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

Netflix Homes

help.netflix.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 80 posts

Re: Netflix Homes

#61

Post by hotpotamus »

wdb wrote: post #59
hotpotamus wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know, if you can afford a different house for a season, I suspect you could afford another Netflix account for that house.

Alternatively, so if you visit your parents every weekend, you can also afford another Netflix account for when you are visiting your parents?

I already use my parents' account, so it wouldn't apply to me so much. I wouldn't buy a Netflix account just for the weekends though; I suppose everyone will have to figure out how to spend their entertainment dollars to suit themselves in the brave new reality.

Re: Netflix Homes

#62

Post by qeternity »

sys_64738 wrote: post #20
qeternity wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The endless pursuit of revenue to suit shareholders. I don’t really understand these comments. Do you think Netflix is a charity? “Endless pursuit of revenue” is how they stay in business, employing people and yes, generating profits to shareholders. Imagine turning this same thinking around at other groups I’d imagine you sympathize with like unionizing workers: “In their endless pursuit of revenue, workers have d…

> I don’t really understand these comments. Do you think Netflix is a charity? That next marginal dollar of revenue in the short term is often at the expense of subscriber goodwill in the long term. Rebuilding burned goodwill is very hard to do and dooms the business in the long run.

Sure, that may be the case. But that's the risk Netflix runs.

How does that answer my question in the slightest?

Re: Netflix Homes

#63

Post by qeternity »

mping wrote: post #28
qeternity wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The endless pursuit of revenue to suit shareholders. I don’t really understand these comments. Do you think Netflix is a charity? “Endless pursuit of revenue” is how they stay in business, employing people and yes, generating profits to shareholders. Imagine turning this same thinking around at other groups I’d imagine you sympathize with like unionizing workers: “In their endless pursuit of revenue, workers have d…

False equivalence, companies want to increase profits sometimes at any cost, ethical or monetary. Workers want fair compensation.

What?!? Workers want as much compensation as possible, and rightly so, as any rational actor would.

Re: Netflix Homes

#64

Post by qeternity »

JohnHaugeland wrote: post #41
qeternity wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The endless pursuit of revenue to suit shareholders. I don’t really understand these comments. Do you think Netflix is a charity? “Endless pursuit of revenue” is how they stay in business, employing people and yes, generating profits to shareholders. Imagine turning this same thinking around at other groups I’d imagine you sympathize with like unionizing workers: “In their endless pursuit of revenue, workers have d…

Who doesn't sympathize with unionizing workers? Anyway, what they meant was "chasing short term profit bumps unwisely at the expense of long term satisfaction due to temporary economic stress"

People always say this, but there are plenty of companies that have been "chasing short term profits" for decades and are now worth hundreds of billions or trillions of dollars.

Plenty of armchair CEOs on this site who simply don't appreciate the market position and power of the companies they judge. I'm not saying this won't be bad for Netflix long run, I'm saying I simply don't know. But I would bet that Netflix management have spent a lot more time than either you or I to understand the implications.

Re: Netflix Homes

#65

Post by qeternity »

czstar wrote: post #40
moralestapia wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People share their Netflix account because they don't think it's worth the full value and/or they're are financially strained. If you raise the cost they will just leave, leaving Netflix with a total of $0 instead of a "small premium for the privilege" from them.

I suspect there are also people who share their account out of inertia. Some kids go off to college and stay on their parents’ account. Sometimes they don’t think about it since the password is stored on the app. Also, Netflix might be losing money when people share their account and want to get to a place where the profit per account increases and then go from there.

> I suspect there are also people who share their account out of inertia.

This move is perfect for these situations. The kids get a discounted Netflix account without losing their account.

Re: Netflix Homes

#66

Post by qeternity »

the_biot wrote: post #33
Comevius wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Compromising your products and services for profit is a slippery slope under normal circumstances, but streaming is a rather competitive market. What Netflix is doing is baffling, they are in the middle of a race for dominance. I think Netflix was too late to realize that they need to become an entertainment company like Disney or HBO and not a tech company, because that's Amazon and the world is too small for anothe…

I always hate to see it as well, when companies degrade their product for the tiniest bit of extra profit. It's the classic one-less-olive-in-airline-meal story. Remember when a Big Mac was actually a big burger? It's a very small burger, these days. Netflix is somewhat ahead of this slippery slope here, in that when they started producing their own content it was third-rate from the start, very much quantity of qual…

> Remember when a Big Mac was actually a big burger? It's a very small burger, these days.

And yet in spite of this, McDonald's Corp has never been more valuable.

See my point?

Re: Netflix Homes

#67

Post by qeternity »

Comevius wrote: post #30
qeternity wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The endless pursuit of revenue to suit shareholders. I don’t really understand these comments. Do you think Netflix is a charity? “Endless pursuit of revenue” is how they stay in business, employing people and yes, generating profits to shareholders. Imagine turning this same thinking around at other groups I’d imagine you sympathize with like unionizing workers: “In their endless pursuit of revenue, workers have d…

Compromising your products and services for profit is a slippery slope under normal circumstances, but streaming is a rather competitive market. What Netflix is doing is baffling, they are in the middle of a race for dominance. I think Netflix was too late to realize that they need to become an entertainment company like Disney or HBO and not a tech company, because that's Amazon and the world is too small for anothe…

> What Netflix is doing is baffling

I wouldn't agree with this, and apparently neither would they. But none of this answers my question.

Re: Netflix Homes

#68

Post by moralestapia »

qeternity wrote: post #65
czstar wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect there are also people who share their account out of inertia. Some kids go off to college and stay on their parents’ account. Sometimes they don’t think about it since the password is stored on the app. Also, Netflix might be losing money when people share their account and want to get to a place where the profit per account increases and then go from there.

> I suspect there are also people who share their account out of inertia. This move is perfect for these situations. The kids get a discounted Netflix account without losing their account.

The kids want Disney+ anyway.

Re: Netflix Homes

#69

Post by czstar »

freedom2099 wrote: post #58
czstar wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The comment you responded to was neither arrogant or superfluous. Prior to the internet people had cable TV subscriptions for their house and vacation house. The norm was TV subscription being location based. Now with the internet that changed a bit. Netflix is trying to come up with a way to ensure that people aren’t using a subscription login “unjustly” (as Netflix defines this). It’s a tricky problem to solve.

It’s not really exactly the same thing! A web services should not be location bound! What if next to access your email you have to be home or pay for any extra location? Following your previous line of reasoning to access standard mail you have to be home!

It wasn’t a line of reasoning or a justification. I was not justifying anything or arguing for or against anything. Web services are already location bound. For example, there are YouTube videos available in the U.S. but not in Russia. I’m certain there are emails legal to be sent and read in Iran that are not legal to be sent in the U.S. One state in the U.S. is attempting to ban abortion information being sent to people within that state’s borders (likely just posturing but the point stands).

I can see from Netflix’s perspective that maybe the cost of allowing too many streams from one account is not profitable. Clearly they think this is a problem.

Re: Netflix Homes

#70

Post by czstar »

wdb wrote: post #60
czstar wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The comment you responded to was neither arrogant or superfluous. Prior to the internet people had cable TV subscriptions for their house and vacation house. The norm was TV subscription being location based. Now with the internet that changed a bit. Netflix is trying to come up with a way to ensure that people aren’t using a subscription login “unjustly” (as Netflix defines this). It’s a tricky problem to solve.

Personally, I think they can solve the "unjustly" by not allowing to watch content at the same time from different locations

I think there must be a number of hours of streaming per month for one account beyond which it is unprofitable for Netflix. I think they are trying to get more accounts below this number.
Post reply on HN