7 ms·

It's hilarious how much production has not been their forte. Aside from a few hits like Stranger Things, most of their originals, which they need to pan out for

by natrik 7y ago

It's hilarious how much production has not been their forte. Aside from a few hits like Stranger Things, most of their originals, which they need to pan out for future success (instead of paying 100 million for Friends) are absolute rubbish.

mennis16 7y ago
Yet the originals they do hit on they hesitate to pay for once they get big. Why they axed BoJack and seem to have driven Bob-Waksberg to Amazon is beyond me. This was the first show I cared about to get that treatment but I've certainly heard anger about other shows as well e.g. Santa Clarita Diet. It's crazy to me how much they're willing to shell out for Friends rather than building on the good originals. But they probably are basing this on viewership numbers I don't have.
- baby 7y ago
  I actually rather watch Friends (or closer: Archer) than BoJack but I know a lot of people seem to like that show.
- WalterBright 7y ago
  > Santa Clarita Diet I'd automatically axe any show proposal about zombies.
  - on_and_off 7y ago
    for this one, it would have been a mistake. It made the impossible and did something fun and original with the concept.
    - taytus 7y ago
      >It made the impossible and did something fun and original with the concept. No, it didn't :) For you may be, for me was... how do I say it?... trash
      - on_and_off 7y ago
        wow you did not like a tv program, you are so edgy and smort !
- threatofrain 7y ago
  Friends is a different kind of feature than a hot or trendy show. Now it's easier to run it on the background and people can enjoy good safe fun.
- matthewcford 7y ago
  what.. this was a great show.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- CamelCaseName 7y ago
  I don't think it's about viewership, but rather the financial return. Extending a show? Most of your viewers will be long time Netflix subscribers who are already unlikely to churn. Buy an existing show/create a new one? Now you're pulling in people who aren't already Netflix subscribers. Some of them will remain long term users. Plus -- you're creating an asset (the show) that you can sell once it's run its course.
- pergadad 7y ago
  They have a few great ones and k love the "limited series" concept (so no endless series added, but just 1-2, so 14-30 episodes). E.g. Frontera Verde was superb.
xvector 7y ago
Witcher has to have been one of the worst-written TV shows I’ve seen. A shame because the source material isn’t bad at all.
- zamadatix 7y ago
  Critically the show seems to have been rated poorly but the audience rating on IMDB and Rotten Tomatoes is extremely high. Overall the data is looking like it'll be another one of their hits despite your personal take on it (just as many did not like Stranger Things).
  - Simon_says 7y ago
    As with anything with a pre-existing fan base, the initial reviews are the pre-existing fans. The reviews will normalize when more people watch and review.
- bdz 7y ago
  There haven't been any good video game-to-motion picture ever. What people love in games is really hard to put on screen (Witcher has the original source material books but they were never as famous or good as the games). Honestly it's really hard to do it, to appeal to both the gamers and the wider audience who never touched the game (inc the critics) I'm playing games since the late 80s and seen so many movies and TV shows failing. This list is perfect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_films_based_on_video_games https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_films_based_on_video_g...
  - cm2012 7y ago
    Witcher is really well reviewed by audiences though. A good secondary indicator is that Reddit loves it.
    - bdz 7y ago
      Oh yeah that's what I meant sorry. A lot of those movies and TV shows are loved by the fans
nine_k 7y ago
What is the hit rate of Hollywood? It seemed to me that most movies don't break even, but a few hits have 20x and higher returns. Compared to that, Netflix's production just looks normal.
- doomlaser 7y ago
  > What is the hit rate of Hollywood? Look at Disney. > It’s difficult not to look at Disney’s record-breaking year, securing eight of the top 10 highest-grossing films of 2019 domestically https://www.theverge.com/2019/12/23/21034937/disney-star-wars-box-office-2019-marvel-pixar-star-wars-avengers-lion-king-frozen https://www.theverge.com/2019/12/23/21034937/disney-star-war... It seems to be a well oiled machine. Their streaming service is no exception. The Mandalorian show, run by Jon Favreau (director of Iron Man and The Lion King) is the most streamed television show in recent history, eclipsing the popularity of Game of Thrones and Netflix's darling, Stranger Things—and that's their first at bat. https://observer.com/2019/12/the-mandalorian-episode-5-disney-plus-ratings-viewership/ https://observer.com/2019/12/the-mandalorian-episode-5-disne... The only media sector where Disney's dominance isn't currently felt is video games—the biggest sector of entertainment by total revenue—where Disney's strategy seems to have been lacking for decades, and where it has not been able to acquire itself out of muddling performance. They were able to outsource a hit with the recent Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order game however, so maybe that will change.
  - oblio 7y ago
    Hollywood is more than just Disney and Disney is the exception.
    - doomlaser 7y ago
      In a discussion of Netflix's poor original content hit-rate, an example of a direct competitor's massively higher hit-rate seems apt. How does Disney's strategy result in better performing content, and how could Netflix learn from it? Is it something wrong with their executive team, or is it just poor strategy, or is it something else? Netflix has taken on enough debt to finance original content that their performance track record in that domain should make investors ask these questions. https://variety.com/2019/digital/news/netflix-debt-junk-bond-2-billion-content-spending-1203377007/ https://variety.com/2019/digital/news/netflix-debt-junk-bond...
chvid 7y ago
I don't think that is correct. I remember when House of Cards came out. It did show that they (Netflix, a technology company) could produce, had big money and a willingness to spend, would do something that was different and unconventional (a political show, released at once). Plus it demonstrated that people were willing to signup for a subscription service just for a particular show.
- gherkinnn 7y ago
  House of Cards (S1) and Stranger Things (S1) and very few others are anomalies im my eyes All the rest I found anywhere between drivel and mostly forgettable. Though I can’t deny that HoC was an important moment in media history.
onion2k 7y ago
Netflix don't need everyone to like everything they make. They only need to have enough shows in their portfolio that are worth the price for an individual to buy in. They could have a thousand things you think are awful and ten that you think are great to get you as a customer. You'll just ignore the things you don't like. So long as your money pays for the shows you watch it doesn't matter if you don't like the other stuff. That content is there to attract someone else. Netflix would fail if any one of their customers liked everything they make, because there'd be thousands of other customers who didn't like any of it. There has to be a mix.
- xiphias2 7y ago
  Actually for me discoverability is a big problem with Netflix: maybe I really like 10% of the shows I start watching, but I don't want to invest so much time in watching boring shows. Disney is much better in this regard.
baby 7y ago
I've watched an actually pretty good number of Netflix shows and movies and I think they are getting there! Think house of cards, mind hunter, kingdom, death love and robots, the witcher.

