Support NeoGAF

[nbcjr]

Watch this: http://www.secform4.com/insider-trading/1065280.htm

He's loading $$ while things go sour.

 

[Marty Chinn]

And fast. The faster the better. Only 1 in 4 new subscribers is interested in discs at all. That's not going to improve over time. Sell it now while there's some value, and use that money to make content deals.

Still waiting for you to explain how I"m a hypocrite.....

 

[VGChampion]

I switched over to Blockbuster this month, and I really like their service. Discs and games by mail, no upcharge on blu-ray or games, and I can swap them at a store for a new game/movie when the urge strikes.

I'd be tempted to switch if all the Blockbusters by me didn't close down. Still, I'll be open to new services now that I'm streaming only and who knows how long that will be worth it.

 

[BertramCooper]

Watch this: http://www.secform4.com/insider-trading/1065280.htm

He's loading $$ while things go sour.

Yeesh.

 

[nbcjr]

nflx will bankrupt.

 

[kr2t0s]

Just curious if anyone has actually cancelled their plan? Either streaming or DVD?

Just cancelled my streaming plan...feels good man.
Signed up for a free month trial to blockbuster and I'll see how that plays out.

Oh and how long before we see kwikster booths outside of grocery stores?

 

[dead souls]

Posted it a couple of pages ago.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/294...-fall-and-why-its-prospects-are-getting-worse

Check the section entitled "Accounting manipulation and fraud?" And also the parts about the CFO resigning.

Yep something definitely smells rotten at Netflix.

I'm going to be disappointed once the disc side of their operation goes away. There's really nowhere else to get access to such a quality library at a reasonable price with quick shipping where I live.

 

[T.M. MacReady]

Cancelled my DVD plan last week, before all this mess. I only need the streaming anyway. Those discs sat around unwatched for weeks.

 

[BertramCooper]

Just curious if anyone has actually cancelled their plan? Either streaming or DVD?

Once the Starz deal is up, I can't see myself keeping it.

 

[dead souls]

Once the Starz deal is up, I can't see myself keeping it.

I finished a Larry Sanders rewatch and then I axed my streaming account. There just isn't even $8 of value in the library, especially if you're like us and already keep up with the television shows that you're interested in.

Having Mad Men and Breaking Bad is great if you haven't seen them, but since I have it's not really a selling point to me.

 

[BertramCooper]

I finished a Larry Sanders rewatch and then I axed my streaming account. There just isn't even $8 of value in the library, especially if you're like us and already keep up with the television shows that you're interested in.

Having Mad Men and Breaking Bad is great if you haven't seen them, but since I have it's not really a selling point to me.

Now that you mention it, I think I might do an epic Doctor Who weekend marathon and then dump it.

 

[faceless007]

Don't think this has already been posted, but I read an interesting theory about the reason for this: Prior to this, Warner Bros. and other studios were blackmailing Netflix to buy their sucky rental-only DVDs with just the bare movie and no special features and 28 days after retail release, by holding the streaming rights hostage unless Netflix agreed to buy those DVDs. By splitting up the companies, Netflix can effectively render those clauses invalid by making the negotiations for streaming separate from negotiations for discs. So WB can't tell Netflix what versions of DVDs to stock on the condition of streaming rights.

Don't know how true that is but it's interesting.

 

[Dan]

I would gladly pay $20 a month for streaming if the library was there, but it only covers about 25% of my queue, and that would only drop lower once you start looking at what has proper subtitles and the correct aspect ratios. I don't want to see the rental industry go down a path where we're once again largely constrained to the most popular stuff. It's already disconcerting that Netflix decided they didn't care about Criterion, and the word is they've been telling other small distributors that they're not interested in them either. If that's the case, streaming completely fails to replace DVD-by-mail for me, and most film fans.

