Netflix Q2 '17: 5.2 million new subscribers and $2.76 billion in revenue

GK86

Homeland Security Fail
#1
100 million subscribers worldwide.

Netflix reported second-quarter earnings on Monday that fell just shy of analyst estimates, and revenue that exceeded expectations as user growth exploded.

The entertainment technology company added 5.2 million total memberships, blowing away Wall Street's estimates of 3.23 million during a historically weak quarter amid the return of marquee content like "Orange is the New Black." International viewers now account for more than half of Netflix's membership base.

Results vs. expectations

EPS: 15 cents per share vs. 16 cents per share, adjusted, expected by a Thomson Reuters consensus estimate

Revenue: $2.79 billion vs. $2.76 billion expected by a Thomson Reuters consensus estimate

User growth (net adds): 5.2 million (1.07 million domestic, 4.14 million international) vs. 3.23 million total streaming (631,000 domestic, 2.59 million international) expected by a FactSet estimate.
Last quarter, Netflix said it would spend over $1 billion in 2017 on marketing costs alone, projecting that the company would have negative free cash flow for "many years" as it invests in original content, including an estimated $2 billion in negative free cash flow this year.

Netflix has shuffled some top executives in recent months, adding chief product officer Greg Peters and feature film boss Scott Stuber. Netflix announced an ambitious plan for its feature film business on Monday, including the release of 40 features "that range from big budget popcorn films to grassroots independent cinema."
 
#6
Netflix has shuffled some top executives in recent months, adding chief product officer Greg Peters and feature film boss Scott Stuber. Netflix announced an ambitious plan for its feature film business on Monday, including the release of 40 features "that range from big budget popcorn films to grassroots independent cinema."
Boo. I'd rather spend that money on more expensive, ambitious series. Something like Game of Thrones or Westworld.
 
#16
Say what you will about the HBO versus Netflix debate but at least HBO is making huge profits while Netflix builds towards..., something.
 
#23
Honestly, as a Netflix stan, I think they should drop this idea that they'll manage to kill cinemas, and stick mainly to low-budget fare with up-and-coming talent (like they did with Beasts of No Nation).

But, apparently others disagree with me, and it seems to be working, and as long as they keep providing me with great stuff to watch I'm happy.
 
#24
These threads always make me think about how i could have bought stocks when netflix first started gaining steam on xbox. Could have been a lot of rich gamers lol

Then again post qwikster when the stock bottomed out
 
#25
Poor Blockbuster.
I'm not a business expert, but if Blockbuster bought them back in the day, they would totally fucked it up and Netflix would not be making anything close to $2.76 billion.

They would have probably stuck with dvd rentals and streaming and not do any original shows. and then lose out to some other company. who knows.
 
#33
These threads always make me think about how i could have bought stocks when netflix first started gaining steam on xbox. Could have been a lot of rich gamers lol

Then again post qwikster when the stock bottomed out
I don't think anyone expected netflix to be where it is today(at these levels)

I had the chance to buy facebook stock when it was around $30 but I didn't think it'd go up all that much more

oh well
 
#34
Is there like a website or something that tells you what streaming service has what shows?
It's so messy right now with Netflix, Hulu and Amazon.
there is, just google things like "where is it streaming" and you can find several different results.

But then you have to deal with certain things being available in different regions. That's annoying to find that something is on Netflix UK and not Netflix US
 
#37
Honestly, as a Netflix stan, I think they should drop this idea that they'll manage to kill cinemas, and stick mainly to low-budget fare with up-and-coming talent (like they did with Beasts of No Nation).

But, apparently others disagree with me, and it seems to be working, and as long as they keep providing me with great stuff to watch I'm happy.
I don't think that they want to kill cinemas, they are pretty open to having their movies being shown in cinemas.
It's the cinema owners who don't want consumers to have the option of seeing it at home on the same day as it comes out on the cinemas.
 
#39
I've been a sub since the beginning. But i barely touch it anymore. There's just way too many series for me which i don't have time to watch. I wish there was a lot more focus on movies. Or am i alone in thinking this?
 
#41
There's a ton of more potential users to grow even more once true high speed infrastructure expands through more rural areas. My parents couldn't use Netflix if they wanted because they can only get 5 mbs service and you can never max out your speed so it's really more like 1.5 mbs during peak hours.
 
#42
I've been a sub since the beginning. But i barely touch it anymore. There's just way too many series for me which i don't have time to watch. I wish there was a lot more focus on movies. Or am i alone in thinking this?
Not alone no. But they bet big on series and that has seemingly worked for them.
 
#45
is this show any good?
Definitely. I'm a big history buff (not to mention having a BA in it...) and am British (if not a die-hard royalist), so perhaps my impressions can be taken with a pinch of salt - but the performances are outstanding, it's beautifully shot, and it does an excellent job of portraying the Royal Family in a country where the political/social landscape is changing constantly.

Thankfully it's not a hagiography of the Royals and the political elite, which was my big fear - Churchill in particular is portrayed as a massively flawed, out-of-touch and out-of-time figure.
 
#49
I don't think that they want to kill cinemas, they are pretty open to having their movies being shown in cinemas.
It's the cinema owners who don't want consumers to have the option of seeing it at home on the same day as it comes out on the cinemas.
Let me rephrase, then: I think Netflix are making a mistake by throwing money at their movies and trying to directly compete with cinemas ("popcorn movies") instead of focusing on movies made on a lower budget which offer something different.

Admittedly I said this before I looked up the budget for Okja but the point still stands that that film has probably done a lot for Netflix's reputation whereas so many of the films come and go with no fanfare because they're basically just direct-to-DVD comedy films with a new banner.
 
#50
Let me rephrase, then: I think Netflix are making a mistake by throwing money at their movies and trying to directly compete with cinemas ("popcorn movies") instead of focusing on movies made on a lower budget which offer something different.

Admittedly I said this before I looked up the budget for Okja but the point still stands that that film has probably done a lot for Netflix's reputation whereas so many of the films come and go with no fanfare because they're basically just direct-to-DVD comedy films with a new banner.
Only three or four have been comedy films. Sandler's stuff, that Wayne one, and what else?