9 ms·

It honestly feels like the technology advantage Netflix enjoyed has all but disappeared. Content is now king and all of the other production companies have bee

by siod 4y ago

It honestly feels like the technology advantage Netflix enjoyed has all but disappeared. Content is now king and all of the other production companies have been making content for decades, Netflix is in serious trouble if it doesn’t lift its game.

xupybd 4y ago
I find that Disney doesn't have better content, but it has new content. I've had Netflix for years and watched most of the stuff I liked. I got Disney and they had Castle. That's kept me going for months and I've not used Netflix since.
- skinnymuch 4y ago
  You’re primarily watching one show? Realistically, any streaming service has a chance at providing that, no?
  - dr_dshiv 4y ago
    Seriously, for me it’s the opposite. Disney has classics. I cant not have all of the Simpsons. Or every Pixar film? It’s just too good. Netflix has new stuff but it gets old faster.
  - xupybd 4y ago
    Yeah it has 8 seasons. I tend to watch a show from start to finish as it cuts down the time spent hunting for something to watch. You're correct that any streaming service has a chance at providing a show I'd like. That's the problem for services at the moment. Netflix has a huge catalogue but I've watched the shows I like. Disney has a smaller catalogue but happens to have a show I can watch with my wife. So that's the one we like at the moment. They don't differentiate on anything else for me. They both work well enough. That said Disney is not on my spart TV so I have to use the Chromecast.
  - bombcar 4y ago
    One show wonders aren’t a bad way to go - and I think this is how Apple+ is going to come in submarine. Price it cheap enough that no matter who you have as #1, you have them as #2.
arrosenberg 4y ago
To the extent they had or still have technology advantages, they are irrelevant. They do not own the majority of the best, most desirable content. Content producers have engaged in (anticompetitive) vertical integration wherein they also have become distributors. As happens in such situations, Netflix finds themselves squeezed out and taxed to death by monopolist studios like Disney, Paramount and Warner. Solution: Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory (FRAND) licensing. Disney must set a price for a piece of content and then allow any distributor to pay that price to carry it. They must not advantage their own distribution service in any way (which they shouldn't be allowed to have in any case). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_and_non-discriminatory_licensing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_and_non-discriminat...
- mappu 4y ago
  It's the modern-day version of United States v. Paramount Pictures, Inc. where movie studios were banned from vertically integrating with theatres. However I note on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Paramount_Pictures,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Paramount_Pic.... that the decree has just been sunset with the reasoning that ""the antitrust restriction was no longer necessary as the old model could never be recreated in contemporary settings"" - but it seems really like the exact same model,
  - lotsofpulp 4y ago
    Why would the public need multiple distributors for the same content? Theaters take tons of staff and logistics to operate. A streaming service is comparably simple (once the initial system is setup) and can deploy all content to all customers within seconds with the efforts of minimal people and overhead.
    - Gigachad 4y ago
      I think the main issue will be that smaller producers and studios won’t be able to make successful content because all of the users and subscriptions will be held by the big players. And even if they can get a licensing deal to put their content on another platform, it won’t be as favourable as Disney gets on their own platform.
yazaddaruvala 4y ago
I'd love to one day read a case study about Netflix's choice to compete with Disney and HBO instead of competing with Akamai, Cloudflare, and Fastly. They really had every possible advantage, and then instead re-built trash TV.
- bombcar 4y ago
  I honestly suspect they believed that nobody else could build what they had because of how hard it was for them to build it. But technology advanced fast and if your differentiator is tech you’d better watch out.
  - yazaddaruvala 4y ago
    > if your differentiator is tech you’d better watch out. I’d say if your differentiator is tech, also sell the tech.
- 1adam1200 4y ago
  I think if you look at the market caps of the companies you listed you’ll have your answer.
asdajksah2123 4y ago
Their technology advantage disappeared the day MLBAM started doing non-MLB stuff. You saw this most clearly with the HBO Go Game of Thrones season premieres. The first time they did it, it was with an in house solution built by a Microsoft veteran (who for some reason decided to build a team in Seattle), that absolutely failed. The next season they outsourced to MLBAM and it was flawless. And would you know it. Disney bought MLBAM. Although now there are several content producers who can match up with Netflix, with their in house teams. What I will never understand though was Netflix voluntarily choosing to eliminate the tremendous data collection operation they had in their rating system. One of Amazon's biggest advantages are the reviews. Netflix had that in the media space. They decided to throw it away for a system which has no user input (so no moat) where anything that is presented to you is invariably rated 99%. It makes absolutely no sense.
- function_seven 4y ago
  I remember actually rating shows and movies on Netflix. There were stars and I could give as many or as few as I wanted. Now they give me some stupid thumbs-up/-down thing, and I just give them the finger in response. Ratings on Netflix are useless now. I do have one huge bit of praise for them: the cancellation process was absolutely painless. Not being snarky, I really appreciated that! (Contrast with trying to cancel SiriusXM, or Spectrum Internet; both painful)
  - zdragnar 4y ago
    Try cancelling Waste Management residential trash pickup. I had to repeat myself over and over that I was cancelling because I was moving to an area they didn't serve, and no, I would not give them my new address to check. After finally convincing them that yes, I really did want to cancel, I was about to hang up and decided to double check that my auto-pay billing would be cancelled too. "Oh no, if you're enrolled in auto-pay, you have to call the billing department to stop that." I was so angry I nearly lost my composure with the lady on the phone who clearly wasn't responsible for such an asinine setup. I wonder how many people got charged for services never rendered and didn't want to deal with their bullshit enough to fight for a refund because they didn't know they had to cancel that separately.
kderbyma 4y ago
Netflix doesn't care about product. they forgot about it when they started making content. that is why they will fail

by siod 4y ago

xupybd 4y ago

I find that Disney doesn't have better content, but it has new content. I've had Netflix for years and watched most of the stuff I liked. I got Disney and they had Castle. That's kept me going for months and I've not used Netflix since.