Don't think this has already been posted, but I read an interesting theory about the reason for this: Prior to this, Warner Bros. and other studios were blackmailing Netflix to buy their sucky rental-only DVDs with just the bare movie and no special features and 28 days after retail release, by holding the streaming rights hostage unless Netflix agreed to buy those DVDs. By splitting up the companies, Netflix can effectively render those clauses invalid by making the negotiations for streaming separate from negotiations for discs. So WB can't tell Netflix what versions of DVDs to stock on the condition of streaming rights.

Don't know how true that is but it's interesting.

That's interesting, but it assumes they have any interest in truly keeping the DVD business around, and all signs point to them trying to kill it.

 

[Blackhead]

Don't think this has already been posted, but I read an interesting theory about the reason for this: Prior to this, Warner Bros. and other studios were blackmailing Netflix to buy their sucky rental-only DVDs with just the bare movie and no special features and 28 days after retail release, by holding the streaming rights hostage unless Netflix agreed to buy those DVDs. By splitting up the companies, Netflix can effectively render those clauses invalid by making the negotiations for streaming separate from negotiations for discs. So WB can't tell Netflix what versions of DVDs to stock on the condition of streaming rights.

Don't know how true that is but it's interesting.

that's one view of it, similar to the speculation that the studios are making Netflix pay for its disc only customers which supposedly Netflix can't afford. One could look at it from another point of view and see that as good for Netflix as it's a bargaining chip. I remember that when Netflix first accepted the 28 day delay for new releases some people saw it as a good deal because it meant more streaming rights. I don't think money itself is enough an incentive to movie studios.
On the other hand this means Quackster can just fuck the studios and get on with business. I see Quackster as surviving longer than Netflix unless Netflix finds another source of content aside from Hollywood.

Good lord, it's down over $78 in the last 5 days. Reed has mentioned they'll be announcing more content soon.. but soon is too late. They needed to say what and when immediately after Starz pulled out.

They added Mad Men -- the most critically acclaimed show of the past decade easily and there was essentially no fanfare. That should have been shouted from the rooftops.. it should have been on commercials, etc. Their PR department is abyssmal.

Netflix really doesn't want to tie their brand to individual shows (except perhaps the original content they're developing). They'd much rather have the customers see Netflix as an amorphous list of loads of movies and rely on the recommendation engine instead. Plus streaming rights for various shows are usually temporary or incomplete anyway. The studios are liable to fuck you over on a whim. Anyone remember last year when Apple had that big AppleTV reveal and was demoing the new rentals on the device showing off a bunch of movies—only for those movies to mysteriously not be available a few days later? If even Apple gets dicked around on content rights then there's even less hope for netflix.

Watch this: http://www.secform4.com/insider-trading/1065280.htm

He's loading $$ while things go sour.

I'm suprised more people weren't selling earlier. Apparently Netflix's P/E ratio was ridiculously high. A market correction was long overdue.

 

[JaggedSac]

Watch this: http://www.secform4.com/insider-trading/1065280.htm

He's loading $$ while things go sour.

If you knew your company was WAAAY overvalued, wouldn't you sell some too?

 

[border]

Netflix really doesn't want to tie their brand to individual shows (except perhaps the original content they're developing). They'd much rather have the customers see Netflix as an amorphous list of loads of movies and rely on the recommendation engine instead.

I think that's a bad way to look at it. Does AMC Theatres not tell you what movies are playing because they "don't want to tie their brand to individual movies"? Should they just sell themselves on being a really great theatre?

Netflix needs to promote their content, and people need to know when they score a high quality show or film. They also need to get people used to the idea that content is going to come and go in a rotation -- it's pretty clear at this point they won't be able to build a permanent library. Half the stuff I see on there now comes with a "Expires October 23" type message.

So advertise the content with a "Now Playing" sort of message that shows off what they've got, but doesn't imply that it will always be there.

 

[nbcjr]

If you knew your company was WAAAY overvalued, wouldn't you sell some too?

that's the point. the CEO doing that sends a bad signal.