Netflix Streaming Genre Alert Thread

[Professor Zoom]

Re: Netflix Steaming Genre Alert Thread

For me, it's a number, not a percentage. I have a lot in both queues. Very few cross over actually.

What titles are available on streaming but not DVD? I haven't found much that I can't get on DVD, except for shows that I suspect aren't available in either format. Here are two series I couldn't find on Netflix: Naked Science and Civil Warriors. (I know the latter is on DVD because Amazon has it.)

My guess is there very very little that is available on streaming that's NOT available on DVD. You can add Shatner's The Captains to the list, you can't yet get it on DVD, but you can stream it now.

For me, streaming is super convenient. More of the moment of "hey, let's see what I can watch right now." We're doing the 1 DVD at a time plan, so the cycle is a little slow... which is hilarious, because years ago I would have remarked how fast it is. Times change.

For me, opting for both streaming and DVD simply isn't worth the expense, but I'm interested to know whether I'm missing titles because of it.

Probably not many. At the same time, I don't find the content lacking on streaming either.

Why have cable when you can watch everything on the internet?

I've thought about cutting the cord, but I don't want to pirate stuff and I do want to yak about it online in a timely fashion, when the conversation is at its most lively, and the only way to accomplish both is to keep paying Comcast's exorbitant fees. At least I've scaled back some by dumping the basic+ tier (that had NatGeo, but again...Netflix has a lot of their series too.)

Keeping up to date with the conversation--since it's the business I'm working in, is important and the reason we haven't cut the cord.

But, it's still tempting.

Is that a Freudian slip in the thread title?

Seriously, Netflix needs to add some substantial content before it can justify its absurd price increase.

How do you define substantial?

More new releases. More quality cable content. Good stuff! If the B stuff makes you happy....well, I'm happy for ya.

The BBC content is B stuff? About Schmidt is B stuff? Trainspotting? Winter's Bone? Tron Legacy? Countless PBS docs? The Expendables (ok, yeah, that's B), Star Trek? My Left Foot? Silverado? Once Upon A Time in the West? These are B movies? B tv shows?

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Re: Netflix Steaming Genre Alert Thread

The BBC content is B stuff? About Schmidt is B stuff? Trainspotting? Winter's Bone? Tron Legacy? Countless PBS docs? The Expendables (ok, yeah, that's B), Star Trek? My Left Foot? Silverado? Once Upon A Time in the West? These are B movies? B tv shows?

The real issue is, they're not everything. It doen't really matter what slice of the pie Netflix is missing. What matters is that they're missing it.

Netflix should be able to say: "If We Don't Have It, It Doesn't Exist." That's what people want, that guarantee of total ease and lack of frustration, of having everything they want dropped in their lap, and cheaply too.

It would be best if the ease and lack of frustration were carried over to the delivery method - streaming is best. But DVD is better than not getting it at all. Netflix is forcing people to choose between two frustrating experiences: not getting everything you want (streaming) or not getting it right away (DVD).

 

[IndyJones]

Re: Netflix Steaming Genre Alert Thread

All streaming is priced equally, so an old episode of Leave it to Beaver* is the same price as a new movie release or HBO series.

To the Netflix subscriber, but I can't imagine that Netflix would be paying the same amount of money to HBO for a season of Game of Thrones as they would to Studio X for season 2 of I Love Lucy.

All streaming is priced equally, so an old episode of Leave it to Beaver* is the same price as a new movie release or HBO series. This is not what the movie studios or HBO wants, to put it mildly. They want to maintain an image that their stuff is worth more than the countless thousands of titles in Netflix's library, many of which would be found in bargain bins or flea markets on the DVD format.

And as a Netflix scubscriber I'm paying the same monthly fee whether I'm using that to get HBO DVDs in the mail or The A-Team, so I can't see how this argument holds any water.


The real explanation is so much simpler than the arguments you're making: HBO came to the decision that whatever money they would get from Netflix in order to stream their shows would be less than they'll get in subscription fees and DVD/Blu-ray sales in a world where they don't let Netflix stream them.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Re: Netflix Steaming Genre Alert Thread

All streaming is priced equally, so an old episode of Leave it to Beaver* is the same price as a new movie release or HBO series.

To the Netflix subscriber, but I can't imagine that Netflix would be paying the same amount of money to HBO for a season of Game of Thrones as they would to Studio X for season 2 of I Love Lucy.

