Netflix's Subscriber Boom Shows the World is Accepting Internet TV (cnbc.com) 148
Netflix's boom in subscribers is a sign that the world is accepting internet TV, meaning without commercials and on-demand, said CEO Reed Hastings during an earnings call with investors. From a report: "The basic demand is increasing as people get more comfortable and more aware of Internet television where you don't get the commercial interruptions, where you get to watch where and when you want," said Hastings. Netflix reported $2.47 billion in revenue during Q4 2016, and earnings per share of 15 cents. The streaming giant wildly beat its original projections for subscriber additions, bringing in 7.05 million new customers compared to its Q3 estimate of 5.2 million. The majority of adds were from international viewers. Even though some shows -- like "Gilmore Girls" -- started as traditional TV shows before moving to Netflix, a large part of the draw for new subscribers came from original shows. Almost half of the most searched for shows this year were Netflix originals, said Ted Sarandos, chief content officer. The company has 42 launches coming up, including Marvel's "Iron Fist" and Drew Barrymore's zombie comedy "Santa Clarita Diet."
Didn't think this was in doubt. (Score:2)
We have seen the future, and it is online subscription video!
Re: (Score:3)
I saw the future 20+ years ago. I had DSL in an apartment rather than cable TV (I could afford one or the other -- not both). Antenna reception was crap. There were a bunch of sites that offered (then free) live video feeds (go go Real Video!). Local news, 1950's tv programming and even some cable programming. I lived that way for quite some time. Then I got married and wife just wanted to push a button and have the screen magically show what she wants to see. It was a few years ago when we finally g
Re: (Score:2)
It wasn't 1080p, but a lot of it was about as good as an analog TV could display.
So, it was better than digital broadcast TV displays? Because digital TV is crap where I live. We stopped watching live TV a year ago because the reception was so spotty. Netflix and Hulu are good enough.
My mother still watches TV, but I also just bought her a Chromecast dongle, and logged her into our Netflix account. She has cable internet (not cable TV), so might as well make use of it beyond email and Facebook.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Get a better antenna, friend. :-) If an 8-bay semi-directional on a tall mast, properly aimed (or on a rotator, if the towers are spread out) won't do the job, then you must either live way out in the boonies, or in a canyon, or in an urban canyon.
I can see the towers from my house and I have a flat roof. Easiest Yagi install ever. The Roku is still better though.
Re: (Score:2)
Sadly, I do live in a canyon, or at least a valley. There's exactly 1 station I could get at low quality with a directional antenna - none with a normal antenna. Oh, well, maybe I'll live someplace flat next time.
Re: (Score:2)
I live in south west Florida, which is a flat as it gets. I don't know how far the towers are from me, but I'm at the edge of town, not out in the swamp. The channels come in clearly, except for every few seconds the picture freezes, or part of it has squares that stay the same as the rest of the picture changes. Or it just goes black for 10 seconds.
I have tried several antennas and they all perform exactly the same, whether the box says 30 miles or 60 mile coverage. Tried a cheap rectangle of plastic, and
Re: (Score:2)
"So, it was better than digital broadcast TV displays?"
Quality of picture? Hello no. However, if the "signal" (slower bandwidth) was weak in Media Player or Real Player (or whatever), the most I would see was a "buffering" and a pause. On broadcast digital TV there's horrible artifacting, audio buzzes and skips that make the program unwatchable -- or it just doesn't come in at all.
Re: (Score:2)
On broadcast digital TV there's horrible artifacting, audio buzzes and skips that make the program unwatchable -- or it just doesn't come in at all.
You need a better antenna setup. And live within 50-60 miles of your broadcast towers, ideally.
Re: (Score:2)
I know. I was replying to someone who indicated problems with digital broadcasts "because the reception was so spotty." I compared 20 year old streaming quality to poor quality broadcast digital. Which is true -- (20 year old streaming with modest bandwidth problems) it was watchable while digital broadcasts with modest reception problems is not.
