3 ms·
First of all, people don't often cancel once they are getting something. That's why those CD-of-the-month club things worked in the 90s, and book-of-the-month b
by stanleydrew 16y ago
First of all, people don't often cancel once they are getting something. That's why those CD-of-the-month club things worked in the 90s, and book-of-the-month before them.
But I'm not even sure that's important. I don't think the goal here is to directly make money on new subscriptions. This is a massive strategic move.
It sends a signal to content providers that Netflix, if need be, can cut them out of the picture, or at least can make things very expensive for them by bidding up the price of content.
- gigawatt 16y agoI think it's more of a message to Amazon that just streaming a few thousand movies won't be enough to steal the market from them. Amazon is great at breaking into new areas, but I think they would have to think twice about moving into television production, given that it's so far outside their sphere.
- chopsueyar 16y agoThat's what "they" said about Netflix.
- gigawatt 16y agoI think "so far outside their sphere" was poor word choice on my part. What I was trying to say was that, for Netflix whose sole business is delivering movies and tv shows to consumers, moving into TV production is not a stretch. For a company like amazon, who already does so many disparate things, to now add something so monolithic as TV production might stretch them in uncomfortable ways. I'm an enormous Amazon fan so I don't put anything past them, but this is kind of a double-dog dare on Netflix's part, in my opinion.