3 ms·

> Netflix CEO: Amazon Losing Up to $1 Billion a Year on Streaming Video I'm skeptical. This posits that Amazon is spending about 1/4-1/2 of what Netflix spend

by kbutler 14y ago

> Netflix CEO: Amazon Losing Up to $1 Billion a Year on Streaming Video I'm skeptical. This posits that Amazon is spending about 1/4-1/2 of what Netflix spends (Netflix on track for $2.1 billion this year), to stream about 1/20th as much (Netflix 33% of internet traffic, Amazon 1.8%), from a greatly inferior content catalog. I think Bezos & Co. can cut better deals than that.

sliverstorm 14y ago
Netflix 33% of internet traffic Numbers like that give me pause. I can kind of see where the anti-Network Neutrality folks are coming from.
- wpietri 14y ago
  Not me! The major consumer use case for anything above basic DSL bandwidth is video. That has been obvious for a decade at least. No ISP should be selling fat consumer pipes and expect people to just send the occasional email. Trying to charge both sides is just monopolist idiocy.
- jlgreco 14y ago
  So long as everybody is paying their own internet bill, I don't see why the ISPs should have any right to complain.
wpietri 14y ago
How would he do that? Hastings says the estimate is based on head-to-head competition. If I'm selling streaming rights for property A, I'm going to go with the people who pay me the most. If Bezos says, "But gosh, we aren't showing it to as many people," my answer will be "Tough!"
- wtvanhest 14y ago
  You are probably right, but you (and Hastings) may not be. If I am a negotiator at Amazon, I am cutting the following deal: - Titles we provide free to our customers - Titles we provide for a charge which we split the fee with content producer at some ratio - Placement of those for pay titles on the site so they are bought more I'd sum the value of the contract and show how even though Amazon will not give as much cash in the deal, the content producer will net a bigger positive number. Obviously this is speculation, but I could see that playing out easily.
- kbutler 14y ago
  There are lots of options besides a blanket per-title or per-library fee. One possibility would be per-stream (per-view) licensing. Another could be per registered user or percentage of revenue. Amazon's best bet may be to include prime streaming as an incremental addition to their paid rental streaming licenses. Lots of options, and Amazon has enough reach and enough channels to customers that I expect a smart business to be able to structure a better deal than paying 40-80 times as much for delivered customer value as a single-channel competitor.
trin_ 14y ago
thats 33% of US internet traffic and not worldwide?

by kbutler 14y ago

sliverstorm 14y ago

Netflix 33% of internet traffic Numbers like that give me pause. I can kind of see where the anti-Network Neutrality folks are coming from.

wpietri 14y ago
Not me! The major consumer use case for anything above basic DSL bandwidth is video. That has been obvious for a decade at least. No ISP should be selling fat consumer pipes and expect people to just send the occasional email. Trying to charge both sides is just monopolist idiocy.
jlgreco 14y ago
So long as everybody is paying their own internet bill, I don't see why the ISPs should have any right to complain.

wpietri 14y ago

How would he do that? Hastings says the estimate is based on head-to-head competition. If I'm selling streaming rights for property A, I'm going to go with the people who pay me the most. If Bezos says, "But gosh, we aren't showing it to as many people," my answer will be "Tough!"

wtvanhest 14y ago
You are probably right, but you (and Hastings) may not be. If I am a negotiator at Amazon, I am cutting the following deal: - Titles we provide free to our customers - Titles we provide for a charge which we split the fee with content producer at some ratio - Placement of those for pay titles on the site so they are bought more I'd sum the value of the contract and show how even though Amazon will not give as much cash in the deal, the content producer will net a bigger positive number. Obviously this is speculation, but I could see that playing out easily.
kbutler 14y ago
There are lots of options besides a blanket per-title or per-library fee. One possibility would be per-stream (per-view) licensing. Another could be per registered user or percentage of revenue. Amazon's best bet may be to include prime streaming as an incremental addition to their paid rental streaming licenses. Lots of options, and Amazon has enough reach and enough channels to customers that I expect a smart business to be able to structure a better deal than paying 40-80 times as much for delivered customer value as a single-channel competitor.

trin_ 14y ago

thats 33% of US internet traffic and not worldwide?