Posted on 12/14/2010 6:26:14 AM PST by Gondring
For the past year, executives at big media companies have watched Netflix with growing resentment — for its success in delivering movies and television shows via the Internet, for its stock price nearly quadrupling, for its chief executive being named businessperson of the year by Fortune magazine.
Now many of the companies that make the shows and movies that Netflix delivers to mailboxes, computer screens and televisions — companies whose stocks have not enjoyed the same frothy rise, and whose chief executives have not won the same accolades — are pushing back, arguing that the company is overhyped, and vowing to charge much more to license their content.
“It’s a little bit like, is the Albanian army going to take over the world?” said Jeffrey L. Bewkes, the chief executive of Time Warner, in an interview last week. “I don’t think so.”
[...]
If Netflix is to renew the Starz pact — and thus keep a steady flow of Hollywood movies — it will probably pay many times the current $25 million a year. Richard Greenfield, an analyst at BTIG research, estimated a new deal could cost Netflix more than $250 million a year. Mr. Bewkes suggested a new deal may not be reached, because Netflix’s subscription streaming service, which costs about $8 a month, isn’t high enough for the company to pay top dollar for movies.
[...]
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Netflix relies on poaching assets of other companies. At some point it will end....
Apparently the US is the only market in which NetFlix delivers movies through the mail. All of their other markets are direct-to-TV downloads.
I wish NetFlix would do away with the mailers and just let us get new movies over the web. Otherwise, my mailers just sit on the counter until one of us goes through the mail.
I think we like Netflix enough that we would pay more. Especially if it means pi$$ing of Time Warner and their ilk.
Go ahead and kill the goose laying the golden eggs Hollywood.
I pay for content now, happily. You make it difficult to live stream movies at a decent price and I will find ways to do it for free.
When was the last time AOL/Time/Warner got anything right in the past decade or so?
How is Netflix any different from a box store with respect to rentals? If Netflix has agreements, and is living up to the agreements, and if it is operating within the law, then what is the issue?
I think Netflix has an excellent business model. Provide the consumer with what he or she wants and sit back and enjoy profits.
How, exactly, are they poaching assets?
I remember in the early 80s, the president of Sears [then the biggest retailer] gave his view of fledgeling Walmart slowing growing: “Who do they think they are? Sears? hahaha.” A few years later, Walmart grew beyond Sears.
I read a comment recently that Netflix has more subscribers than Time Warner. hmmm.
Yes...it got great deals on initial contracts and has scooped the market, but once those end, the market price point will be higher than now.
Netflix is making money.
If Netflix has agreements, and is living up to the agreements, and if it is operating within the law, then what is the issue?
Agreements are not forever. They have to be renewed and everyone wants a piece of the pie.
Cable Company crybabies.
The only thing worse than calling your cell phone carrier is calling the cable company. They should try focusing on
improving their customer service instead if bitc#ing about their competitors.
Their stock price seems to a little on the exuberant side..
I use Netflix on a Roku device and love it. The Roku also has an Amazon channel which we use on the occasion where we really want to see a specific movie.
One loophole Netflix needs to close is that up to 5 households can share one subscription.
But doesn’t the streaming version of netflix not allow you to view the special features they put on the disks like audio commentaries and deleted scenes? That’s why I still like the mail service.
I'm sure an Internet Service Provider would have a thing or two to say about that.
I disagree with your first comment (they're not poaching assets just because they're making bank), and agree with the second (cable companies missed the first streaming boat and are trying to get it back into the harbor so that they can launch theirs). I've never cared for Time Warner, but good gosh I love Netflix.
I am of like mind...and very much for the same reasons. I'm at $8 per month now, and would gladly accept a price increase to $12/month. I wonder tho at where my "tipping" point would be with Netflix?? $15/mo? $20/mo? $39.95/mo. When would the cost be "too much to pay"?
At any rate, I will not let my Netflix go until such time as I can obtain cable/satellite service "al a carte". In the meantime, I have my digital "rabbit ears", my 44" HDTV, six free TV channels (for news and such), and Netflix for whatever movies I want to watch.
OK...on occasion I hook up to Hulu for something, but that's pretty rare.
Fie on T/W and their ilk!
“Netflix relies on poaching assets of other companies. At some point it will end.... “
Time Warner’s price is too high, and their service sucks eggs through a straw. My son uses the internet for all his content. Hulu, Netflix, etc. He just got a digital antenna for live news.
Time Warner is on thin ice.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.