Re: (Score:2)
so you don't have internet access already? (Score:2)
if you are already paying for internet access to.... you know... ACCESS THE INTERNET, like for instance to post on slashdot, then you cannot say it is a cost of Netflix or other online television subscription. you are already paying for internet access anyways, so netflix is only costing a whopping $7.99/mo
given the amount of content available on netflix as compared to whatever tiny handful of channels you get from your antennae, i'd say that's a $7.99/mo well spent
Re: (Score:1)
No, its 1-2 online video subscriptions 'per month'. Not I must have all of them all the time, if that is the case, why give up the cable/satellite model in the first place?
Re: (Score:1)
Because ads?
Also, I think Netflix is driving down the price.
$10 vs $15 for HBO (they are similar in quality of new output IMO).
I don't get why ad supported has failed with streaming services, but it seems to have (I would think advertisers would live to be able to buy their ads more targeted for demographic, but they seem to have lumped streaming with Youtube and not with TV as far as ad purchasing goes, and therefore don't pay a premium (or enough of one to make it sustainable).
Re: (Score:1)
But my point is that even with multiple services, it makes sense to give up on cable.
I pay about $5/month over what I would for basic cable + HBO (I have Hulu, Netflix, HBO). I still find it better than cable.
I save myself a box and a remote, it's worth the $5 for that reason alone.
Re: (Score:1)
I used to, but legal streaming wins out in convenience for me, and I have a decent job.
Re:Didn't think this was in doubt. (Score:4, Informative)
From the Kodi website:
IMPORTANT: The official Kodi version does not contain any content whatsoever. This means that you should provide your own content from a local or remote storage location, DVD, Blu-Ray or any other media carrier that you own.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
You're being downmodded, but I see this attitude very often, especially with millenials.
Eventually they'll have nothing to watch if they keep it up.
Advertising and greed (Score:3)
At least initially, people moved to Netflix not because they had tons of good content, but because it was cheap and without ads. Now Netflix grew into viable challenger to established networks, in another couple years networks will start going out of business as subscriber loss keep accelerating.
I remember back in the 90's (Score:1)
I remember back in the 90's when my cable company switched all of their channels to nothing but infomercials all night. In an instant they ditched 50% of their content, but prices did not go down at all. Then i noticed how they were cutting whole scenes out of some of my favorite shows so they could show more ads. I dont know what happened after that because i canceled service & havent looked back since.
Re: (Score:2)
Then i noticed how they were cutting whole scenes out of some of my favorite shows so they could show more ads. I dont know what happened after that because i canceled service & havent looked back since.
Don't get me started! When I discovered METV, I thought it was great that I could watch some of the old shows from my youth. It didn't take long to find that large chunks of those shows were missing because of ads.
Re: (Score:2)
This.
CEOs and shareholders want asymptotic revenue growth in a very short time. We all know what the top of that graph looks like. Growth is over pretty quickly and the greed motivation continues.
It would be nice (not for greedy CEOs and shareholders) if a company would settle for a great lifestyle that it could maintain for many years and stop the boom/bust shit.
Re: (Score:2)
I think the cable companies started ramping prices to consumers first, then the networks caught on and began demanding more carriage fees, figuring that they weren't going to let the cable company profit while they didn't.
Then the production companies and sports leagues caught on, and figured they weren't going to let the networks get fat and profitable, and THEY demanded more money, part of which the networks tried to make up with more advertising.
And now we're in this spiral where they've gotten used to j
Re: (Score:2)
90% or more of the content available on Netflix is produced by those networks
But, according to the summary and TFA, fewer and fewer people are watching that content. People are mostly watching movies and Netflix original content, not traditional network content, and the proportion of Netflix original content is growing fast.
Personally, I would be delighted if Netflix dumped all the shows from traditional networks. It would mean less garbage I need to wade through in order to find something worth watching. They could use the savings to make more of their own shows, which tend to b
Re: (Score:1)
Personally, I would be delighted if Netflix dumped all the shows from traditional networks.
