5 ms·

Netflix showed how much content you could get for a cheap cost relative to cable. Now everyone company wants to charge the same for their meager library.

basch 7y ago
Netflix pricing was always temporary. Content owners werent ready to destroy their old business models, they temporarily rented licensing rights to Netflix while they figured out how they were going to handle shifts in consumption. It's almost the same thing as Uber prices being VC subsidized. And now Disney is following the same playbook, sell Disney+ at or below cost for a while until they can inflate MAU enough that people just accept the subscription as a cost of life. Theres also a bit of Rose Colored glasses going on here, Netflix catalog was pretty bad in the beginning, and people are misremembering it as better than it was. Netflix only exists at all because they could get their DVD business off the ground without paying per view licensing fees. >charge the same for their meager library We are also talking about a generation who is saying "I wont pay $7-$15 four times, thats too expensive" but while growing up, who's parents were paying $150/m to Comcast or DirecTV.
- ghaff 7y ago
  I see (heh) the rose-colored glasses with Netflix a lot. Their streaming catalog for licensed content, especially movies, was always pretty sucky. People may remember specific things they used to have that they don't now, but it was always hard to find specific shows and, especially, films if you went searching for them. I remember mentioning this to a senior Netflix tech guy at the time and his response was basically that people come for the movies and stay for the TV. (This was a bit before the real explosion in premium TV content.)
- megablast 7y ago
  > Content owners werent ready to destroy their old business models, they temporarily rented licensing rights to Netflix while they figured out how they were going to handle shifts in consumption. No, they saw a new revenue stream, and jumped on it. Then they saw where things were heading, and they would have less control if Netflix took over, so they all pulled back and started up their own streaming services.
  - jimbokun 7y ago
    You are saying the same thing.
- moate 7y ago
  >>We are also talking about a generation who is saying "I wont pay $7-$15 four times, thats too expensive" but while growing up, who's parents were paying $150/m to Comcast or DirecTV. Yea I'm part of the group of millenials killing everything. Here's my honest to god thoughts: I don't care if piracy is killing the industry, or if these people aren't able to keep operating. Let the whole thing burn to the ground. We'll figure it out. It would be painful (the jobs! The lives disrupted! The profits!!!) and I'm aware of that. I just don't care. The industry has opened Pandora's box. And I'm not going to feel bad when Disney or Verizon or whatever megacorp the other 5% of the industry those two don't has their business disrupted. The entertainment industry has gotten gross and stagnant and continues to progress towards a monopoly. This current era is going to shift, and likely very fast. There's too many services, and piracy is still an easy option. You can slow roll price increases, but only so far and only if there's a very small (2-5?) number of services people feel they're getting value from.
  - basch 7y ago
    No comment on responsibility or culpability. But, "I want everything for $9 that used to cost $99" is an unreasonable expectation. People paying for cable and satellite are paying way more than the cost of even 5 of these unbundled services. And pay for tv still has commercials. These direct from content producer unbundled apps are still significantly cheaper than the old world. People's expectation of what content should cost seems to be shaped by "I want everything cable does but for the price of netflix." Thats not a delivery volume or price point that ever existed, anywhere.
    - LeoNatan25 7y ago
      Is it really? The amount of people willing (and able) to pay today 10-20 is likely ten times the people who paid 100-200 in previous generation. You see the same in gaming and film, where you have many many more consumers today than you had 30 years ago, and still they complain about “piracy is killing industry”, while their profits are through the roof.
      - fyfy18 7y ago
- LeoNatan25 7y ago
  Cat’s out of the bag now. How many people will be willing to go to the old model or old prices? I certainly my won’t be.

basch 7y ago

Netflix pricing was always temporary. Content owners werent ready to destroy their old business models, they temporarily rented licensing rights to Netflix while they figured out how they were going to handle shifts in consumption. It's almost the same thing as Uber prices being VC subsidized. And now Disney is following the same playbook, sell Disney+ at or below cost for a while until they can inflate MAU enough that people just accept the subscription as a cost of life. Theres also a bit of Rose Colored glasses going on here, Netflix catalog was pretty bad in the beginning, and people are misremembering it as better than it was. Netflix only exists at all because they could get their DVD business off the ground without paying per view licensing fees. >charge the same for their meager library We are also talking about a generation who is saying "I wont pay $7-$15 four times, thats too expensive" but while growing up, who's parents were paying $150/m to Comcast or DirecTV.

ghaff 7y ago
I see (heh) the rose-colored glasses with Netflix a lot. Their streaming catalog for licensed content, especially movies, was always pretty sucky. People may remember specific things they used to have that they don't now, but it was always hard to find specific shows and, especially, films if you went searching for them. I remember mentioning this to a senior Netflix tech guy at the time and his response was basically that people come for the movies and stay for the TV. (This was a bit before the real explosion in premium TV content.)
megablast 7y ago
> Content owners werent ready to destroy their old business models, they temporarily rented licensing rights to Netflix while they figured out how they were going to handle shifts in consumption. No, they saw a new revenue stream, and jumped on it. Then they saw where things were heading, and they would have less control if Netflix took over, so they all pulled back and started up their own streaming services.
- jimbokun 7y ago
  You are saying the same thing.
moate 7y ago
>>We are also talking about a generation who is saying "I wont pay $7-$15 four times, thats too expensive" but while growing up, who's parents were paying $150/m to Comcast or DirecTV. Yea I'm part of the group of millenials killing everything. Here's my honest to god thoughts: I don't care if piracy is killing the industry, or if these people aren't able to keep operating. Let the whole thing burn to the ground. We'll figure it out. It would be painful (the jobs! The lives disrupted! The profits!!!) and I'm aware of that. I just don't care. The industry has opened Pandora's box. And I'm not going to feel bad when Disney or Verizon or whatever megacorp the other 5% of the industry those two don't has their business disrupted. The entertainment industry has gotten gross and stagnant and continues to progress towards a monopoly. This current era is going to shift, and likely very fast. There's too many services, and piracy is still an easy option. You can slow roll price increases, but only so far and only if there's a very small (2-5?) number of services people feel they're getting value from.
- basch 7y ago
  No comment on responsibility or culpability. But, "I want everything for $9 that used to cost $99" is an unreasonable expectation. People paying for cable and satellite are paying way more than the cost of even 5 of these unbundled services. And pay for tv still has commercials. These direct from content producer unbundled apps are still significantly cheaper than the old world. People's expectation of what content should cost seems to be shaped by "I want everything cable does but for the price of netflix." Thats not a delivery volume or price point that ever existed, anywhere.
  - LeoNatan25 7y ago
    Is it really? The amount of people willing (and able) to pay today 10-20 is likely ten times the people who paid 100-200 in previous generation. You see the same in gaming and film, where you have many many more consumers today than you had 30 years ago, and still they complain about “piracy is killing industry”, while their profits are through the roof.
    - fyfy18 7y ago
LeoNatan25 7y ago
Cat’s out of the bag now. How many people will be willing to go to the old model or old prices? I certainly my won’t be.