-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Netflix splits streaming and DVD by mail service; latter to be called "Qwikster"
- Thread starter CronosBlade
- Start date
- Status
ElectricBlue187
Member
wow two horrible decisions in as many months. Somebody needs to be fired for this
VanMardigan
has calmed down a bit.
Is Blockbuster by mail any good now? Last time I had them, they had a hard time with new releases on blu ray. Couldn't get any of the movies at the top of the queue.
DiscoJer
Member
G-Fex said:
Red Box killed video stores, not Netflix.
Or rather, consumer DVD pricing did (as opposed to the VHS days, where generally they would cost $99.99 and up). Why rent a movie for $5 when you could buy it for $15? (and in many cases, much less, or older titles that are $5 and under to buy at a big box store).
Video stores could compete somewhat with Netflix on new releases. Netflix, you'd sometimes have to wait a month to get a new movie. Blockbuster would devote like half the rows in the their store to new releases (which is perhaps overstating things a bit, because the other half sucked, but still, they had a lot of new releases).
But that's where Red Box had them beat, or delivered the coup de gras. Want a new movie? Red Box has it, for a $1 a night, which is a much better than the price Blockbuster offered. And no dealing with surly clerks (something that seemed to be the norm there)
And while Netflix is sort of screwed, it's hard to see what else they could have done. Charge for streaming from day one? Splitting up the companies is the only thing they can do (albeit with a better name - wonder if they will buy that guy out on Twitter for a few million?)
They are pretty much in the same position Blockbuster was, when Hollywood decided to go with consumer pricing for DVDs (though Blockbuster apparently was offered a deal to keep the old model, and they declined, so they did screw up, much to everyone's benefit).
Here, again, it's Hollywood changing the rules of how content is sold. Instead of charging peanuts for streaming, they are charging a lot of money. Too much for Netflix to be profitable as it was. Unfortunately, this time, unlike the DVD pricing, the consumer isn't getting a better deal.
They kept the Netflix name for the part of the business that matters longterm.
The "I messed up" mistake was not announcing the new name back when they split the plans. That might have helped people understand the strategy.
The story should have been "Netflix service will still cost only $7.99".
The "I messed up" mistake was not announcing the new name back when they split the plans. That might have helped people understand the strategy.
The story should have been "Netflix service will still cost only $7.99".
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
Tobor said:
Well, first of all, I don't think most people care about the strategy. If you paid $10 before and you want to keep getting everything you got before, you pay $16 now. The reason isn't important to people. Why would it be? Netflix are trying their best. They don't want to raise the price. They're raising the price because they're being held hostage by the hands that feed. But people don't care who is at fault, they care about what they need to pay to get the things they want.
It's true that ultra-geeks like us like to blab about this stuff, but we're few and far between and we're not the cause of the social media outrage.
I don't think their continued contrition changes much in that respect. People want as many movies and TV shows as possible for as cheap as possible. I can't say if the die-hard disc people are mostly people who really want discs, or people who would prefer streaming but need the selection the disc service gives them. I'm sure Netflix has studied that. But either way, people's satisfaction with Netflix isn't going to be based on sympathy, it's going to be based on content offerings.
ReBurn
Gold Member
I wonder how many of those lost subscribers were people who paid for the service but never used it, then dropped it once it went to the new pricing?
If nothing else I think it would have made sense to spin the streaming portion off into the new company. But maybe they thought it better to try to build a new brand around the part that could survive after their recent string of disasters.
If nothing else I think it would have made sense to spin the streaming portion off into the new company. But maybe they thought it better to try to build a new brand around the part that could survive after their recent string of disasters.
They lost 800k customers, 600k of which were disc customers. The Netflix name is staying with the better longterm bet.ReBurn said:
@stump, Changing the name is entirely about perception. Nerds like us understood the businesses were being split back when the price hike on discs was announced. It was part of that announcement. Normal people(and investors, apparently) didn't get it. Look at the headlines today, they all include "Netflix splitting the business", when that was already announced months ago.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
For those complaining/questioning the "brand split"/name change:
Netflix is about to roll out streaming-only services overseas under the Netflix brand name, so the streaming-only service is what will be known worldwide as "Netflix." It makes sense.
The inclusion of video games may be what saves this company. I think that will draw a large number of new customers or bring back old customers.
Netflix is about to roll out streaming-only services overseas under the Netflix brand name, so the streaming-only service is what will be known worldwide as "Netflix." It makes sense.
The inclusion of video games may be what saves this company. I think that will draw a large number of new customers or bring back old customers.
Anerythristic
Member
So in like in three years are brick and mortar rental stores going to be back in style? We need to invest.
