4 ms·

Most of the competitors can lean on a decades long backlog of hits that attract people. Netflix needs to build everything from scratch, and the cost of creating

by nikanj 5y ago

Most of the competitors can lean on a decades long backlog of hits that attract people. Netflix needs to build everything from scratch, and the cost of creating TV series is ridiculously high nowadays

shellfishgene 5y ago
I wonder what the percentage of old shows is in total watched minutes. I almost never watch shows or movies older than ~2 years or so. I'm sure that's different for kid's movies, but I think I'm not too much of an exception.
- ghostpepper 5y ago
  I am the opposite. Almost none of the new Netflix content appeals to me, but I watch re-runs of things like The Office and Seinfeld.
  - JKCalhoun 5y ago
    Ha ha, I'm a bit like you but I instead scour YouTube for even older shows like "Route 66" or the old "You Bet Your Life".
    - mbg721 5y ago
      Interestingly, "You Bet Your Life" highlighted the fact that Groucho Marx got old, and it's weird in kind of the same way that Elvis getting old is weird.
      - JKCalhoun 5y ago
        Interesting in other social ways as well — Groucho was allowed to (literally) "cat-call" the attractive female guests on his show. I suppose there was a sieve that their guests went through but it is still fascinating to see the parade of suburban Los-angelites: housewives, people with strong ethnic ties to the "old country" that had yet to be melted into the pot that was 1950's America. Who knew door to door salesman really was a typical working class occupation?
        mbg721 5y ago
        Oh yeah, all kinds of baggage attached to the last bits of the vaudeville Borscht Belt. That's also something that makes the transition from Allan Sherman to Weird Al Yankovic so jarring; they did the same act, but even aside from production values, Weird Al didn't bother dragging a previous audience along, and was willing to go anywhere.
    - technothrasher 5y ago
      I'm definitely stuck in the 60's through 80's for television shows, and tend to watch my favorites over and over. But honestly, I've downloaded and stored most of the stuff I like because I'm terrified of it disappearing off streaming sources.
- discardable_dan 5y ago
  I'm this way _for Netflix_. HBO Max and Disney both have an awesome back-catalog of things to revisit, and I'm constantly finding myself watching an old 90s or 00s movie I had forgotten about on a whim, because it's there. The catalog is curated enough to focus on including good stuff, and HBO Max also has all of Batman: TAS.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- marpstar 5y ago
  In recent years I'm too busy to focus on watching something new, so usually I'll put on something I've already seen a hundred times for background "watching". Currently rewatching Silicon Valley, before that was Saved By The Bell (ahh, nostalgia).
- nirvdrum 5y ago
  Two years is about the length of time required for me to consider a show on Netflix. They kill a lot of shows after two seasons. I don't want to invest the time in a storyline that Netflix is going to axe without a natural conclusion.
  - ghaff 5y ago
    That may be true but network TV regularly killed TV shows early in their run too--often in the first season even.
    - rurp 5y ago
      True but networks have a severe time slot constraint, in addition to the same production costs as Netflix, so it's a lot more understandable. Maybe my perception is off but Netflix seems even worse about killing new shows after 1-2 seasons, which is pretty ridiculous IMO. Netflix seems overly reliant on small scale KPIs at the expense of the overall experience. Of course it's possible that they know exactly what they're doing and I'm just far away from their target consumer.
      - ghaff 5y ago
        I don't know the numbers but Netflix probably kills shows faster. >Of course it's possible that they know exactly what they're doing and I'm just far away from their target consumer. Maybe. So long as a show doesn't get canceled at a completely unnatural point, I'm actually fine with just a couple seasons a lot of the time--especially with the historical network model of 20 episodes per season or so. And, conversely, by the time a show hits 4 or 5 seasons I'm done with it even if it's still pretty solid. I'm just tired of it. There are a bunch of network shows I liked that stayed pretty good but I just stopped watching them at some point.
      - nirvdrum 5y ago
