They didn't lose me, but I did cut back. My subscription cost went from $20 to $30 a month, so I cut back on what services I was paying for to get back to $20. I didn't want too, but I just wasn't seeing the value.
Netflix Loses 800k Subscribers
- Thread starter Greg Tito
- Start date
I couldn't care less how their stock performs. It's their terrible selection of streaming stuff that has me on the fence about quitting. I'm actually hoping this investor panic will spur them on to getting good stuff available streaming, so I'll hold on for a bit longer.
This.Waaghpowa said:
My family has considered getting Netflix before, but because of how much it doesn't have in comparison to the American one, we haven't. I can't access Hulu and a whole lot of other streaming sites because I'm Canadian and that keeps me from watching a lot of things that I'd like to watch. Ugh. It really sucks.
I was wondering how that decision would affect them, considering how stupid that decision was, and to my surprise not a whole lot.
I wouldn't give up Netflix, I don't use it daily, but it sure does fit a nice little hole when I want to watch a movie just for the hell of it.
I wouldn't give up Netflix, I don't use it daily, but it sure does fit a nice little hole when I want to watch a movie just for the hell of it.
Honestly, I think people have been over-reacting to this whole thing. First off, it seems to me that with the split, Netflix could have made some better deals with Hollywood for more content over streaming because they could have made a better business case, helping to pull Hollywood's collective head from its ass about the new paradigm of content distribution that is the internet. In fact, Netflix would be forced to beef up their streaming service as a result of the split because the two ventures exist separately and must maintain profitability separately. However, now, they are less inclined to make such an investment.
Further, they are more inclined to force you into paying more for content by splitting their availability of content between streaming and DVD, raking you over even more for money. They could easily split their content to DVD only and streaming only just to make you have purchase both services in order to obtain full access to content. How is that different from the situation now? Well, as far as I know, it's not entirely enforced now, and it would have been even harder to enforce in the case of the separate companies since both would have to live or die by their own merits. However, now, Hastings could totally game this such to force people to pay more for content access.
Also, I don't know about other people, but I have a decent internet connection. I find streaming far, far more convenient and easier to deal with than DVDs through the mail. I find myself watching more through streaming than I ever did through DVD mailings. Plus, there are no issues about damaged discs or discs being sent out of order. Further, I can watch what I want, if it's available, at the moment I get the inclination and time for it, not having to plan ahead to wait for a DVD to be mailed to me, by which time I may not have the time or the care to watch the video.
Basically, in my opinion, the entire fervor generated over this has been typical media stirring the pot to get views and page-hits, and internet-nerds being the typical petulant mental 2-year-olds that they are. No one took at least 5 seconds to just sit and think through the issue and see that it may not have been so bad. But, now that things have been reversed and Netflix has lost significant revenue due to over-reaction, everyone, Netflix and customers, are left in a worse overall state, in my opinion.
For the record, I had long ago dropped the DVD portion of my Netflix subscription because I was holding onto DVDs for weeks to months, not cycling my queue. I would just forget or neglect to run it to the mailbox to return it. After several months of noticing I'm paying Netflix for a subscription I'm hardly using because of my own laziness, it became obvious that streaming-only was a much better fit. I realize this is not the case for everyone. Some people prefer the DVDs or just don't have sufficient quality internet access to make streaming a viable option.
But, honestly, I think most of the people who were bitching had more than good enough an internet connection for streaming. By simply switching to streaming-only and stop with the bitching, they would have cut their own subscription cost in half, and they would have forced the business case for Hollywood to provide more support for streaming content. However, in my opinion, that's all out the window now, thanks to a petulant few who just didn't want to take the time to think before they screamed bloody murder.
Further, they are more inclined to force you into paying more for content by splitting their availability of content between streaming and DVD, raking you over even more for money. They could easily split their content to DVD only and streaming only just to make you have purchase both services in order to obtain full access to content. How is that different from the situation now? Well, as far as I know, it's not entirely enforced now, and it would have been even harder to enforce in the case of the separate companies since both would have to live or die by their own merits. However, now, Hastings could totally game this such to force people to pay more for content access.
Also, I don't know about other people, but I have a decent internet connection. I find streaming far, far more convenient and easier to deal with than DVDs through the mail. I find myself watching more through streaming than I ever did through DVD mailings. Plus, there are no issues about damaged discs or discs being sent out of order. Further, I can watch what I want, if it's available, at the moment I get the inclination and time for it, not having to plan ahead to wait for a DVD to be mailed to me, by which time I may not have the time or the care to watch the video.
Basically, in my opinion, the entire fervor generated over this has been typical media stirring the pot to get views and page-hits, and internet-nerds being the typical petulant mental 2-year-olds that they are. No one took at least 5 seconds to just sit and think through the issue and see that it may not have been so bad. But, now that things have been reversed and Netflix has lost significant revenue due to over-reaction, everyone, Netflix and customers, are left in a worse overall state, in my opinion.
