3 ms·

Netflix had great streaming tech years before anyone else did. I wonder why they decided that the right move was to compete on content. If they had just set up

by qq66 4y ago

Netflix had great streaming tech years before anyone else did. I wonder why they decided that the right move was to compete on content. If they had just set up a platform where any content provider could sell their content (on a monthly or one-off basis) for a small cut like 15%, they might have become the default "TV store."

stingraycharles 4y ago
They had to focus on content as they feared other studios would start their own streaming studios and took their content away (as mentioned by the article). What you’re describing would not work in the movie industry, which is very contract and license heavy.
asdff 4y ago
They had to. Consumers don't care about streaming tech; in their eyes all the services are the same levels of fine. They do care about content and once content producers started rolling their own streaming services, cutting Netflix out, and pulling their content, they had to do something to keep their shelves looking stocked.
- ralusek 4y ago
  This isn't true. I and many others really had a hard time with a few. HBO Go, for example, particularly at the beginning, was too shite to use. Had tons of content I wanted, and I never used it. But I agree that once you pass "good enough," there are diminishing returns.
- hef19898 4y ago
  It depends, Shopify for example is providing eCommerce technology to shop owners. And they do great. Netflix could have gone that route. Contrary to Shopify so, streaming lives of content. Which means the only reasonable customers for Netflix tech were content owners looking at their own streaming service (not that many around pre-Netflix, Amazon developed it's own tech) or content creators (excluding big studios, this market was and is owned by YouTube). I think Netflix didn't have much of a choice, and they did very well, didn't they? Anecdata: Most of my current streaming is happening on Netflix (original content from Spain, Scandinavia, Poland,... stuff you don't get somewhere else) or Disney+ (incredible how deep Disney's catalogue is, especially for older films like Alien). Prime Video fell behind quite a bit on the content front. Netflix has an opportunity so, IMHO, in cooperating with local studios and producers in smaller countries. Something neither Disney nor Amazon seem to be capable of doing.
- dazc 4y ago
  > Consumers don't care about streaming tech.. You haven't tried All4 then? Even a paid subscription will not save you from random freeze and adverts. https://www.channel4.com/ https://www.channel4.com/
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
Dracophoenix 4y ago
That might result in legal problems (see FCC vs Turner cases) or unfavorable terms for the company (i.e no incentive for networks to keep shows on Netflix).
remus 4y ago
This is basically how they started, as they licensed a lot of content for the platform to begin with. The content providers looked at that juicy monthly revenue and decided they wanted a slice of the action, and now we have Netflix, hbo max, Disney+, Apple TV, Amazon prime and probably a few others I've forgotten. Lots of content, as long as you don't mind subscribing to each one individually!

by qq66 4y ago

stingraycharles 4y ago

They had to focus on content as they feared other studios would start their own streaming studios and took their content away (as mentioned by the article). What you’re describing would not work in the movie industry, which is very contract and license heavy.

asdff 4y ago

They had to. Consumers don't care about streaming tech; in their eyes all the services are the same levels of fine. They do care about content and once content producers started rolling their own streaming services, cutting Netflix out, and pulling their content, they had to do something to keep their shelves looking stocked.

ralusek 4y ago
This isn't true. I and many others really had a hard time with a few. HBO Go, for example, particularly at the beginning, was too shite to use. Had tons of content I wanted, and I never used it. But I agree that once you pass "good enough," there are diminishing returns.
hef19898 4y ago
It depends, Shopify for example is providing eCommerce technology to shop owners. And they do great. Netflix could have gone that route. Contrary to Shopify so, streaming lives of content. Which means the only reasonable customers for Netflix tech were content owners looking at their own streaming service (not that many around pre-Netflix, Amazon developed it's own tech) or content creators (excluding big studios, this market was and is owned by YouTube). I think Netflix didn't have much of a choice, and they did very well, didn't they? Anecdata: Most of my current streaming is happening on Netflix (original content from Spain, Scandinavia, Poland,... stuff you don't get somewhere else) or Disney+ (incredible how deep Disney's catalogue is, especially for older films like Alien). Prime Video fell behind quite a bit on the content front. Netflix has an opportunity so, IMHO, in cooperating with local studios and producers in smaller countries. Something neither Disney nor Amazon seem to be capable of doing.
dazc 4y ago
> Consumers don't care about streaming tech.. You haven't tried All4 then? Even a paid subscription will not save you from random freeze and adverts. https://www.channel4.com/ https://www.channel4.com/

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

Dracophoenix 4y ago

That might result in legal problems (see FCC vs Turner cases) or unfavorable terms for the company (i.e no incentive for networks to keep shows on Netflix).

remus 4y ago

This is basically how they started, as they licensed a lot of content for the platform to begin with. The content providers looked at that juicy monthly revenue and decided they wanted a slice of the action, and now we have Netflix, hbo max, Disney+, Apple TV, Amazon prime and probably a few others I've forgotten. Lots of content, as long as you don't mind subscribing to each one individually!