Netflix probably won't do that because they'd be leaving a segment of the market unserved and that would open up a very large opportunity for a competitor.
They would be doing to themselves what Blockbuster and Hollywood did when they ignored the streaming content model.
Perhaps what they need is a better interface so that people like you, who aren't interested, don't have to see that content but people like me, who watch it, can find it easily.
LK
Re: (Score:2)
This.
Every. motherfucking. reality. show. is. based. on. the. same. goddam. formula.
How many of those fucking inane pieces of shit do we need?
And ... my cable company says I have "hundreds" of channels.
Shit like 24/7 infomercials about tightening asses and abs and cosmetics and scooter chairs and slicer/dicers. I never watch that shit, but I pay for it.
I have Dish. When a rain cloud comes in from the South, I lose reception and there's no Plan B.
I can get Dish on every goddam device I own, from anywhere the
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
I am waiting on an entirely new reality show. Its called Alaskan Fixer Upper Tiny Tree House Survivor Hunt.
Re: (Score:2)
Netflix is not going to drop network programming. Hate to break it to you Potsy, ALL programming is designed for viewers. It's designed to get the most eye balls. Even Netflix needs viewers.
Re: (Score:2)
And why do people search? Because they have no idea what the show is, but they heard about it. Meaning they aren't necessarily subscribing, either.
Re: (Score:3)
There never was any such thing as "cord cutting". Sure you can cancel your cable TV. But you need Internet access and where are you going to get it? For most of the U.S. you have exactly one choice, and they charge you more more Internet access if you don't also have their TV service. Then add monthly data caps on top of that. All of those so-called cord-cutters most likely ended up paying more and getting less.
7 or 8 years ago when I "cut the chord" (and you're right, just the cable TV part, the cable company still has a monopoly on broadband in my area), I saved a whole lot of money. My cable bill went down like 80% just getting the internet. Then, as more and more people cut the chord, cable companies started realising how much money they were losing, and how they could use their internet monopoly to an advantage and started jacking up their internet prices. (the fact that they only started doing this once c
Re: (Score:2)
You should really look into how "cord" is spelled.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I really chouldn't be bothered.
I guess, I saw it on the comment above mine spelt like that and subconsciously started spelling it incorrectly myself.
Re: (Score:2)
History Channel? Not about history anymore. TLC? Just a channel about exploiting freaks for reality TV. Discover? Discover how bad reality TV is.
Abandoning your niche for a bigger marketshare. Happens every few years.
TLC is no longer an abbreviation for anything.
TruTV used to be Court TV.
Last I knew, "Syfy" was mostly B movies and wrestling.
Re: (Score:2)
I used to enjoy when I was younger SciFi (before it was SyFy), when it was all Space 1999 reruns, and crappy horror movies you could laugh at.
Usually they were one-word titled horror movies, where that one word was an animal "Crocodile", "Piranha", "Skeeters" or "Bunnies" and invariably that one animal was trying to eat a group of stranded young adults. There was often a scruffy cop trying to help them too. It was good, in the background moview, where you wanted something on, but weren't really paying att
Re: (Score:2)
Back when B movies were trying to be good movies. Now, Syfy commissions these with the intent of them being bad. I don't understand the reasoning there.
Re: (Score:1)
A woman took over back before the name change. If you read about her, you'll understand why series get killed off and an emphasis on SJW memes. When SYFY started, I quit cable.
Re: (Score:1)
I went to look for her name but came across this.
Seems she was ousted and SYFY is trying to do a 180.
http://ew.com/article/2014/10/... [ew.com]
And ISPs are jacking up rates (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:And ISPs are jacking up rates (Score:5, Insightful)
Plus, this gouging will get Gov't involved - they are asking for repeat of breakup of Bell.
You obviously have been in a coma for a while.
