Netflix signs multi-year deal with Disney

[Bob The Skutter]

I know there was recently a WB TV Deal done for the UK but it seems Sky have a grip on the big movie studio deals. So I guess this deal or others like it won't be coming to the rest of us.

[ToddKent]

Interesting tidbit from the article:

Reuters wrote:

---

Losing Disney's movies means Starz is left with only Sony Pictures for film content. The pay-TV channel cast the ending of its agreement with Disney as its decision, saying it preferred to use the money for original programming creation.

The only original content from Starz that I've seen their season of Torchwood. And even though that season was deeply flawed I wonder if this means they might be willing take another crack at it.

Or at the very least maybe they'll take a cue from AMC, HBO and Showtime and create some really great new TV. Then we all benefit.

[Alidar Jarok]

RoJoHen wrote:

---

My question is this:

Will they only be allowed to play Disney movies that are currently not "in the vault?"

That's the question. Although I have no idea why they continue such an antiquated system.

[Robert Maxwell]

This sounds like it may be as much bad news for Starz as it is good news for Netflix. I haven't forgotten Starz' little tiff with Netflix a while back, which resulted in Starz pulling all of their content.

Maybe Starz will do okay building more and more original programming, but I've not seen anything from them that's of, say, HBO-level quality, and if they spread themselves too thin, the quality could suffer even more.

Long-term, this could be really bad for Starz. It could also be really good, if they have some kind of brilliant plan we don't know about.

[BillJ]

I'm sure this will lead to another couple of price increases between now and 2016. Oh joy.

[bigdaddy]

BillJ wrote:

---

I'm sure this will lead to another couple of price increases between now and 2016. Oh joy.

No. The price is going to stay the same forever.

Honestly, Netflix people are really damn spoiled. Yes, the price will go up at some point, deal with it. Even if the price was $20 a month it's still better than cable and 90% cheaper.

You want streaming all in one place with original shows? You have to pay for it. I'm sure by then the price will go up to $10, but not anytime soon because other companies are trying to bring Netflix down.

[Temis the Vorta]

BillJ wrote:

---

I'm sure this will lead to another couple of price increases between now and 2016. Oh joy.

I dunno, Netflix customers seem awfully price sensitive and liable to kick them to the curb if upset. Hasn't Netflix learned that little lesson?

Anyway, I pay a big $20/month for Netflix which beats the heck out of the $80/month that Comcast was getting from me before I finally got totally fed up with them.

Netflix has a huge advantage of not needing to offer live sports, the costs of which are going nuts and it's only going to get worse.

The average household already spends about $90 a month for cable or satellite TV, and nearly half of that amount pays for the sports channels packaged into most services. Massive deals for marquee sports franchises like the Dodgers and Lakers are driving those costs even higher. Over the next three years, monthly cable and satellite bills are expected to rise an average of nearly 40%, to $125, according to the market research company NPD Group.

Cable and satellite can get away with this because sports viewers are not price sensitive enough to scream their heads off and cut the cord, even if that means giving up watching sports for good. I'd rather ally myself with the price sensitive crowd, since that's the only way that corporate greed can even theoretically be kept in line.

[RoJoHen]

Alidar Jarok wrote:

---

That's the question. Although I have no idea why they continue such an antiquated system.

Because it makes the movies seem more important when they are eventually re-released...I guess?

[cylkoth]

Snaploud wrote:

---

The article says the Disney catalog won't be available on Netflix until 2016.

There are 2 separate deals announced here. Deal 1) Netflix scoops the ''Pay tv window'' from Starz, for Disney owned theatrical films starting in 2016... meaning that 6 months in theaters, then 6 months after the ''dvd sales window'', Netflix Instant streaming gets those new releases, just as HBO, SHO, and Starz does with current movies, Starz will continue to be the pay tv home of Disney theatricals until their current agreement ends in 2016.
Deal 2) is for catalog titles which began Tuesday. The Nightmare Before Christmas, Pocahontas, James and the Giant Peach, Dumbo and Alice in Wonderful and several others have already been added. Starz controlled the catalog rights as well, but no longer.

And for those wondering, the first 6 Star Wars films will not be streamed on Instant Watch. 20th Century Fox retains distribution rights (theatrical, home vid, tv syndication), so they aren't a part of this deal.

[Temis the Vorta]

RoJoHen wrote:

---

Because it makes the movies seem more important when they are eventually re-released...I guess?

Yeah, it's artifical scarcity. The question is, as consumers get used to technlogy breaking down all excuses to scarcity - there's no tecnological reason why Netflix can't give you what you want, when you want it, it's just a matter of securing the rights - will they still accept any form of scarcity?

After all, doesn't piracy offer everything you want, right when you want it? (I don't know from direct experience. )

[Gary Mitchell]

bigdaddy wrote:

---

Your point is what? If you can spend $8 plus tax a month it's only like 9 months of Netlix.

Not that it really matters in this thread (I was just angry with Netflix because I was only half way through SG-1) but the point is just what I said. I don't spend $8 a month, my brother got me a gift subscription.