don't want to just say 'nah, I'll watch the rest another day when I'm not at the stream limit'.

Re: Netflix loses 1M users in Spain over password policing

#545

Post by josho »

jstarfish wrote: post #539
rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote: post #515

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Netflix has been enforcing concurrent streams for a while now, no? Four adults that live in four different houses sharing one Netflix account might not ever bump up against the four concurrent stream limit. Their concurrent usage might be quite similar to a family of four under one roof. But critically, the four adults are all technically capable of paying for their own subscriptions, while the children of the family…

> Four adults that live in four different houses sharing one Netflix account might not ever bump up against the four concurrent stream limit. Their concurrent usage might be quite similar to a family of four under one roof. Realistically, the case to allow password sharing is four family members, living under the same roof, but not sharing the same internet connection. If the family is watching Netflix on their own p…

Those users won’t be affected by password sharing restrictions. The implementation details take into consideration those scenarios.

Re: Netflix loses 1M users in Spain over password policing

#546

Post by baq »

rurp wrote: post #402
baq wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good shows are usually expensive in their first season and always in later seasons. Expensive is a word accounting, finance and investors really don’t like.

But then why do the rug pull of making one or two seasons of a good show and then killing it? That serves to piss off everyone who took the time to watch and get interested in the show. If Netflix only wants to make reality tv they should just own that. I stopped even considering Netflix shows with only one or two seasons because they almost always get killed mid-story. Which means I pretty much never watch Netflix n…

It works short term to attract new subscriptions, which is what counted until last year.

Let's say you aren't alone in your subscription situation, to put it mildly.

Re: Netflix loses 1M users in Spain over password policing

#547

Post by muffinman26 »

MichaelDickens wrote: post #485
muffinman26 wrote: post #460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bringing up episodic television shows in the 90s brings up an interesting point. For 90s episodic television, script submissions were open to the public. Each show still had a team of staff writers like they do today, but the staff writers would mostly write the really important episodes (like finales and two-parters). The bulk of the episodes would be freelance scripts, with the staff writers editing for consistency…

> The bulk of the episodes would be freelance scripts, with the staff writers editing for consistency and adding an extra scene or two to hint at continuing plot threads Can you name a few shows that were written that way? I'd never heard of this but I don't watch much TV from before the 2000's.

I know that at least Star Trek: The Next Generation and the Golden Girls accepted freelance scripts. You can sometimes find the submission guidelines for Star Trek: The Next Generation on fan sites. You can also tell if this is the case for a show by looking at the writers. If there are lots of writers who only wrote one or two episodes, the show probably took submissions.

All the old books about television script writing I've read are about submitting in this way, but by the time I was actually considering it episodic television was rapidly dying out.

Re: Netflix loses 1M users in Spain over password policing

#548

Post by nmz »

dcow wrote: post #458

What I truly don’t understand is why everyone decided they needed their own streaming platforms. What’s the strategy there? Why does Disney need to invest resources into Disney+ when they can just sell the rights to their content to one or two Streaming platforms and make more money? Did they think it would be cheaper to build their own platforms? Same for all the others. Who cares if Netflix owns the streaming user-…

Considering how many companies Disney has been acquiring. It is absolutely the right choice.

Re: Netflix loses 1M users in Spain over password policing

#549

Post by ModernMech »

prepend wrote: post #403
ModernMech wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I genuinely don't understand this sentiment in 2023. Maybe in 2003 it was reasonable, but if you have the money, just spend it to buy the content you want. I get that there's a lot of "crap" that you don't want to see, but I appreciate some of that, and I'm sure you appreciate some of what I call "crap". I don't see how you go from that situation to justifying not paying for it. There's a price for the content and it…

I use plex as an interface and it organizes my content in an easy to find and watch manner. It’s the fewest clicks to see new content. Comically I subscribe to many online services (Hulu, Netflix, apple+) and will end up discovering and watching new shows through plex and my rss feeds than the actual apps. So pirating still gives me the best user interface. Especially with combining content from multiple services. Al…

So piracy gives you the best UI. Sure. But why do you believe your need for the best UI is enough to clear the bar for ethics when it comes to violating other people's IP rights? Stealing food from the store is way more convenient than going through the line. Best UI there is for grocery shopping.

Re: Netflix loses 1M users in Spain over password policing

#550

Post by fundad »

dcow wrote: post #458

What I truly don’t understand is why everyone decided they needed their own streaming platforms. What’s the strategy there? Why does Disney need to invest resources into Disney+ when they can just sell the rights to their content to one or two Streaming platforms and make more money? Did they think it would be cheaper to build their own platforms? Same for all the others. Who cares if Netflix owns the streaming user-…

It was a ZIRP thing
Post reply on HN