To quote myself from an earlier thread:

"Netflix is the Groupon of movie rentals/streaming."

-The Egg

I Am The Egg Matt Drudge Smears Upon His Body: [th09.deviantart.net image 640x640]


To quote myself from an earlier thread:

"Netflix is the Groupon of movie rentals/streaming."

-The Egg

See I was thinking Netflix was more like the Martha Stewart of rentals/streaming which is a much more obvious analogy.

Let's see what their pricing scheme is first and range of content first.

Not saying they won't come up with something, but the owners of the content are terrified about losing their share of the money pie, and are all too happy to gouge the would-be online purveyors for every penny.

Netflix is the Justin Bieber of movie rentals/streaming.

Netflix is the company of movie rentals/streaming

Netflix is the Netflix of movie rentals/streaming.

Netflix is the Uwe Boll of movie rentals/streaming

fearmongert: Netflix is the Uwe Boll of movie rentals/streaming

I'd say that Uwe Boll is the Netflix of Groupon.

Netflix is the eBay of movie rentals/streaming.

I like Netflix.
They broke the mold and killed $5/rentals.

Until A la Carte service comes, they are the next best thing.

They'll get bought out soon for their library rights, but I have no hate for Netflix.

The package of programming would be limited in its scope, said two people with knowledge of the plans. Another person said the focus would be packages of movies similar to Liberty Media's Starz Play and Viacom's Epix or could involve children's programming from a partner such as Walt Disney Co or Viacom.

Given this description, I can't imagine why I'd switch.

So... Before people were saying that Streaming>Cable/Satellite because you get to watch what you want and don't have to pay for what you don't.

Ok.

But now multiple streaming companies are popping up, and they have exclusive contracts with providers. So now we're back to the same problem - you may have to subscribe to one streaming service for only one show, and another service for another, and so on.

Its great that Verizon wants to offer an alternative to consumers, hell...the product offerings may even be richer or more focused, as opposed to half the stupid shiat that Netflix offers for streaming. All that being said, they have a small thing to contend with: Netflix has spent a ton of money and time integrating into almost every electronic entertainment device. I can pull Netflix up on my TV, BluRay, Xbox and Wii.

I know Verizon is doing something with Xbox, and game console integration shouldn't be that difficult, but getting their app onto TVs and BluRays that would function in a similar way to Netflix app, I suspect will be a bit more difficult. And quite frankly, this applies to any Netflix competitor...

Now, all that being said, here are two paragraphs from the article that point to why entertainment delivery is stagnating:

Verizon has been back and forth with programmers over the last two years exploring the possibility. While a lot of the discussion has been around fees, the programmers have also been concerned about the possibility of hurting their existing - and lucrative - relationships with the cable operators.

Companies that sell cable and satellite subscriptions are concerned that customers will drop their pay-TV subscriptions in favor of cheaper Web alternatives - so called 'cord-cutting' or 'over-the-top'

Obviously, at the end of the day, it is all about the money. Look, that is fine, companies are in business to make money. I know that today, the cable industry is alive and well...but it is a dying business model. Consumers are a lot more tech savvy and are starting to become a lot more aware of and have access to alternative entertainment options and entertainment delivery services. It really comes down to an adapt or die philosophy for the industry as a whole.

finnished: So... Before people were saying that Streaming>Cable/Satellite because you get to watch what you want and don't have to pay for what you don't.

Ok.

But now multiple streaming companies are popping up, and they have exclusive contracts with providers. So now we're back to the same problem - you may have to subscribe to one streaming service for only one show, and another service for another, and so on.

Or even worse - Seasons 1-4 will be available on Netflix, but seasons 5,6 and 9 will be available through Verizon and seasons 7, 8 and 10-12 will be through Sony Entertainment.

Until data caps are removed, it's all kinda moot. I've burned through about 20 percent of my quota in the last seven days.

Not promising.

mat catastrophe: Until data caps are removed, it's all kinda moot. I've burned through about 20 percent of my quota in the last seven days.

Not promising.