For Netflix, the value of Game of Thrones is that it's necessary to more subscribers vs I Love Lucy. More people would cancel their subscriptions because of lack of the former than of lack of the latter. The difference I described above is how the content producers want consumers to perceive their products, not how consumers pay for the products currently. Even though Netflix must pay more for Game of Thrones, it also needs Game of Thrones more, yet cannot afford to alienate and confuse its subscribers by charging more for Game of Thrones than I Love Lucy (which is why it wouldn't cooperate with Starz, which wanted them to do exactly that sort of thing.) But if Game of Thrones were some little show with little demand for it, Netflix could negotiate a better deal.

All streaming is priced equally, so an old episode of Leave it to Beaver* is the same price as a new movie release or HBO series. This is not what the movie studios or HBO wants, to put it mildly. They want to maintain an image that their stuff is worth more than the countless thousands of titles in Netflix's library, many of which would be found in bargain bins or flea markets on the DVD format.

And as a Netflix scubscriber I'm paying the same monthly fee whether I'm using that to get HBO DVDs in the mail or The A-Team, so I can't see how this argument holds any water.

Once again, I'm not talking about the consumer perspective, I'm taking about the perspective of the movie and TV studios. They hate that you pay the same for HBO as old episodes of A-Team. How are they supposed to continue to induce people to pay $20/month for HBO if people are thinking of HBO as equal to the A-Team? It undermines their whole business model.

The real explanation is so much simpler than the arguments you're making: HBO came to the decision that whatever money they would get from Netflix in order to stream their shows would be less than they'll get in subscription fees and DVD/Blu-ray sales in a world where they don't let Netflix stream them.

Well yeah - Netflix undermines their business model by giving consumers cheaper alternatives to their content, and also by undermining the whole concept of premium content by giving people easy access to a huge library of competing alternatives. Both things are happening.

I'm sure there are plenty of people who do value I Love Lucy more than Game of Thrones. But if Netflix didn't exist, how could they get I Love Lucy? Hit or miss reruns? Would Blockbuster even bother to stock episodes and if so, would they be complete? Netflix makes getting I Love Lucy far easier than it's ever been. Multiply that by, I dunno, hundreds of thousands of titles. How could all that not be a threat to all currently produced content, especially content that is priced at a premium?

There are three different perspectives in all this: the producer's, the consumer's, and Netflix's. They're all different and everyone is jockying for advantage.

 

[Professor Zoom]

Re: Netflix Steaming Genre Alert Thread

The BBC content is B stuff? About Schmidt is B stuff? Trainspotting? Winter's Bone? Tron Legacy? Countless PBS docs? The Expendables (ok, yeah, that's B), Star Trek? My Left Foot? Silverado? Once Upon A Time in the West? These are B movies? B tv shows?

The real issue is, they're not everything.

The real issue FOR YOU. I'm very happy with what they have available on streaming. Many people are. Now, for the price? Some are happy, some aren't. But people weren't complaining when it was included in the price of the DVD rentals.

It doen't really matter what slice of the pie Netflix is missing. What matters is that they're missing it.

Netflix should be able to say: "If We Don't Have It, It Doesn't Exist." That's what people want, that guarantee of total ease and lack of frustration, of having everything they want dropped in their lap, and cheaply too.

Not even Blockbuster STORES could say "If we don't have it, it doesn't exist." So, DVD or streaming that holds true. There is a TREMENDOUS amount of content.

Some people won't EVER be happy.

However, right now, streaming is totally easy, there's no frustration, in the queue or streaming it to the TV, and it's fairly cheap. The only criteria it doesn't fulfill for you, it doesn't have EVERYTHING that you want to watch. What rental business does?

Perhaps that expectation is to high for the real world.

It would be best if the ease and lack of frustration were carried over to the delivery method - streaming is best. But DVD is better than not getting it at all. Netflix is forcing people to choose between two frustrating experiences: not getting everything you want (streaming) or not getting it right away (DVD).

My bringing up the streaming thing wasn't to get into a debate about Netflix making people choose, or "forcing" people, I was bringing up the streaming point because time and time again I hear people complain about lack of content on the streaming side--which I don't think is true.

Now, as far as your "frustrating" experiences... well, the DVD getting to you right away "frustration"... was anyone complaining about that before streaming? If that's the most serious problem they have, switch streaming.... if you want everything, go to just the DVD. If you want both, pay for both.