        Wired had an article about this a year or so back [0] that said shows get more expensive after the first two seasons, so Netflix is inclined to kill them in favor of new shows. It also said viewership during that initial window also heavily influences the renewal process. Netflix has a lot more data than network television ever has and I think it leads them to be a bit overzealous with their decision making. Most shows I've really enjoyed have a weak first season as they find their footing. [0] -- https://www.wired.co.uk/article/netflix-originals-cancelled-oa-altered-carbon-sense8 https://www.wired.co.uk/article/netflix-originals-cancelled-...
- tomjen3 5y ago
  That would indeed be very interesting, but back when I joined Netflix that was almost all they had, and I watched a lot of content. From time to time the special effects are bad enough that it breaks immersion (TOS), but for the most part if the movie/show was any good when it was written it is good today. So why not watch it? I didn't get to see Buffy until it was on Netflix and I enjoyed it as much as I would have when it was new, I think. Granted the computers and cellphones are obviously dated (but if you think of it as a period show, it is fine) and it is a bit grating how everybody is always fully covered during/after sex, but the stories are as great as they were back then.
Frost1x 5y ago
How many are subscribing to competitors to watch backlog? If they are, it's going to be short lived where folks subscribe for a month or two, hit the target backlogs in binge mode, and move along. I have a few streaming services and rarely ever am I watching old content (the key stuff I've already consumed). I subscribe to services for their new content, not their old catalog. Maybe I'm the exception and not the norm of the typical subscriber. I blame the lack of investment in target shows and focus on broad short lived and quickly canceled shows to the decline. I understand their business model catering to short attention spans but it puts me off a large swath of their content. Unless it's a movie or mini series with full conclusion, I tend to skip right over the content anymore no matter how interesting the story may seem to be. The last thing I want is to get drawn in and invested in a story only to have wasted my time and have the remainder canceled. Entertainment is part of it but many people want a beginning to end story of some sort. If you want to cater to short attention spans, good luck competing with YouTube, Facebook, and TikTok content.
whycombagator 5y ago
That’s why they don’t always create from scratch. Netflix originals doesn’t always mean they commissioned and produced a show/movie
vagrantJin 5y ago
> the cost of creating TV series is ridiculously high nowadays I disagree with this claim. Their problem is that they enjoy losing money - a fetish if you will - in an attempt to draw and cater to a very particular and very young crowd. Its like they forgot that somewhat mature people over 35 actually do exist and are usually the ones paying for the service. Its a pity because with all that talent and resources - they should be well above everyone else of they werent so damn focused on everything but good storytelling. I've seen stick figures on youtube tell better stories than Netflix.
- graton 5y ago
  Funny I just read an article that argued the opposite point. That streaming services, unlike broadcast TV, is catering to the older demographic more. https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/14/entertainment/only-murders-in-the-building-hacks-older-actors/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/14/entertainment/only-murders-in...
- awb 5y ago
  Per the cost of content creation: > Netflix spent approximately $17 billion on content in 2021 and ended the year with an estimated 222 million subscribers, a cost per subscriber of $76.60 (keep in mind that Netflix has other costs like sales, marketing, facilities, and labor just like any other company). Under the new subscription pricing model, 41% of the annualized price of the standard plan will go towards covering Netflix’s content costs, down from 47% before the price hike.
- dehrmann 5y ago
  I'd love to see Netflix make knockoffs of popular back catalog shows that are just different enough to get away with it. 3-camera sitcoms with no-name actors should be pretty cheap to produce, and one of the shows could end up being ironically good, and one might be genuinely good.
ghaff 5y ago
Yeah, although if you're older and don't rewatch a lot of content the backlog doesn't really help a lot--especially if their older movie catalog is thin.
epolanski 5y ago
You way overestimate the importance of decades long backlog of hits. New content gets infinitely more views.