ReBurn
Gold Member
I can see where the Netflix name fits better with the streaming business. But I do wonder if streaming is a better long term bet for them since content providers may price it out of existence while simultaneously fragmenting the market. I guess if nothing else the failure of Netflix will influence the future of digital distribution.
I see this as the beginning of the end for Netflix. Either they end up as a curator with very few, yet very popular, high quality content, like HBO, or Netflix crumbles in 4 years.
If anything this makes me less sympathetic. First they passed on the costs to customers, all the while crippling the service, and now they're forcing customers to juggle two different accounts because the company doesn't want to deal with the complexity of two different delivery systems for content. I used to pay Neflix for the convenience of having all that done for me even though Neflix didn't have many titles I wanted to see.Tobor said:
why are they doing that though? The disc side of thte company was profitable and imo it helped their business. It'd be like Amazon dropping physical books because ebooks are burgeoning in popularity.Plinko said:
BattleMonkey
Member
Splitting the websites is incredibly stupid. Now I got to surf two sites to determine what to stream and what to get by disc?
I like the game option though, but will see what the extra charge is. Trying the Blockbuster Total Access now which includes games and blu ray at no extra cost, of course it doesn't have new release games though. I would hope/assume that if Netflix is going to charge me extra I will at least have new titles as an option.
I like the game option though, but will see what the extra charge is. Trying the Blockbuster Total Access now which includes games and blu ray at no extra cost, of course it doesn't have new release games though. I would hope/assume that if Netflix is going to charge me extra I will at least have new titles as an option.
Qwikster is an absolutely awful name. It seems like the names have been flip-flopped. Netflix should be the snail mail service and Qwikster should be the streaming.
Why can't they separate the snail mail plans so if I only want to rent games I don't have to subscribe to the DVD plan?
All in all, this is a very stupid decision on Netflix's behalf. It will be interesting to see how Qwikster performs in the future.
Why can't they separate the snail mail plans so if I only want to rent games I don't have to subscribe to the DVD plan?
All in all, this is a very stupid decision on Netflix's behalf. It will be interesting to see how Qwikster performs in the future.
brucewaynegretzky
Member
Greyface said:This. It's just been one anti-consumer move after another. I'll have to start searching around for the local cinephile movie rental place. Hopefully some still exist
I don't think Gaf gets what "anti-consumer" means. Typically more choice between services isn't seen as "anti-consumer." If they were making you buy useless things to get things you want it would be different. Doing something people don't like isn't necessarily "anti-consumer."
Did you miss the part aboutbrucewaynegretzky said:
I had friends and recommendations on the site. Others had posted lots of reviews. First Netflix hid the features and now they aren't there anymore. Netflix is making their services worse to appease to the studios (dvd availability window for example).
Cardigan said:
Net has the word "net" in it. as in "internet". I can see why they would want to keep the well known name for what they consider to be the future of the company.
whether or not this whole splitting and rebranding is successful is another matter. If the streaming service continues to get worse, as some of the people here are saying, then the brand will not mean very much and the subscriptions will drop.
(In Canada, the streaming service has always been relatively poor with weak selection and missing features - no queue!)
brucewaynegretzky
Member
Greyface said:
So they are offering less services. That's the market adjusting the price for something that was undervalued before. It sucks. I agree. But Netflix has done nothing "anti-consumer."
Hari Seldon
Member
What a terrible decision. Just keep the brand recognition and save the hundreds of millions in advertising they will need to dish out to make old people be able to spell the horrible name.
Wow I never thought I would do this but I think I am switching to blockbuster. I had blockbuster online and was a happy customer for 2 years but switched to Netflix once they started the streaming service. But now there is really no reason for me to stay with Netflix for new release DVDs (or should I saw stay with Qwikster). I have to go to two separate websites now anyways with these changes so why not go to Blockbuster for the other one?? Plus Blockbuster gets new releases way faster then Netflix on dvd I wonder if that will change with Qwikster?? I am going to keep the netflix streaming for now but I think I am done using them for dvds.
brucewaynegretzky
Member
Greyface said:
It's a matter of what the term "anti-consumer" means. This isn't a matter of personal opinion. There's a definition for the term and it isn't "anything where the consumer gets less services." It's "practices of a company that take away a consumer's ability to choose, or overcharge them for a service due to unfair leverage. No one is claiming Netflix is charging more than they should.
brucewaynegretzky
Member
Greyface said:
And how is that "ant-consumer" in any sense other than "people are unhappy," which isn't anti-consumer.
I only made the original point, because its something Gaf throws around a lot without any real connection to the topic at hand.
mclaren777
Member
Why is that?DMeisterJ said:
DjangoReinhardt
Thinks he should have been the one to kill Batman's parents.
This is an obnoxious move from a consumer standpoint.
- Status