4 ms·

While late is better than never, Disney is too little too late. I'm not saying they will fail. Of established players they are the strongest and making the bol

by kjksf 7y ago

While late is better than never, Disney is too little too late. I'm not saying they will fail. Of established players they are the strongest and making the boldest moves so they have a chance at being a no 2. But they launch when Netflix has 150 million subscribers. They almost saturated the US market and are quickly devouring international. Taking market share from a dominant competitor is almost impossible. If Bob Iger wasn't asleep at the wheel, just like the rest of the industry, Disney would have launched a competitor when Netflix had 10 million US-only customers. They had a chance then but not now, competing against Netflix's 150 million subscribers and asymmetrical warfare from Amazon.

scarface74 7y ago
Disney’s definition of success and Netflix’s definition of success is completely different. Disney doesn’t have to depend on subscription revenue to fund its streaming content. It’s already made money on most of its content by the time it gets to Disney+. It’s just an additional revenue stream. Netflix lives or dies by being able to create or license content at one price and sell it via subscription revenue at a higher price - it has never been able to do that. It gets it more debt every year trying to keep up. In the words of Steve Jobs related to Dropbox. Streaming services are now a feature not a product.
- cortesoft 7y ago
  Except we are still expected to pay for each one as if they were a product... the only one that is really treated like a feature is amazon prime streaming... it is one part of being a prime member. All the others are sold as stand alone products you have to individually pay for.
  - scarface74 7y ago
    In the case of Dropbox - the alternative OneDrive is a feature. For the price of Dropbox’s 1TB of storage, you can get a complete O365 subscription for six users and a combined 6TB of storage. But it’s almost impossible to have a sustainable business when your larger competitors can price your “product” at just above break even as a bundled offering and a platform play.
    - cortesoft 7y ago
      I understand what your point is, I am saying that only amazon currently does that with its streaming service.

by kjksf 7y ago

scarface74 7y ago

Disney’s definition of success and Netflix’s definition of success is completely different. Disney doesn’t have to depend on subscription revenue to fund its streaming content. It’s already made money on most of its content by the time it gets to Disney+. It’s just an additional revenue stream. Netflix lives or dies by being able to create or license content at one price and sell it via subscription revenue at a higher price - it has never been able to do that. It gets it more debt every year trying to keep up. In the words of Steve Jobs related to Dropbox. Streaming services are now a feature not a product.

cortesoft 7y ago
Except we are still expected to pay for each one as if they were a product... the only one that is really treated like a feature is amazon prime streaming... it is one part of being a prime member. All the others are sold as stand alone products you have to individually pay for.
- scarface74 7y ago
  In the case of Dropbox - the alternative OneDrive is a feature. For the price of Dropbox’s 1TB of storage, you can get a complete O365 subscription for six users and a combined 6TB of storage. But it’s almost impossible to have a sustainable business when your larger competitors can price your “product” at just above break even as a bundled offering and a platform play.
  - cortesoft 7y ago
    I understand what your point is, I am saying that only amazon currently does that with its streaming service.