Choices have consequences. Netflix needs to pay more for content. So, yeah, they have to raise prices. At least they gave people a CHOICE, THREE actually. Stick with what you got, pay more, or choose between the thing that you use and value more and pay less. THE HORRORS! How DARE THEY!?

 

[OmahaStar]

Re: Netflix Steaming Genre Alert Thread

Netflix should be able to say: "If We Don't Have It, It Doesn't Exist."

Temis, the more you post in this thread, the funnier your posts get. They are so far removed from reality, I'm surprised they aren't appearing on Fox News.

What world do you think you're living in? You think Netflix, with its 10 bucks a month, should be able to have the rights to stream everything that's ever existed? Wow. Just ... wow.

 

[The Master of Tarquin Hill]

Re: Netflix Steaming Genre Alert Thread

Choices have consequences. Netflix needs to pay more for content. So, yeah, they have to raise prices. At least they gave people a CHOICE, THREE actually. Stick with what you got, pay more, or choose between the thing that you use and value more and pay less. THE HORRORS! How DARE THEY!?

The problem I see here is that they put the cart before the horse. As a longtime netflix subscriber I would have been much more comfortable with them raising my price AFTER they had acquired significant content.

Instead, they forced me to drop DVDs, which was their goal w/ the qwikster spin-off, a business model that they expected to eventually die off.

So, here I am, someone who dropped theirs DVDs like they(netflix) wanted, but left with a half-assed library to chose from. Once again, I am glad that Netflix apologists like yourself are happy. But for me, I got screwed out of half of my membership.

 

[JD]

Re: Netflix Steaming Genre Alert Thread

I'm doing both streaming and DVDs right now, mainly because there are alot of things that aren't streaming that I want to see. And I'm fairly happy with the selection available for both, although I definitely wish they had more of the newer, bigger movies available for streaming. I actually have some stuff in my streaming queue that has been on it for over a year that I haven't watched yet. And honestly, I would be more than willing to give up most of those movies, if they were to actually get bigger recent stuff, like Rio, or The Social Network or The King's Speech. Sure there's good stuff in available for streaming, but to be honest most of the stuff that I really really want to see isn't and it is a little annoying. I kinda wish they would get less of the little weird movies that noone is ever going to watch, and get more of the popular recent stuff. But, there still enough stuff on there that I do want to see that I'm willing the keep it. On the other hand, I really am very impressed with the selection of TV shows they have streaming. And I think there are actually more shows that I'm really looking forward to watching in my streaming queue than there are on my DVD queue.
I just watched Pitch Black today, and I loved it.

 

[cylkoth]

Here are 2 articles concerning Netflix's issues dealing with the major studios in trying to acquire more recent Hollywood films, and the studio's desire not to sell them streaming rights to them. It really does show how far they (the studios) are going to throttle Netflix, how threatened they are by this new world of online streaming-or more precisely, a monthly subscription service that Netflix wants to become. They have no problems allowing recent films to be streamed on pay per view platforms like Vudu or Amazon. But they are erecting walls to position Netflix as a place where recent hits can't be be streamed.

While focused on the plight of Hulu, it delves into the roadblocks Netflix has run into...

The Starz situation, sometimes overlooked amid the PR problems, may actually have been the key moment. It was then that investors made the connection between Netflix’s need to increase prices and the ability of content providers to demand staggering fees from the high-profile video company — a stick they could use to limit Netflix’s appeal to consumers and prevent, among other things, a dramatic increase in cancellations of cable service, thereby preserving the traditional model.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/hulu-owners-make-stand-by-nixing-sale-2011-10-15?siteid=yhoof

And from January...

Time Warner CEO Jeff Bewkes is openly hostile, refusing to license premium HBO content to Netflix’s streaming service while questioning the virtue of dealing with a company that might erode the perceived value of content. Phil Kent, CEO of Turner Broadcasting Systems, a Time Warner company, has gone further, warning TV executives who might be thinking about selling Netflix streaming rights to their shows to think twice about the impact those deals might have on traditional syndication pacts.
"We’ve been telling our suppliers — the various studios that we buy from — that in the future, [Netflix streaming deals are] going to have a significant impact on what we’re going to be willing to pay for programming or even bid at all," Kent told investors Jan 5.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/hollywood-execs-privately-netflix-71957

And getting back to the actual thread topic (not that I mind the behind the scenes conversation ), I watched Dreamscape for the first time in ages. Still a good movies after all these years.
Just don't let Hollywood try a reboot/remake.

