This is pretty obviously false. Why are you grasping onto your argument that Netflix is a monopoly when there are a whole host of other providers, just not as popular? Amazon, iTunes, Vudu, Xbox Live, and PSN are all in some way or another extremely similar to On-Demand. Your internet example IS a monopoly. Unfortunately, it holds absolutely no similarity to Netflix.
Well, to be fair, I have Comcast and their on-demand library is pretty freaking huge (and lots of HD content as well) and is included in the cost of having the cable tier I have. The only time you have to pay extra is for a really new release or for their weak-sauce porn.
My brother has been on Netflix for several years, and I have been his supplier (going on and choosing films for him), as I go to see the movies in theaters when they come out, and have a good idea what he would like or not like.
He got his notification from Netflix two days ago, and quit that same day.
Even with raised prices, the dollar spent per hour of entertainment ratio of Netflix is still the best deal I’ve ever had.
Except that baseball I got when I was in Middle School.
We are dropping back to streaming only. I knew this was coming, but I expected the price jump to be more. Netflix wants out of the mail business. The cost savings for us will be more for insurance against data limits than outright savings. We don’t have cable, so its all streaming or disc. I’m afraid cutting out the discs might send us over our limit. If our ISP lowers the limit again it certainly will.
I feel like we’re all caught in purgatory while this new technology gets worked out between the studios, the cable companies, broadcasters, ISPs, and streaming providers. There is a workable model in there somewhere which will make customers happy and make everyone a profit. But it will take years of tug and pull to figure it out. Meanwhile we’re expecting to be dropping services and signing up and dropping and re-signing for the next few years while these prices and services fluctuate. It is just going to be the reality of situation for a while.
I agree that the insta-renew makes it more difficult to gauge the actual numbers. So you could also argue that it may be worse than the expiration pages make it look, because many of those in the 3 pages of upcoming titles are not really “new” to Netflix but just old titles that had expired and are now being returned. And if there really was some sort of equilibrium we should see 11 upcoming pages and 11 expiring pages or at least something close. But with only 3 upcoming, it is very clear which way the tide is turning at least in the near future.
In my opinion, it’s the timing of this price increase that is partly causing it to be so poorly received.
Oh yeah, the free library is fairly big. No arguing there. The interface sucks though. I was talking about new, paid stuff. And of course for $10 you can have Netflix’s library or for $50/month you can have Comcasts’s cable. DVR’s are up to $15/month, which is eye-popping, plus all sorts of taxes and local fees.
But some 1/3 of people under 40 (this link 30% of Young Netflix Subscribers Are Skipping Cable - Business Insider has 18-24 but I’ve seen cites with the under 40 demographic) with Netflix no longer subscribe to “premium” or “real” cable; they have basic cable. Many have basic cable (no On-Demand) because it’s cheaper to have high speed internet + basic cable than simply to have high speed internet.
When it comes to streaming content you are correct, Netflix is entirely at the mercy of the studios. However, the 30-day wait on new DVD releases was a concession that Netflix made to the studios in return for more access to their catalogs for streaming. They did not have to make that deal. Netflix chose to weaken their DVD service to strengthen their streaming product. At the time, it was easier to swallow because streaming was a free add-on to your DVD service so everyone potentially received some benefit from it. But now that they are splitting the services, DVD-only customers are just left with the raw-end of that bargain.
Sorry, but that’s simply a terrible idea.
Releasing vague information about upcoming price changes is just going to result in speculation, and people are going to assume the worst. It’s the business version of your significant other saying “we need to talk” or your oncologist leaving a message to call immediately. If it were good news, they’d just tell you. So it must be bad news, and they’re trying to figure out how to break it to you. Even worse, it must be really bad news, because they felt the need to “prepare” you for the blow. And so on.
Netflix handled this unfortunate change correctly. They were clear and concise, and they gave plenty of lead time so that people aren’t all of a sudden charged more on their next renewal. In addition, they didn’t let the increase in price for streaming affect the customers that don’t care about streaming. If streaming isn’t worth $8 to you, then just switch to DVDs. The current DVD-only plans are in fact cheaper than they were before Netflix ever had streaming.