by natrik 7y ago

mennis16 7y ago

Yet the originals they do hit on they hesitate to pay for once they get big. Why they axed BoJack and seem to have driven Bob-Waksberg to Amazon is beyond me. This was the first show I cared about to get that treatment but I've certainly heard anger about other shows as well e.g. Santa Clarita Diet. It's crazy to me how much they're willing to shell out for Friends rather than building on the good originals. But they probably are basing this on viewership numbers I don't have.

baby 7y ago
I actually rather watch Friends (or closer: Archer) than BoJack but I know a lot of people seem to like that show.
WalterBright 7y ago
> Santa Clarita Diet I'd automatically axe any show proposal about zombies.
- on_and_off 7y ago
  for this one, it would have been a mistake. It made the impossible and did something fun and original with the concept.
  - taytus 7y ago
    >It made the impossible and did something fun and original with the concept. No, it didn't :) For you may be, for me was... how do I say it?... trash
    - on_and_off 7y ago
      wow you did not like a tv program, you are so edgy and smort !
threatofrain 7y ago
Friends is a different kind of feature than a hot or trendy show. Now it's easier to run it on the background and people can enjoy good safe fun.
matthewcford 7y ago
what.. this was a great show.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
CamelCaseName 7y ago
I don't think it's about viewership, but rather the financial return. Extending a show? Most of your viewers will be long time Netflix subscribers who are already unlikely to churn. Buy an existing show/create a new one? Now you're pulling in people who aren't already Netflix subscribers. Some of them will remain long term users. Plus -- you're creating an asset (the show) that you can sell once it's run its course.
pergadad 7y ago
They have a few great ones and k love the "limited series" concept (so no endless series added, but just 1-2, so 14-30 episodes). E.g. Frontera Verde was superb.

xvector 7y ago

Witcher has to have been one of the worst-written TV shows I’ve seen. A shame because the source material isn’t bad at all.