Der Trumpenfuhrer and the Republicans who control congress are absolutely opposed to anything that prevents ISPs and the big media companies from screwing consumers as much as possible.
Thanks to unlimited approval of mergers, the biggest ISPs, who have monopoly control of Internet access, are also owners of most of the content creators.
Re: (Score:3)
Neither major party candidate had a great deal of support to give for net neutrality. Hillary was somewhat in favor of it, Trump was opposed and linked it to censorship (specifically the fairness doctrine) and is opposed. Sanders was furiously in favor of the idea, but of course, he didn't get the nomination. I've had a hard time following how it is supported or opposed in Congress, but my general impression is that a few more Democrats normally favor it, versus Republicans. Regardless, I don't think ne
Re: (Score:2)
The real reason net neutrality is on the ropes is this: the idea was barely discussed by anyone during the election, in comparison to other issues. The companies that stand to profit from net neutrality are electronic media companies, and the companies that stand to profit from its removal are electronic infrastructure companies, and both will continue their fight under the covers. There wasn't much input from the electorate on the topic at all this cycle.
Actually I think it's way more old media vs new media, here in Norway where the main broadband revolution was DSL from telcos and the fiber revolution was lead by a former power company the "electronic infrastructure companies" seem pretty happy just to sell you bits and bytes. My impression is that in the US it's different because so large a part of the American population get their broadband through cable. It seems both bandwidth caps and anti-net neutrality gouging is primarily driven by cable companies
Re: (Score:2)
It seems both bandwidth caps and anti-net neutrality gouging is primarily driven by cable companies wanting to drive customers to their own services instead of using online services and remain the gatekeeper and middle man between the content and the customers.
Absolutely correct. And those that have DSL or fiber from the phone company, they were used to gouging customers for phone service and the cable company was their only competition. Might as well call it assumed collusion, since they just know that they both want to keep prices high and there is no other competition.
Re: (Score:2)
Democrats are the media / communication company whores, not the republicans.
Or, you know, it's both [arstechnica.com]. In this particular case you have a Democratic AG in a state with a majority Republican stage government (including governor) for legislation that hurts the public but helps communication companies. Cloris Leachman in Beerfest might as well have been speaking for both parties when she said "We are all whores".
WRONG! DO IT AGAIN! (Score:1)
Title: "Netflix's Subscriber Boom Shows the World is Accepting Internet TV"
Reality: Free TV is so full of commercials, people is paying just to avoid them. Happens with Internet TV that you can rip HQ from it (not like "private hardware home decoders" where you can't even plug an USB).
Re: (Score:2)
I totally agree with this sentiment. I hate ads a lot, and Netflix offers an ad-free service. If that changes, I'm gone.
Re: (Score:2)
I hate ads a lot...
I also hate ads, and not just because they are jarring to view. I hate them because they encourage broadcasting to the lowest common denominator viewer. Companies act as if ad revenue has to continually increase or something is wrong. They continually try to widen out their audience in a bit to increase ad revenue until we get TLC and The History Channel showing horrible formulaic reality TV shows that most viewers who have a half a brain and a soul find repugnant. I watch Netflix because I find many of the
Re: (Score:2)
Free TV is so full of commercials, people is paying just to avoid them
Maybe, but some of us paid ONCE: I have a DVR (Tivo), turn on 30-second skip, rarely see even part of a commercial. Rarely if ever watch 'live' TV, either, so it's really not a problem for me.
Had to happen at some point (Score:2)
On demand availability and no unnecessary junk. Of course this would turn everyone to Netflix and similar services. .mp3 format illegal in the olden days?) Maybe I missed it or I jinxed it. Eith
What I find interesting is that traditional media execs. didn't try and stop it or massively slow the pace of aforementioned services as their industry will die off in the long run (remember that the industry didn't want to put their music up on Spotify due to not making enough revenue, or that they tried to make the
Re: (Score:2)
They did try to sabotage it. On the content owner side, they attacked Netflix by trying to hold back their best titles so that they could turn Netflix into "the service that only has stuff nobody cares about." This is one reason why Netflix has invested in their Original Series.