 

[BillJ]

Re: Netflix Steaming Genre Alert Thread

Netflix should be able to say: "If We Don't Have It, It Doesn't Exist."

Temis, the more you post in this thread, the funnier your posts get. They are so far removed from reality, I'm surprised they aren't appearing on Fox News.

What world do you think you're living in? You think Netflix, with its 10 bucks a month, should be able to have the rights to stream everything that's ever existed? Wow. Just ... wow.

I don't agree with OmahaStar very often, but this is spot on!

 

[Kirkman1987]

It's not that bad, Streaming alone remains a steal at $8 a month. Honestly, there is somewhere between 250-300 films and tv shows in my queue right now.

I love the selection of older titles. I love all the old horror films, obscure 80's action movies, silents, MST3K and so on. Anyone with a broad interest in film should be fully satisfied with the content for $8 a month.

 

[backstept]

Re: Netflix Steaming Genre Alert Thread

Hey, Charlie Jade. I need to watch that at some point.

yeah that's one of my favorites that nobody seems to know about
it's definitely worth watching

Sci-Fi channel tried to air it on sci-fi fridays I think, then pushed it to Tuesday late night . . . basically killed it in its US broadcast, but it's actually a pretty good show with some fascinating characters

 

[BillJ]

Hell, the instant streaming just paid for itself as I found season 1 of Star Blazers today.

 

[Professor Zoom]

Re: Netflix Steaming Genre Alert Thread

The problem I see here is that they put the cart before the horse. As a longtime netflix subscriber I would have been much more comfortable with them raising my price AFTER they had acquired significant content.

That I agree with. How they handled the price increase was poor.

Instead, they forced me to drop DVDs, which was their goal w/ the qwikster spin-off, a business model that they expected to eventually die off.

Seriously? They "forced" you? How did they do that? Come to your house with some goons from a B movie?

So, here I am, someone who dropped theirs DVDs like they(netflix) wanted, but left with a half-assed library to chose from. Once again, I am glad that Netflix apologists like yourself are happy.

But for me, I got screwed out of half of my membership.

Really? Because you do know you can sign up for both, right? They aren't stopping you from having both the streaming and the DVDs.

In other words, they aren't screwing you over. YOU don't think it's worth the extra price to have both. You, for some reason, chose streaming over the DVDs. Which brings up a question: why did you choose streaming over DVDs if you think there's no content? If you wanted the cheaper plan, then you should've chosen the DVDs, sounds like you woulda been happier.

Sounds like the only person who screwed you out of anything was yourself.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

There's a fundamental rule of marketing that Netflix broke, that is the source of all their difficulties.

Let's say you have Offer A and Offer B. Both are good deals for the customer, but Offer A is better than Offer B.

You cannot give customers Offer A and then switch to Offer B. The fact that both are good deals is irrelevant. People perceive reality in context with other things, not in isolation. Offer B will not be seen as "still a good deal" and therefore good. It will be seen as "a worse deal than Offer A" and therefore bad.

And who is at fault for this situation? Netflix. They are the one who set up customer expectations with Offer A. They should have known that switching to Offer B would result in a total shitstorm. It's like they've got nobody at their company who's ever sat through Marketing 101. Surreal.

In Netflix's defense, I'm sure they didn't plan to ever have to swtich to Offer B. They're being backed into a corner because the movie studios and premium channels won't cooperate with Netflix's original plan to use DVDs by mail to build their customer base and then eventually switch over to streaming as the vast majority of their business and let the DVD market peter out.

But this scheme directly threatens movie studios and premium channels' core business, so if Netflix expected them to cooperate nicely, then Netflix again is at fault here. Just because they have a grand vision of their own future doesn't mean that the content providers are going to cooperate, when it's not in their interests to cooperate.

All this should have been predictable. They should have realized long ago that "shit, we're going to have to switch to Offer B and everyone will hate us." They could have taken steps to mitigate the damage with a savvy PR campaign aimed at deflecting the blame from them to the uncooperative content providers. Everyone hates Hollywood anyway, it wouldn't be that hard to make Netflix customers hate them a little more.

Netflix is still in a bad position, with a value proposition ("you can get any TV show or movie you want right here, cheap and easy") that is dependent on the cooperation of powerful companies that aren't motivated to cooperate. But it didn't need to be as bad as it is.

 

[Professor Zoom]

Let's say you have Offer A and Offer B. Both are good deals for the customer, but Offer A is better than Offer B.