by nikanj 5y ago

shellfishgene 5y ago

I wonder what the percentage of old shows is in total watched minutes. I almost never watch shows or movies older than ~2 years or so. I'm sure that's different for kid's movies, but I think I'm not too much of an exception.

ghostpepper 5y ago
I am the opposite. Almost none of the new Netflix content appeals to me, but I watch re-runs of things like The Office and Seinfeld.
- JKCalhoun 5y ago
  Ha ha, I'm a bit like you but I instead scour YouTube for even older shows like "Route 66" or the old "You Bet Your Life".
  - mbg721 5y ago
    Interestingly, "You Bet Your Life" highlighted the fact that Groucho Marx got old, and it's weird in kind of the same way that Elvis getting old is weird.
    - JKCalhoun 5y ago
      Interesting in other social ways as well — Groucho was allowed to (literally) "cat-call" the attractive female guests on his show. I suppose there was a sieve that their guests went through but it is still fascinating to see the parade of suburban Los-angelites: housewives, people with strong ethnic ties to the "old country" that had yet to be melted into the pot that was 1950's America. Who knew door to door salesman really was a typical working class occupation?
      - mbg721 5y ago
        Oh yeah, all kinds of baggage attached to the last bits of the vaudeville Borscht Belt. That's also something that makes the transition from Allan Sherman to Weird Al Yankovic so jarring; they did the same act, but even aside from production values, Weird Al didn't bother dragging a previous audience along, and was willing to go anywhere.
  - technothrasher 5y ago
    I'm definitely stuck in the 60's through 80's for television shows, and tend to watch my favorites over and over. But honestly, I've downloaded and stored most of the stuff I like because I'm terrified of it disappearing off streaming sources.
discardable_dan 5y ago
I'm this way _for Netflix_. HBO Max and Disney both have an awesome back-catalog of things to revisit, and I'm constantly finding myself watching an old 90s or 00s movie I had forgotten about on a whim, because it's there. The catalog is curated enough to focus on including good stuff, and HBO Max also has all of Batman: TAS.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
marpstar 5y ago
In recent years I'm too busy to focus on watching something new, so usually I'll put on something I've already seen a hundred times for background "watching". Currently rewatching Silicon Valley, before that was Saved By The Bell (ahh, nostalgia).
nirvdrum 5y ago
Two years is about the length of time required for me to consider a show on Netflix. They kill a lot of shows after two seasons. I don't want to invest the time in a storyline that Netflix is going to axe without a natural conclusion.
- ghaff 5y ago
  That may be true but network TV regularly killed TV shows early in their run too--often in the first season even.
  - rurp 5y ago
    True but networks have a severe time slot constraint, in addition to the same production costs as Netflix, so it's a lot more understandable. Maybe my perception is off but Netflix seems even worse about killing new shows after 1-2 seasons, which is pretty ridiculous IMO. Netflix seems overly reliant on small scale KPIs at the expense of the overall experience. Of course it's possible that they know exactly what they're doing and I'm just far away from their target consumer.
    - ghaff 5y ago
      I don't know the numbers but Netflix probably kills shows faster. >Of course it's possible that they know exactly what they're doing and I'm just far away from their target consumer. Maybe. So long as a show doesn't get canceled at a completely unnatural point, I'm actually fine with just a couple seasons a lot of the time--especially with the historical network model of 20 episodes per season or so. And, conversely, by the time a show hits 4 or 5 seasons I'm done with it even if it's still pretty solid. I'm just tired of it. There are a bunch of network shows I liked that stayed pretty good but I just stopped watching them at some point.
    - nirvdrum 5y ago
      Wired had an article about this a year or so back [0] that said shows get more expensive after the first two seasons, so Netflix is inclined to kill them in favor of new shows. It also said viewership during that initial window also heavily influences the renewal process. Netflix has a lot more data than network television ever has and I think it leads them to be a bit overzealous with their decision making. Most shows I've really enjoyed have a weak first season as they find their footing. [0] -- https://www.wired.co.uk/article/netflix-originals-cancelled-oa-altered-carbon-sense8 https://www.wired.co.uk/article/netflix-originals-cancelled-...
tomjen3 5y ago
That would indeed be very interesting, but back when I joined Netflix that was almost all they had, and I watched a lot of content. From time to time the special effects are bad enough that it breaks immersion (TOS), but for the most part if the movie/show was any good when it was written it is good today. So why not watch it? I didn't get to see Buffy until it was on Netflix and I enjoyed it as much as I would have when it was new, I think. Granted the computers and cellphones are obviously dated (but if you think of it as a period show, it is fine) and it is a bit grating how everybody is always fully covered during/after sex, but the stories are as great as they were back then.

Frost1x 5y ago

How many are subscribing to competitors to watch backlog? If they are, it's going to be short lived where folks subscribe for a month or two, hit the target backlogs in binge mode, and move along. I have a few streaming services and rarely ever am I watching old content (the key stuff I've already consumed). I subscribe to services for their new content, not their old catalog. Maybe I'm the exception and not the norm of the typical subscriber. I blame the lack of investment in target shows and focus on broad short lived and quickly canceled shows to the decline. I understand their business model catering to short attention spans but it puts me off a large swath of their content. Unless it's a movie or mini series with full conclusion, I tend to skip right over the content anymore no matter how interesting the story may seem to be. The last thing I want is to get drawn in and invested in a story only to have wasted my time and have the remainder canceled. Entertainment is part of it but many people want a beginning to end story of some sort. If you want to cater to short attention spans, good luck competing with YouTube, Facebook, and TikTok content.

whycombagator 5y ago

That’s why they don’t always create from scratch. Netflix originals doesn’t always mean they commissioned and produced a show/movie

vagrantJin 5y ago

> the cost of creating TV series is ridiculously high nowadays I disagree with this claim. Their problem is that they enjoy losing money - a fetish if you will - in an attempt to draw and cater to a very particular and very young crowd. Its like they forgot that somewhat mature people over 35 actually do exist and are usually the ones paying for the service. Its a pity because with all that talent and resources - they should be well above everyone else of they werent so damn focused on everything but good storytelling. I've seen stick figures on youtube tell better stories than Netflix.

graton 5y ago
Funny I just read an article that argued the opposite point. That streaming services, unlike broadcast TV, is catering to the older demographic more. https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/14/entertainment/only-murders-in-the-building-hacks-older-actors/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/14/entertainment/only-murders-in...
awb 5y ago
Per the cost of content creation: > Netflix spent approximately $17 billion on content in 2021 and ended the year with an estimated 222 million subscribers, a cost per subscriber of $76.60 (keep in mind that Netflix has other costs like sales, marketing, facilities, and labor just like any other company). Under the new subscription pricing model, 41% of the annualized price of the standard plan will go towards covering Netflix’s content costs, down from 47% before the price hike.
dehrmann 5y ago
I'd love to see Netflix make knockoffs of popular back catalog shows that are just different enough to get away with it. 3-camera sitcoms with no-name actors should be pretty cheap to produce, and one of the shows could end up being ironically good, and one might be genuinely good.

ghaff 5y ago

Yeah, although if you're older and don't rewatch a lot of content the backlog doesn't really help a lot--especially if their older movie catalog is thin.

epolanski 5y ago

You way overestimate the importance of decades long backlog of hits. New content gets infinitely more views.