7/30=.23

.23>.20

You're fine.

mat catastrophe: Until data caps are removed, it's all kinda moot. I've burned through about 20 percent of my quota in the last seven days.

Not promising.

Just curios how you are using your connection. I ditched cable for a Roku, and I use Netflix streaming plus Amazon Prime. I also stream Pandora and I play a lot of TF2. With all that plus the other stuff I do online I've used 20GB over the first eight days of my billing cycle. Comcast caps me at 250GB.

skinink: I ditched cable for a Roku

How's that Roku working out for you, content wise?

Jesus could this be even more screwed up? The movie/entertainment industry is shooting themselves in the head. Actively killing the rental industry by exclusive deals and forcing people to buy the DVD instead, killing netflix, screwed up DRM that doesn't work, and actually forces you to pay to watch movies that you already own (Ultraviolet), scrambling everything to where you have to go to four different places to get all that you want to watch.

And Mat Castrophe hit it dead on, Bandwith caps will eventually kill this and no matter what anybody says, in the US, broadband high speed is NOT A GIVEN. There's large areas in West Texas where phones don't even work.

skinink: mat catastrophe: Until data caps are removed, it's all kinda moot. I've burned through about 20 percent of my quota in the last seven days.

Not promising.

Just curios how you are using your connection. I ditched cable for a Roku, and I use Netflix streaming plus Amazon Prime. I also stream Pandora and I play a lot of TF2. With all that plus the other stuff I do online I've used 20GB over the first eight days of my billing cycle. Comcast caps me at 250GB.

I'll add something to this, the bigger problem is when families get involved. You have several people in the same household streaming /downloading music, movies, possibly a Steam player (1.5 gig updates every time) and you will burn through the cap.

so they've raided the piggy bank to launch a streaming venture of Starz Play, which Netflix had and nobody cared about and Epix (which Netflix currently has) and thats going to kill Netflix? Because the way I see it they are either going to pay as much or more than what Netflix paid for those same streaming rights, which suggests they aren't going to be able to offer their service for any less than what Netflix charges.

skinink: mat catastrophe: Until data caps are removed, it's all kinda moot. I've burned through about 20 percent of my quota in the last seven days.

Not promising.

Just curios how you are using your connection. I ditched cable for a Roku, and I use Netflix streaming plus Amazon Prime. I also stream Pandora and I play a lot of TF2. With all that plus the other stuff I do online I've used 20GB over the first eight days of my billing cycle. Comcast caps me at 250GB.

at least you're able to find out where you are on yours. AT&T just constantly tells me

"oh don't worry about it. Here is how to estimate how much you should be able to use in a month. We'll email after the fact the first time you go over and then we'll send you emails when you hit 90% the second time. But seriously, don't worry about it. Most people don't come close to going over, so you're probably good. Unless we say you're not.".

its a good thing net neutrality in the US so that Verizon can't throttle Netflix streaming over their own service

Netflix is the egg Matt Drudge smears upon his body of movie rentals/streaming.

PizzaJedi81: skinink: I ditched cable for a Roku

How's that Roku working out for you, content wise?

We ditched cable for a Roku box a couple years ago. We have Netflix (dvd and streaming) and Hulu Plus. Plus, we have an antenna for football games and such. There's plenty of content available between Netflix and Hulu to keep us happy. Our total cost (including internet from U-Verse) is about $60/month. With Comcast, we were at about $120/month for internet and tv. The internet was out half the time, and the TV signal was pure pixelated garbage.

So in traditional Verizon fashion, it will start out with the same features as everyone else, but then they will disable basic functions because they haven't found a way to make money on them yet?

See: Verizon Wireless and NFC on the Galaxy Nexus (new window)

HotWingConspiracy: The package of programming would be limited in its scope, said two people with knowledge of the plans. Another person said the focus would be packages of movies similar to Liberty Media's Starz Play and Viacom's Epix or could involve children's programming from a partner such as Walt Disney Co or Viacom.

Given this description, I can't imagine why I'd switch.