Personally, I don’t care much about streaming. I’d probably pay an extra $2-3/mo for it, but for $8/mo, I’ll just get more DVDs.
Agree with iamthewalrus. In fact, this whole thing has not changed my opinion of Netflix at all. I still think they are a pretty good company,
Well, I much prefer streaming & will probably go Streaming Only. But I’ve got a few weeks to decide.
So it’s not a big problem for me, either.
Most of the stuff we watch is not available on streaming, and streaming is more of a pain then slipping in a DVD. I use it some to watch low picture quality stuff (like MST3Ks) between DVDs, but we have plenty of stuff to do besides watch TV. The DVDs sitting there inspire us to watch, streaming does not. So, I think we may drop streaming, and never notice.
However, I bet they retreat when enough people unsubscribe and they admit that they’ve gone from a company nearly everyone likes to one a lot of people hate. Sure they have to raise prices, but the number in the paper is 60%, and that sounds more like a health insurance company than Netflix.
Still doesn’t make Netflix a monopoly.
What makes your and my cable companies, for high-speed internet (and I still don’t have FiOS) a monopoly are not just that they are the only act in town. Part of being a monopoly is that one is the only act in town AND that no one else can enter the market. Comcast and Cablevision just can’t come into my area and set up shop for physical, technical, and legal reasons. Google could decide to compete with Netflix tomorrow and be up and running in a month.
If I am the only guy selling screwdrivers in town, I can charge $50 a screwdriver but it won’t last long because someone else can get the same screwdriver and sell it for $40. So unless I control the means of production (I am the only guy who makes screwdrivers too), being the only game in town does not give me the ability to monopoly price my product. Netflix knows that it needs to keep its eye on Amazon, Blockbuster, other online streaming services, etc. because they can eat Netflix’ lunch if given the chance.
I was just reading a NYTimes article. Two things from it: Netflix claims they are not just passing on higher costs for content :dubious: and Netflix claims it has accounted for subscriber cancellations. We’ll probably never find out, but I’d like to know how their forecasts measure against the actual numbers.
So he was just so angry that he couldn’t wait the ~two months for the increase to actually happen. Unless one was already waffling over the service, anyone who cancels at the announcement without waiting for the increase is an idiot.
Also, if your brother does not use streaming (which I cannot tell from your post), the price for DVD-only is staying the same or going down in most instances. Knee-jerk reactions are just stupid.
Isn’t this going to make the DVD-by-mail service LESS profitable? The people that tended to let movies sit around were more profitable than people that constantly send them in. The more profitable customers are going to be the same people who will be more likely to cancel the DVD-by-mail part. Is this the beginning of the end for DVD-by-mail?
I don’t understand it either. There are over 12,000 titles currently streaming (per InstantWatcher). You mean to tell me out of 12,000 titles there’s not a SINGLE MOVIE that appeals to you? Even if you like only 5% of the titles, that’s still 600 movies to watch! And when you consider some of those are entire 5-6 year long TV series how is there nothing to watch?
Raises hand
We average a DVD every 2-3 weeks, but we Watch Instantly all the time, ergo we plan to reduce our plan to Instant Only and get our DVDs from Redbox. We figure it will only cost $1 more per month that way.
Seeing as how this was one of our few entertainment splurges, it’s upsetting. We don’t have cable, we get internet only. We don’t pay for Hulu, only watch free stuff. We don’t go out to movies more than once a year. I really can’t understand the logic behind such an extreme price hike. The last one, I was able to justify and accepted. This one, not so much. They’d have been better off raising their prices in smaller, more acceptable chunks, unless they are actively *trying *to reduce their DVD-by-mail subscribers.
Your public library charges for DVD rental?!? How bizarre. And it sounds like they aren’t much cheaper than Blockbuster.
That’s exactly what they are trying to do. Delivering streaming is way more profitable than DVDs by mail. They are being proactive and changing their business model ahead of the great technological changes coming down the pipes. Ten years from now renting DVDs will be as quaint as renting VHS tapes. They are getting out before the crash. It is a smart move in the long run.
If that is the case (and I believe it is) they should have been much more gradual about it. It is amazing the backlash the price increase has caused.