On the cable TV side, they slowed down Netflix (one o
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately, for me, my only option for wired high speed Internet is TWC (now called Spectrum). If I don't like their prices or speeds, I really have no other option.
Ad aversion (Score:1)
Netflix have made me ultrasensitive to ads. For me is now near impossible to follow a regular tv broadcast. Ads are too distracting (thats a feature!!, some might say). Even when Netflix's movie collection is bland and somewhat old, their original content for the most part is entertaining and with good production values. I have been a Netflix costumer for about 2 years and I don't plan to cut it.
On demand video is definitely way more customer friendly than regular television and those numbers say that
Re: (Score:2)
See too. That is interesting is that when you watch content made for TV channels with ads on something like Netflix, you realize how bad many TV shows are and how much content they reuse. :D
Hulu (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hulu's a lot better than it used to be. It has an ad-free option, shows have a one day delay, and it works fine on my Roku. Though its selection is smaller than Netflix, it has some stuff that NF doesn't.
More Incentives for Bandwidth Caps, Net Neutrality (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm in the US, we have Charter for internet and AT&T for cable (good UI). Both offer cable.
We aren't there yet, but I could see, through terribly lengthy litigation, a class action that forces local monopolies to divest internet and cable offerings. You can offer one, an independent company has to offer the other.
That said, I do have two internet choices, and Charter isn't bad at all ($40 per month unbundled, uncapped, 100/10 service, we stream 3-4 hours a day, no problems). The cable is expensive bu
Re: (Score:2)
If you can't get better than DSL in Seattle (and Netflix streams fine on DSL at moderate resolution), find a better place in Seattle. Heck, there's fiber in some areas (stops about 100 yards away from where I live - sigh).
People aren't accepting but avoiding (Score:2)
What people really do is trying to escape the ads with bits of programming strewn in between that free TV has become. Advertising has poisoned the very soil they've been living off with their attitude that people cannot escape their clutches.
Guess what: People could.
It's the same that happened to online advertisers who thought they could push obnoxious ads onto people until even the least technically inclined person got off their ass and installed an adblocker. And the same is happening to TV. Geeks and oth
Re: (Score:2)
And even more important is the time you saved, you can watch a 45 minute show in only 23 minutes. I.e. without the fuckin' ads.
That's why I use DVR for practically everything I watch now, to skip the ads.
It used to be that there were 4 ads shown every 15 minutes. Now they are up to 6 ads, for some shows, and they have started showing mini-content (4 to 5 minutes) between two sets of ads. It's definitely at the point where a TV show is unwatchable in real time.
Re: (Score:2)
And between "you cannot tape this show" and "you cannot fast forward through this part", the whole DVR has become obsolete for most applications unless you know how to remove that bullshit from the equation. Yes, you can do that, maybe I can if I could be assed to find it out, but Joe Randomwatcher cannot.
And he will not give a shit about it if there's an alternative that doesn't require him to because there isn't anything to tape (the show happens when you want it) and there isn't anything to fast forward
What DVR are are you using? (Score:2)
And between "you cannot tape this show" and "you cannot fast forward through this part", the whole DVR has become obsolete for most applications unless you know how to remove that bullshit from the equation.
I haven't run into a commercial yet that my Tivo can't fast forward through. I can't be bothered with services like Sling that won't let you skip commercials. Just not worth the money to waste my life watching ads.
Re: (Score:2)
And between "you cannot tape this show" and "you cannot fast forward through this part"
I've had Tivo since the Series 2 came out and have never been prevented from recording whatever I want or skipping/fast forwarding through anything I want, so I don't know what you're talking about. I know the technology exists to do that, but I've never had it happen to me nor have I ever heard of it happening to anyone.
conventional television networks go bye bye (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I couldn't even watch at set time when I DIDN'T have a DVR. I recorded on my VCR like crazy in the 90s when I was too busy to watch many evenings.