zamadatix 7y ago
Critically the show seems to have been rated poorly but the audience rating on IMDB and Rotten Tomatoes is extremely high. Overall the data is looking like it'll be another one of their hits despite your personal take on it (just as many did not like Stranger Things).
- Simon_says 7y ago
  As with anything with a pre-existing fan base, the initial reviews are the pre-existing fans. The reviews will normalize when more people watch and review.
bdz 7y ago
There haven't been any good video game-to-motion picture ever. What people love in games is really hard to put on screen (Witcher has the original source material books but they were never as famous or good as the games). Honestly it's really hard to do it, to appeal to both the gamers and the wider audience who never touched the game (inc the critics) I'm playing games since the late 80s and seen so many movies and TV shows failing. This list is perfect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_films_based_on_video_games https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_films_based_on_video_g...
- cm2012 7y ago
  Witcher is really well reviewed by audiences though. A good secondary indicator is that Reddit loves it.
  - bdz 7y ago
    Oh yeah that's what I meant sorry. A lot of those movies and TV shows are loved by the fans

nine_k 7y ago

What is the hit rate of Hollywood? It seemed to me that most movies don't break even, but a few hits have 20x and higher returns. Compared to that, Netflix's production just looks normal.

doomlaser 7y ago
> What is the hit rate of Hollywood? Look at Disney. > It’s difficult not to look at Disney’s record-breaking year, securing eight of the top 10 highest-grossing films of 2019 domestically https://www.theverge.com/2019/12/23/21034937/disney-star-wars-box-office-2019-marvel-pixar-star-wars-avengers-lion-king-frozen https://www.theverge.com/2019/12/23/21034937/disney-star-war... It seems to be a well oiled machine. Their streaming service is no exception. The Mandalorian show, run by Jon Favreau (director of Iron Man and The Lion King) is the most streamed television show in recent history, eclipsing the popularity of Game of Thrones and Netflix's darling, Stranger Things—and that's their first at bat. https://observer.com/2019/12/the-mandalorian-episode-5-disney-plus-ratings-viewership/ https://observer.com/2019/12/the-mandalorian-episode-5-disne... The only media sector where Disney's dominance isn't currently felt is video games—the biggest sector of entertainment by total revenue—where Disney's strategy seems to have been lacking for decades, and where it has not been able to acquire itself out of muddling performance. They were able to outsource a hit with the recent Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order game however, so maybe that will change.
- oblio 7y ago
  Hollywood is more than just Disney and Disney is the exception.
  - doomlaser 7y ago
    In a discussion of Netflix's poor original content hit-rate, an example of a direct competitor's massively higher hit-rate seems apt. How does Disney's strategy result in better performing content, and how could Netflix learn from it? Is it something wrong with their executive team, or is it just poor strategy, or is it something else? Netflix has taken on enough debt to finance original content that their performance track record in that domain should make investors ask these questions. https://variety.com/2019/digital/news/netflix-debt-junk-bond-2-billion-content-spending-1203377007/ https://variety.com/2019/digital/news/netflix-debt-junk-bond...

chvid 7y ago

I don't think that is correct. I remember when House of Cards came out. It did show that they (Netflix, a technology company) could produce, had big money and a willingness to spend, would do something that was different and unconventional (a political show, released at once). Plus it demonstrated that people were willing to signup for a subscription service just for a particular show.

gherkinnn 7y ago
House of Cards (S1) and Stranger Things (S1) and very few others are anomalies im my eyes All the rest I found anywhere between drivel and mostly forgettable. Though I can’t deny that HoC was an important moment in media history.

onion2k 7y ago

Netflix don't need everyone to like everything they make. They only need to have enough shows in their portfolio that are worth the price for an individual to buy in. They could have a thousand things you think are awful and ten that you think are great to get you as a customer. You'll just ignore the things you don't like. So long as your money pays for the shows you watch it doesn't matter if you don't like the other stuff. That content is there to attract someone else. Netflix would fail if any one of their customers liked everything they make, because there'd be thousands of other customers who didn't like any of it. There has to be a mix.

xiphias2 7y ago
Actually for me discoverability is a big problem with Netflix: maybe I really like 10% of the shows I start watching, but I don't want to invest so much time in watching boring shows. Disney is much better in this regard.

baby 7y ago

I've watched an actually pretty good number of Netflix shows and movies and I think they are getting there! Think house of cards, mind hunter, kingdom, death love and robots, the witcher.