skinnymuch 4y ago
You’re primarily watching one show? Realistically, any streaming service has a chance at providing that, no?
- dr_dshiv 4y ago
  Seriously, for me it’s the opposite. Disney has classics. I cant not have all of the Simpsons. Or every Pixar film? It’s just too good. Netflix has new stuff but it gets old faster.
- xupybd 4y ago
  Yeah it has 8 seasons. I tend to watch a show from start to finish as it cuts down the time spent hunting for something to watch. You're correct that any streaming service has a chance at providing a show I'd like. That's the problem for services at the moment. Netflix has a huge catalogue but I've watched the shows I like. Disney has a smaller catalogue but happens to have a show I can watch with my wife. So that's the one we like at the moment. They don't differentiate on anything else for me. They both work well enough. That said Disney is not on my spart TV so I have to use the Chromecast.
- bombcar 4y ago
  One show wonders aren’t a bad way to go - and I think this is how Apple+ is going to come in submarine. Price it cheap enough that no matter who you have as #1, you have them as #2.

arrosenberg 4y ago

To the extent they had or still have technology advantages, they are irrelevant. They do not own the majority of the best, most desirable content. Content producers have engaged in (anticompetitive) vertical integration wherein they also have become distributors. As happens in such situations, Netflix finds themselves squeezed out and taxed to death by monopolist studios like Disney, Paramount and Warner. Solution: Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory (FRAND) licensing. Disney must set a price for a piece of content and then allow any distributor to pay that price to carry it. They must not advantage their own distribution service in any way (which they shouldn't be allowed to have in any case). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_and_non-discriminatory_licensing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_and_non-discriminat...

mappu 4y ago
It's the modern-day version of United States v. Paramount Pictures, Inc. where movie studios were banned from vertically integrating with theatres. However I note on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Paramount_Pictures,_Inc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Paramount_Pic.... that the decree has just been sunset with the reasoning that ""the antitrust restriction was no longer necessary as the old model could never be recreated in contemporary settings"" - but it seems really like the exact same model,
- lotsofpulp 4y ago
  Why would the public need multiple distributors for the same content? Theaters take tons of staff and logistics to operate. A streaming service is comparably simple (once the initial system is setup) and can deploy all content to all customers within seconds with the efforts of minimal people and overhead.
  - Gigachad 4y ago
    I think the main issue will be that smaller producers and studios won’t be able to make successful content because all of the users and subscriptions will be held by the big players. And even if they can get a licensing deal to put their content on another platform, it won’t be as favourable as Disney gets on their own platform.

yazaddaruvala 4y ago

I'd love to one day read a case study about Netflix's choice to compete with Disney and HBO instead of competing with Akamai, Cloudflare, and Fastly. They really had every possible advantage, and then instead re-built trash TV.

bombcar 4y ago
I honestly suspect they believed that nobody else could build what they had because of how hard it was for them to build it. But technology advanced fast and if your differentiator is tech you’d better watch out.
- yazaddaruvala 4y ago
  > if your differentiator is tech you’d better watch out. I’d say if your differentiator is tech, also sell the tech.
1adam1200 4y ago
I think if you look at the market caps of the companies you listed you’ll have your answer.

asdajksah2123 4y ago

Their technology advantage disappeared the day MLBAM started doing non-MLB stuff. You saw this most clearly with the HBO Go Game of Thrones season premieres. The first time they did it, it was with an in house solution built by a Microsoft veteran (who for some reason decided to build a team in Seattle), that absolutely failed. The next season they outsourced to MLBAM and it was flawless. And would you know it. Disney bought MLBAM. Although now there are several content producers who can match up with Netflix, with their in house teams. What I will never understand though was Netflix voluntarily choosing to eliminate the tremendous data collection operation they had in their rating system. One of Amazon's biggest advantages are the reviews. Netflix had that in the media space. They decided to throw it away for a system which has no user input (so no moat) where anything that is presented to you is invariably rated 99%. It makes absolutely no sense.

function_seven 4y ago
I remember actually rating shows and movies on Netflix. There were stars and I could give as many or as few as I wanted. Now they give me some stupid thumbs-up/-down thing, and I just give them the finger in response. Ratings on Netflix are useless now. I do have one huge bit of praise for them: the cancellation process was absolutely painless. Not being snarky, I really appreciated that! (Contrast with trying to cancel SiriusXM, or Spectrum Internet; both painful)
- zdragnar 4y ago
  Try cancelling Waste Management residential trash pickup. I had to repeat myself over and over that I was cancelling because I was moving to an area they didn't serve, and no, I would not give them my new address to check. After finally convincing them that yes, I really did want to cancel, I was about to hang up and decided to double check that my auto-pay billing would be cancelled too. "Oh no, if you're enrolled in auto-pay, you have to call the billing department to stop that." I was so angry I nearly lost my composure with the lady on the phone who clearly wasn't responsible for such an asinine setup. I wonder how many people got charged for services never rendered and didn't want to deal with their bullshit enough to fight for a refund because they didn't know they had to cancel that separately.

kderbyma 4y ago

Netflix doesn't care about product. they forgot about it when they started making content. that is why they will fail