It is good to have a bunch of shows on Netflix right now during the winter break when regular TV is even crappier than usual.
Plot twist: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think it will go that way.
if "cord cutting services close", I won't be going back to cable. I can't, it isn't worth it, even if I got the cable into my house for free I wouldn't even bother to connect it.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't forget: Cable companies price TV+Internet bundles at a much lower cost than Internet-only thus luring cord-cutters back in the fold "to save money." (And even if you put the cable box in the closet without ever connecting it, you're counted as a subscriber.)
Re: (Score:2)
Free television disappears
*weary sigh* No, friend, it does NOT. Get an antenna! All the Free TV you can stand!
I just fired Time Warner. (Score:2)
I finally had enough of Time Warner and fired them for video delivery. Fuck them and their abuse of CCI "CopyOnce" flagging that amounts to rent-seeking by eliminating all non-rented choices for a DVR system except for Windows Media Center (EOL) and TiVo (not really your own).
I now have faster internet speeds, and Sling TV for $40/month cheaper, with all the same channels. And I recycled the box I was using for Windows Media Center into an Ubuntu 16 / MythTV box for recording OTA HD programming at far bet
There will be commercials (probably) (Score:5, Insightful)
Netflix's boom in subscribers is a sign that the world is accepting internet TV, meaning without commercials and on-demand, said CEO Reed Hastings
Yeah we've seen the "no commercials" promise before when cable TV was becoming a thing and it was bullshit then too. They'll only stay away from commercials long enough to get a subscriber base. Commercials are where most of the money is and it will be hard for them to ignore that fact. I have a hard time imagining Netflix being immune to the siren's call of that much cash forever.
Huh? (Score:2)
I honestly don't remember a promise of no commercials from Cable, only certain channels one could receive from cable. Some of the available channels, like early HBO did say "commercial free" because you paid (and most likely still do) for the subscription. Subscription based TV is why people go to Netflix and watch Netflix owned shows. Just like I pay for CRTV and watch their shows. The "Free" Youtube content can have commercials, but if you subscribe you don't get them either.
Networks who continue to u
Re: (Score:2)
I honestly don't remember a promise of no commercials from Cable, only certain channels one could receive from cable.
That's because cable companies could not promise "no commercials" for any channel EVER*. Cable began as a way of retransmitting broadcast stations to people who could not put up their own antennas (CATV is "community antenna TV"), and broadcast stations have ALWAYS had ads.
It wasn't until cable had enough market saturation and satellite services matured to the point that satellite-delivered content networks like HBO became available, and it was HBO's promise of "no ads", not the cable TV company.
* with th
Alternatives (Score:1)
Yeah, but it's a lot easier to offer alternative digital offerings on the internet than it is with something that requires a dedicated physical connection/hardware to customers' house (cable/satellite).
That, and the "piracy" alternative is always there too.
Competition - whether legal or otherwise - can help prevent bad behavior.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah we've seen the "no commercials" promise before when cable TV was becoming a thing and it was bullshit then too. They'll only stay away from commercials long enough to get a subscriber base. Commercials are where most of the money is and it will be hard for them to ignore that fact. I have a hard time imagining Netflix being immune to the siren's call of that much cash forever.
Is it really? Take the Superbowl which is one of the few items where we have pretty much all the numbers. In 2014 there was 49 minutes 15 seconds of commercials, $4.5 million average per 30 second slot and 111.4 million viewers. That works out to a little less than $4 per viewer. So if you offered $5 to watch it ad-free you'd be beating the advertisers. That's not bad for about four hours of entertainment with both a football game and the half time show and it's supposed to be super-expensive compared to no
Re:There will be commercials (probably) (Score:4, Insightful)
People will leave then. It weould be nice to have payments for no commercials and free with commercials.