Agreed, and also, I don't understand why the article makes it sound like Viacom/Epix can only sell to Verizon OR Netflix and not both... That may be their intention, but the article makes it sound like both isn't even an option.

I realize this is a tangent but... the fact that we don't have a streaming service capable of streaming damn near anything ever to anyone who wants it is not a matter of technology or infrastructure. It's purely the fault of our copyright system. If we're going to have a system that forces Netflix to get "rights" for everything it streams, we should at least have a system with some sort of compulsory licensing and not this exclusive crap we have now.

I Am The Egg Matt Drudge Smears Upon His Body: [th09.deviantart.net image 640x640]


To quote myself from an earlier thread:

"Netflix is the Groupon of movie rentals/streaming."

-The Egg

Yeah but in this case, is it a good thing? I don't really want to live in a world where the 7-10 shows I want to watch are available (sometimes exclusively) from 5 different streaming providers, each one wanting me to fork over $8-15 a month for their service.

25 years from now we're going to be talking about the break-up of Ma Verizon in past tense.

Project Free TV (google it) or TVDuck.

Look studio executives I don't want Balkanized websites. Hulu, Crackle, Netflix, HBOGo, whatever else you have. You're basically a giant incestuous monopoly as it stands, can't you at least have the decency to have one central portal? You can all run subdomains or something of it if you want, just have a unified UI and search.

Secondly I am not buying cable just for access to your streaming site. That defeats the purpose. At that point it might as well be 2003 and I'm still stuck to dicking around with the "On Demand" button on my Comcast remote. No thank you.

Now you also need to understand you produce three levels of content. Content I will pay to own. For example I will pay to download high quality versions of Archer and own them since I'll rewatch them repeatedly. I also don't want Archer to go away, so I'll spend a couple bucks to own the episode and vote with my wallet. Other items like the Simpsons are one and done for me, I'll stream it and watch ads but I'm not going to enter my credit card number to view it. The last level is the unwatchable crap that sucks too bad to even pirate. A wise person might consider making all their contant available as a paid download (high quality and in a nice format that I can use on all the devices I own) and as something I can stream with ads. Customers will pick the option they want for the content and you either get straight cash or ad revenue. If you're a dick we'll just go rip it, toss it on Tudou or some other Chinese streaming site that doesn't give a fark about copyright and you will get no income.

Finally admit some properties are in their "end of life" for revenue. I might watch some older movie with ads, but I'm never going to buy it, Just host it and get the ad revenue, bandwidth is cheap. Stop trying to make me pay extra to access to your historical catalog. Or if you're feeling really nice, have your lawyers come up with some license where media can be passed around freely but you still hold the copyright on it.

Basically accept that what used to be termed as piracy is actually your competition. Project Free TV and TVDuck are posting up low resolution versions of your content and making money. They're not a charity and they're covering bandwidth costs via ads. They figured out a revenue stream on this. You guys with the high quality master copies and long standing contacts to ad agencies should be able to figure out how to make money.

Artcurus: Jesus could this be even more screwed up? The movie/entertainment industry is shooting themselves in the head. Actively killing the rental industry by exclusive deals and forcing people to buy the DVD instead, killing netflix, screwed up DRM that doesn't work, and actually forces you to pay to watch movies that you already own (Ultraviolet), scrambling everything to where you have to go to four different places to get all that you want to watch.

That's when consumers who would like to pay for the content say "screw this" and download it from bittorrent.

jonny_q: I realize this is a tangent but... the fact that we don't have a streaming service capable of streaming damn near anything ever to anyone who wants it is not a matter of technology or infrastructure. It's purely the fault of our copyright system. If we're going to have a system that forces Netflix to get "rights" for everything it streams, we should at least have a system with some sort of compulsory licensing and not this exclusive crap we have now.

We're going to end up re-creating the cable TV system online is what will happen. All the big players will roll out their own "Netflix killer", none of them will have enough bang-for-the-buck to really survive such a splintered landscape long term, and eventually the media companies/telcos/whomever will start signing deals with each other, someone will buy out someone else, and we'll have on-line cable TV that will end up at about the same $100/month subscription rate.

