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

Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros

about.netflix.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

561–570 of 1001 posts

Re: Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros

#561

Post by mulderc »

throwaway7783 wrote: post #555
thayne wrote: post #514

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want a separation between the streaming platform companies and the content making companies, so that the streaming companies can compete on making a better platform/service and the content companies compete on making better content. I don't want one company that owns everything, I want several companies that are able to license whatever content they want. And ideally the customer can choose between a subscription t…

This should really be the end goal. We are worse off than cable right now with all these streaming services and worse , overlapping content.

Strong disagree on being worse off than cable. I now almost never see ads, that is a huge benefit in my book.

Re: Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros

#562

Post by doctorpangloss »

jader201 wrote: post #519
phartenfeller wrote: post #52

I don't like this. Netflix rarely creates excellent content; instead, it frequently produces mediocre or worse content. Will the same happen for Warner? Are cinemas now second behind streaming? Edit: I agree Netflix has good Originals. But most are from the early days when they favored quality over quantity. It is sad to see that they reversed that. They have much funding power and should give it to great art that re…

> Are cinemas now second behind streaming? It feels like a race to the bottom. Movie and TV content quality has taken a nose dive in the past decade. Yes, there are exceptions, but it’s hard to find these days. Maybe it’s because producing movies/TV is so much easier and cheaper that there is now so much low quality noise, that it makes finding the high quality signal so difficult. But it seems like you used to be ab…

the kind of person who watches a LOT of television and movies likes slop, it's not complicated.

still different than media people PAY for. for example substack sells empty opinions that agree with you. it is totally wrong to say that slop sells. it is merely the highest engagement for an audience that DOESN'T pay.

you could say, "engagement is the wrong metric," but if that were really true, tech jobs would contract like 50%. the alternative becomes, "would you like fries with that?"

Re: Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros

#563

Post by DharmaPolice »

raw_anon_1111 wrote: post #155
mihaic wrote: post #126

It's always great to read about how the people the own the means of distribution aquire also the means of production, trying to create a meta-monopoly. /sarcasm I'm rooting for someone on the regulary side disliking all the crap that Netflix produces, and just shuts the whole thing down. Those 5 billion they'd have to pay for a breakup fee in that case would have me feeling better that I couldn't cancel their service…

There is no “monopoly” on either content distribution or creation. Amazon and Apple are both trillion dollar companies that have streaming services. Then there is Disney, Comcast (Peacock), Paramount, STARZ (standalone company), and AMC

The legal definition of monopoly in some jurisdictions means anyone with a large enough of a market share able to influence pricing, etc in a market. A market share as low as 25% can be called a monopoly. Does HBO+Netflix have a 25% share of the streaming market? I've no idea, but possibly.

Re: Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros

#564

Post by wooque »

chrisgd wrote: post #554
phartenfeller wrote: post #52

I don't like this. Netflix rarely creates excellent content; instead, it frequently produces mediocre or worse content. Will the same happen for Warner? Are cinemas now second behind streaming? Edit: I agree Netflix has good Originals. But most are from the early days when they favored quality over quantity. It is sad to see that they reversed that. They have much funding power and should give it to great art that re…

I would disagree. I think what you see is the popular, but less well done material. Dept Q was an original 8-10 episode detective drama that was highly thought of. It received no press but it likely showed up on your carousel. Netflix knows eventually you will find it but not sure they can bring you everything.

There is nothing original in Dept Q. It's British adaptation of Danish book and TV show.

Re: Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros

#565

Post by smallerfish »

hnben wrote: post #462
smallerfish wrote: post #449

I'm a fan. Injecting a huge catalog into Netflix is a win for consumers who want just one subscription. And injecting studio talent into Netflix (assuming the merge gives WB creatives influence) can only help. HBO's tech sucks. Apple is (in my experience) hard to get running in the Android ecosystem. Most of the other options are too narrow in catalog, or ad ridden. Consolidating streaming services down to a handful…

> Consolidating streaming services down to a handful of offerings will make price competition more fierce because they'll have richer catalogs to do battle with. this is not how markets usually work.

Correct, but the current market is not working. 15+ streaming services is terrible for consumers. Catalogs are compromised. Bigger services can push prices up because they have more stuff. Clearly if there are too few players then there's less competition and no price pressure, but there's a sweet spot between what exists today and that.

Re: Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros

#566

Post by BurningFrog »

throwaway7783 wrote: post #555
thayne wrote: post #514

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want a separation between the streaming platform companies and the content making companies, so that the streaming companies can compete on making a better platform/service and the content companies compete on making better content. I don't want one company that owns everything, I want several companies that are able to license whatever content they want. And ideally the customer can choose between a subscription t…

This should really be the end goal. We are worse off than cable right now with all these streaming services and worse , overlapping content.

Did people forget that on cable you could only watch what was being broadcast in that moment?

Streaming is infinitely better.

Re: Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros

#567

Post by devrundown »

alt227 wrote: post #517
devrundown wrote: post #468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pretty sure WWE would have an exclusivity clause that would prevent another pro-wrestling program on Netflix. But who knows!

WWE dont have the clout they used to. I remember when they were the number 1 viewed website on the internet. Nowadays the MMA & UFC is much more valuable.

Well UFC and WWE are both part of the TKO group.

Re: Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros

#568

Post by MangoToupe »

philipallstar wrote: post #453
MangoToupe wrote: post #426

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a rule of thumb, consolidation is never good. There are exceptions where consolidated services can improve (eg arguably physical infrastructure, healthcare), but in general this will not benefit the consumer.

As a rule of thumb maybe, but in this case it might well.

How? This only means prices will go up.

Re: Netflix to Acquire Warner Bros

#569

Post by butlike »

paxys wrote: post #210
palata wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Someday a new startup will piggy bank on Netflix and probably buy it later. I think what history shows us is that the modern monopolies managed to destroy antitrust to the point where nobody will ever do to them what they did to others.

People said that a generation ago as well, and the one before that. Yeah monopolies make it hard, but every one of them eventually crumbles to the next wave of innovation.

Yup. Can't redirect the ocean. So-to-speak.
Post reply on HN