Re:'Product placement' (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
4th-wall-breaking breaks in the middle of the plot to show off some product or other
Kimmy Schmidt did that (as a joke) with Mentos. Arrested Development came close.
Matter of time (Score:3)
Do not give too much control over a single industry to a single corporate interest. I am a netflix subscriber splitting a 4k account 4-ways, but I have absolutely no doubt when they have the market they want, the only way they are gonna keep investors interested, the 3rd-party studios low-balling prices, or their own production assets happy with their salaries is by breaking the current service in some way. It surely won't be ads, but I'm betting 4k or even HD will at some point increase to become prohibitively expensive for a big chunk of their user base that currently has those and people will have to compromise. (it already increased in the past). Either that or the account-sharing capability will be cut-off.
Subscription services have flat rates, and when the user-base stops growing and also becomes flat while you have already optimized your entire business process, the company freezes financially, which is also known as stagnation. If you look at other industries that have peaked, such as ISP and other communication providers, you know exactly what happens: they increase prices, decrease quality, or bundle useless services to artificially raise prices. And these guys have competition to cope with, while Netflix is like Apple and Android ecosystems together, while Hulu, HBO Go and whatever else are like Windows Phone. It's not gonna be pretty when it happens.
And... Spotify is gonna be just the same, with the difference the music industry provides a infinitesimally cheaper product (music production is almost free when compared to film/tv) at a much higher end-user cost. Spotify knows they have a high-margin, "premium" feeling product and they don't sell it cheap. There's a reason they are so restrictive with family plans as opposed to Netflix account sharing.
Different industry example: Console games - just launched prices have risen from around 40bucks to 70 in less than a decade. Another industry: smartphones - top-tier flagships now cost more than 1000 dollars unlocked. The first iPhone fully spec'd out cost 599$ while top of the line 7 Plus costs 969$. 370 bucks is no joke my friends, apple needs cash to build that UFO.
Re: (Score:2)
Console games are $60 (at least in the US). It's also easy to get them for less than that, as an Amazon Prime or Best Buy subscriber you can get them for $48 on release day. I'm also not sure where your $40 figure comes from, everything I can find points to the prices being considerably higher. For example, this article [ign.com] looks at game pricing over history and concludes they're cheaper now than ever (adjusting for inflation).
You are right about phones, but I'd say that the specs of the top end phones have als
Re: (Score:2)
As I replied to Wraithlyn, I have a geographical bias to provide those examples. It doesn't make the rest any less true.
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Console game prices (major studio releases, not indie titles) have been in the $50-$70 range for decades.
AAA console games like Street Fighter II and Final Fantasy III had release prices of $70, and that was 25 years ago.
Adjusting for inflation, console games have never been cheaper [arstechnica.com].
Re: (Score:2)
I might be biased: the EU market (specifically the euro-zone, where I live) rarely get's a game on release day for less than 69EUR. UK is luckier but still not US-level. Some months ago, before the Brexit vote which affected GBP and EUR against the USD, 69EUR was close to 85USD, and now it's still a good 74USD .
I should have made that clearer, and maybe it wasn't the best example due to the obvious technology price gap. For reference, and a clear example, the Nintendo Switch is being pre-sold at 300USD, 280
Re: (Score:2)
I feel ya. I'm in Canada and Netflix selection blows compares to the US.
On the flip side, I pay $9.99 CAD which is only $7.68 USD. Hurray for the weak Canadian dollar?