So...Verizon is going to partner with companies that are currently partnered with Netflix...how is that different again? You get the same content from a different carrier that will eventually raise rates on you. they'll take a hit early on to ward off some competition, but when the dust settles rates go up. Guar-on-tee.

How's that plan to start including video games coming along Netflix? You know, when you were trying to get us to buy into splitting into Qwikster? I mean that service was supposed to be rolling out in a "few weeks" when it was announced after all..

jayhawk88: jonny_q: I realize this is a tangent but... the fact that we don't have a streaming service capable of streaming damn near anything ever to anyone who wants it is not a matter of technology or infrastructure. It's purely the fault of our copyright system. If we're going to have a system that forces Netflix to get "rights" for everything it streams, we should at least have a system with some sort of compulsory licensing and not this exclusive crap we have now.

We're going to end up re-creating the cable TV system online is what will happen. All the big players will roll out their own "Netflix killer", none of them will have enough bang-for-the-buck to really survive such a splintered landscape long term, and eventually the media companies/telcos/whomever will start signing deals with each other, someone will buy out someone else, and we'll have on-line cable TV that will end up at about the same $100/month subscription rate.

The flawless efficiency of the free market in action.

I remember when people were talking about Blockbuster striking a death blow to Netflix.

PizzaJedi81: skinink: I ditched cable for a Roku

How's that Roku working out for you, content wise?

If you want what I consider good content you have to pay. That generally means Netflix and/or Hulu+ subscriptions. If you have/use Amazon Prime for the mailing, having some free streaming content is a nice bonus but the UI is not friendly enough to make it a regular thing.

almandot: How's that plan to start including video games coming along Netflix? You know, when you were trying to get us to buy into splitting into Qwikster? I mean that service was supposed to be rolling out in a "few weeks" when it was announced after all..

onlive is going to kill game rental by mail anyways, just like netflix streaming killed netflix by mail

SharkTrager: mat catastrophe: Until data caps are removed, it's all kinda moot. I've burned through about 20 percent of my quota in the last seven days.

Not promising.

7/30=.23

.23>.20

You're fine.

Took me a minute to wrap my head around what you were trying to prove. Hint: there are 31 days in December.

/He's still fine.

FTA: The package of programming would be limited in its scope

Yeah, that sounds like it will really kill off Netflix. Only bad thing about this is more competition will drive up licensing cost from content providers.

tricycleracer: jayhawk88: jonny_q: I realize this is a tangent but... the fact that we don't have a streaming service capable of streaming damn near anything ever to anyone who wants it is not a matter of technology or infrastructure. It's purely the fault of our copyright system. If we're going to have a system that forces Netflix to get "rights" for everything it streams, we should at least have a system with some sort of compulsory licensing and not this exclusive crap we have now.

We're going to end up re-creating the cable TV system online is what will happen. All the big players will roll out their own "Netflix killer", none of them will have enough bang-for-the-buck to really survive such a splintered landscape long term, and eventually the media companies/telcos/whomever will start signing deals with each other, someone will buy out someone else, and we'll have on-line cable TV that will end up at about the same $100/month subscription rate.

The flawless efficiency of the free market in action.

I wouldn't call the copyright system "free market". You might call it a necessary evil, but a government-granted monopoly on a thing is more of an exception to the free market and not really part of it. I know that's a lot of pejorative words, but I really don't mean it that way... it is what it is.

jayhawk88:
Yeah but in this case, is it a good thing? I don't really want to live in a world where the 7-10 shows I want to watch are available (sometimes exclusively) from 5 different streaming providers, each one wanting me to fork over $8-15 a month for their service.

Whilst I don't have the same erm... buffet of services in my country you guys do this is one of my concerns as well. It's a similar thing to video games, I like the digital distribution but I don't honestly want Steam, Origin, Impulse and the like all on my computer. I just want something I can rock up to, tell it what I want and it goes off looking for the lowest price from the various services.

The Egg is the Groupon of analogies.