They offered A, B, AND C....

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Now, as far as your "frustrating" experiences... well, the DVD getting to you right away "frustration"... was anyone complaining about that before streaming? If that's the most serious problem they have, switch streaming....

My point is that both DVDs and streaming are frustrating experiences, just different types of frustrating experiences.

Obviously, for you the biggest issue is getting something fast. For me, the biggest issue is knowing I can get whatever I want from a single, convenient place. Speed is irrelevant to me because I have a DVR filling up with shows faster than I can watch them. If I don't happen to have a DVD around, I can watch something off the DVR. There's really no hurry to see any given show, since I don't expect to get hit by a bus tomorrow.

You could probably divide up the Netflix customer base into these two basic groups (which is exactly what Netflix is doing, by default) - those who value speed over selection and those who value selection over speed.

But it's only human nature to want everything both ways: speed and selection. Ideally, Netflix wants to satisfy both desires. Imagine if they could: everyone would be happy! But instead, they have this lousy situation where lots of people are unhappy.

But my unhappiness is greatly mitigated by knowing that Netflix is really just suffering from a PR problem and that my perception that Offer B is worse than Offer A is irrelevant and I'm still getting a great deal from them just via DVD rental. If everyone understood the situation as thoroughly as I do, people would be far more forgiving of Netflix, which has made some very basic marketing and PR blunders, but is still a good service that people shouldn't be bailing on like they are.

 

[Professor Zoom]

Ideally, Netflix wants to satisfy both desires. Imagine if they could: everyone would be happy! But instead, they have this lousy situation where lots of people are unhappy.

You make it sound like Netflix ISN'T trying to secure more content for streaming. Which isn't true.

But my unhappiness is greatly mitigated by knowing that Netflix is really just suffering from a PR problem and that my perception that Offer B is worse than Offer A is irrelevant and I'm still getting a great deal from them just via DVD rental. If everyone understood the situation as thoroughly as I do

Seriously? As "thoroughly" as you? Ego much?

Because, as I said, it's not A or B.... It's A or B OR C....

, people would be far more forgiving of Netflix, which has made some very basic marketing and PR blunders, but is still a good service that people shouldn't be bailing on like they are.

And I think Netflix will recover many of those people as they try other services and realize it's still a better deal (especially C) than say....Amazon, which doesn't NEARLY have the same amount of content streaming as Netflix.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Netflix should be able to say: "If We Don't Have It, It Doesn't Exist."

What world do you think you're living in? You think Netflix, with its 10 bucks a month, should be able to have the rights to stream everything that's ever existed? Wow. Just ... wow.

Why shouldn't people be able to stream everything in existence for ten bucks a month? Is there some rule written in the sky that says they can't?

Anyway, it's not really me who wants that. I'll be perfectly happy to just get DVDs from them forever and never use streaming at all. It's Netflix who would want to be able to make that offer, if they could. It certainly would stop people from cancelling their subscriptions.

You make it sound like Netflix ISN'T trying to secure more content for streaming. Which isn't true.

Wrong, read my posts. I've been very sympathetic towards Netflix. I know very well they've been trying to get more content and that it's the content providers who have been throwing up barriers. Netflix should only be blamed for not predicting this situation better.

Seriously? As "thoroughly" as you? Ego much?

I guess it's posts like yours that are making me egomanical because you don't really have a grasp on the situation from a business perspective. You're just talking about your own narrow consumer experience, which is okay, but I like to see things from a broader business perspective. This whole thread has been really interesting to analyze.

The problem I see here is that they put the cart before the horse. As a longtime netflix subscriber I would have been much more comfortable with them raising my price AFTER they had acquired significant content.

But the content providers are motivated to keep them from acquiring significant content, because it threatens their businesses.

Here are 2 articles concerning Netflix's issues dealing with the major studios in trying to acquire more recent Hollywood films, and the studio's desire not to sell them streaming rights to them. It really does show how far they (the studios) are going to throttle Netflix, how threatened they are by this new world of online streaming-or more precisely, a monthly subscription service that Netflix wants to become.

Yeah, the problem with this thread is that too few people have taken the time to take a look into the situation and really understand what is going on.

 

[doubleohfive]

Re: Netflix Steaming Genre Alert Thread

I wish Tron was available as well as Legacy. I haven't seen the original in twenty years.

The original TRON is available on Blu-Ray and DVD.