Original content (Score:2)
Producing their own original content was a smart more for Netflix. Everybody knows that their streaming movie selection sucks nowadays and you have to get the old fashioned DVDs in the mail for a decent choice. But for streaming TV shows of good quality it's a pretty good deal, especially since they allow people to share accounts. In fact they say the subscriber model for TV goes some way to explaining the rising quality of scripted TV in certain areas. Shows like Kings were really good but didn't do so we
Re: (Score:2)
"Investors brought up concerns over increasing costs. For fiscal 2017, Netflix said its free cash flow deficit will be about $2 billion in 2017, compared to $1.7 billion in 2016, which is because the company wants to own "more content and more content categories," said chief financial officer David Wells." http://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/18... [cnbc.com]
So it won't be long before commercials show up on Netflix or see
Similar Headlines (Score:2)
* iPhone Sales Suggest Acceptance of "Cell" Technology
* Latest PC Sales Numbers Show Increasing Belief in Productivity Increases
* New, Used Car Purchases Rise, Experts Say Consumers May Prefer Over Horse-Drawn Carriages
* Electricity Usage Data Indicate Waning Interest in Oil Lamps, Ice Block Delivery
Too bad... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Once the people currently in charge of content production get too old, leave or lose their current edge in some other way the business will start to come undone a la HBO which certainly has seen much better days.
But what replaces it? That's the $64,000 question. That's been the flaw in all of these "Netflix is doomed because it sucks now / will soon start sucking" arguments. They've got the early brand name recognition (like "iPad" or "Skype" or "Google", it even flirts with genericism) and the legacy device compatibility. It's hard to overstate just how important these two things are. There are plenty of people out there are who watch Netflix on devices that can't be updated to include a competitor. Hell, my pare
Re: (Score:2)
I think the biggest threat to Netflix would be a buyout. If a major media company (e.g. Disney) bought Netflix outright, they could ruin the service and drive people away from it. (Either on purpose to "drive more people to DVD sales" or just from execs who "totally know what the hip kids nowadays want from their streaming service" and thus need to get their two cents in.) Apart from that or the ISPs ganging up on Netflix post-Net Neutrality, you're right that Netflix's position is near-unassailable.
Re: (Score:2)
With the exception of Game of Thrones and Westworld all their new content is terrible. Even the bad Netflix originals like "The OA" are better than the garbage on HBO. And that's actually the problem with the Netflix business model. It's become just another HBO. And the problem with that is once you become just a content studio you're entire business model is a slave to your talent. Once the people currently in charge of content production get too old, leave or lose their current edge in some other way the business will start to come undone a la HBO which certainly has seen much better days. I love Netflix but wouldn't own the stock.
The thing about HBO is people will pay the subscription fee every month for just one of those shows. One really good show with very high production value like Game of Thrones, Westworld, The Sopranos, and even short stuff like Band of Brothers or The Pacific, and you can milk that show and move on to the next. I'm sad to say I am one of those people. I hardly ever watch HBO currently outside of Game of Thrones, Westworld, and a movie or 2 on demand. BUt those shows are good enough for me to justify keepi
Re: (Score:2)
The HBO subscription is only worth it if you have a peer group that also has an HBO subscription and so it's important to watch things at the same time as them. I stopped buying DVDs about 10 years ago when renting became a lot cheaper than buying, but I've recently started again with boxed sets. Even if I only watch each episode once, it's cheaper than any of the streaming options, plus they're practically DRM free (as in, the DRM is so broken that it may as well not exist) and I can copy them to a mobil
Re: (Score:2)
The HBO subscription is only worth it if you have a peer group that also has an HBO subscription and so it's important to watch things at the same time as them
Entertainment is much cheaper if you are perpetually 3-5 years behind, and can avoid spoilers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Funny that, I've been a subscriber for many years (since way before the dvd/streaming plan split), and still haven't watched all the content I want to watch. What makes it more difficult is that content I wanted to see (the grand tour) is amazon exclusive, so I now have even more to watch.
But feel free to call me a statistical anomaly, I think you'd be wrong now, given the huge subscriber based Netflix has enjoyed for years...
As Long as it remains commercial free, I will subscribe.
Re: Now all they need is some actual content! (Score:1)
You don't get netflix for the movies, you get it for the TV series
Re: (Score:2)
But even "Netflix originals" are, mostly, licensed content from production houses
When they're paying for production, they generally go for worldwide distribution rights. The problem with regional licensing is that companies tend to sell exclusive rights by country for a program.