For the record, I had long ago dropped the DVD portion of my Netflix subscription because I was holding onto DVDs for weeks to months, not cycling my queue. I would just forget or neglect to run it to the mailbox to return it. After several months of noticing I'm paying Netflix for a subscription I'm hardly using because of my own laziness, it became obvious that streaming-only was a much better fit. I realize this is not the case for everyone. Some people prefer the DVDs or just don't have sufficient quality internet access to make streaming a viable option.
But, honestly, I think most of the people who were bitching had more than good enough an internet connection for streaming. By simply switching to streaming-only and stop with the bitching, they would have cut their own subscription cost in half, and they would have forced the business case for Hollywood to provide more support for streaming content. However, in my opinion, that's all out the window now, thanks to a petulant few who just didn't want to take the time to think before they screamed bloody murder.
I really don't understand the overreaction some people are having over Netflix. It's still the best service at their latest, higher prices. I'm actually paying less since I now use the streaming only service that I wanted from the beginning and when I want to start renting movies again you better believe I'll pick netflix over redbox or any other service. By-the-way, Redbox is only cheap IF you return the movie/game within 24 hours. If you accidentally keep the movie for five days, you've just paid $5 which is more than what Movie Gallery and Blockbuster used to charge for a movie rental. Keep a game for that long and you've just paid the same $10 price that Blockbuster charges.
Also, there are other companies that have done way worse with pricing and services yet most people wouldn't complained or would even defend the crappy move made by said company. Think of all the crap companies like Sony (well people did fuss over them a bit), Microsoft, EA and even Valve pulled and how most people responded with "meh, not that bad," or "What they did was great! We must defend the mother-land-company!"
Also, there are other companies that have done way worse with pricing and services yet most people wouldn't complained or would even defend the crappy move made by said company. Think of all the crap companies like Sony (well people did fuss over them a bit), Microsoft, EA and even Valve pulled and how most people responded with "meh, not that bad," or "What they did was great! We must defend the mother-
I don't understand why people are so annoyed about Netflix, they needed extra money so they split there services, I can understand people having a problem with that idea but then after hearing the complaints they take it back, listening to there costumers and fulfilling there needs, but for some reason this is somehow a horrible idea.
Again, floating a third of the U.S.'s internet usage and posting eight or more DVDs both ways for $8/month was never going to be a stable long-term business model. I understand people being irked, but they're irked because they were promised the impossible, and for a time, delivered it. It's still a better deal for my purposes than cable television.
I had Netflix before it split into Netflix & Qwikster, I didn't blink an eye. I still had Netflix running during the split, and up until Qwikster dissolved back into Netflix. Still never batted a lash.
I never bothered with DVD's in the mail, is what I'm saying, and haven't noticed much of anything.
I never bothered with DVD's in the mail, is what I'm saying, and haven't noticed much of anything.
I've actually been planning on taking Netflix up on that Free Trial thing they have going. Been meaning to watch The Thing. Which is to say John Carpenter's The Thing. Which is to say not the crap version in theaters.
And maybe some Batman: Under the Red Hood.
And maybe some Batman: Under the Red Hood.
Dropped my netflix subscription for a Hulu subscription. Helps me save space on my DVR and watch shit on the go.
Oh and being a Dish Network subscriber, I get a 1 DVD rental plan from blockbuster for free sooooooo... Yeah, sad to say Netflix has lost its usefulness.
They need to do something to compete with Hulu and/or my satellite provider, because right now Hulu is doing just about what I needed netflix instant watching for... but better.
Oh and being a Dish Network subscriber, I get a 1 DVD rental plan from blockbuster for free sooooooo... Yeah, sad to say Netflix has lost its usefulness.
They need to do something to compete with Hulu and/or my satellite provider, because right now Hulu is doing just about what I needed netflix instant watching for... but better.
Use something like Hotspot Shield Launch, which will change your IP whilst you have it on - works for me. I get to see their stuff, they get to show me adverts.Waaghpowa said:
(I'm assuming this is alright to talk about on the forum as I have done before - if not mods you could just delete this and tell me otherwise.)
When reading the topic title I thought Netflix would probably go bankrupt, but after reading the article they dropped from 24.6 million customers to 23.8 million..
So much for 'losing' anything other then a few subscribers, they'll still make more money after raising their prices.
So much for 'losing' anything other then a few subscribers, they'll still make more money after raising their prices.
and BlockBuster rejoices that it's not quiet dead yet.
If costs are going up either they charge more or split there service. It'd be nice to keep everyone but some people are going to be unhappy. If keeping costumers means losing profit then you're doing it wrong. Companies are about making money, not helping people (well for profit companies are anyways).
If costs are going up either they charge more or split there service. It'd be nice to keep everyone but some people are going to be unhappy. If keeping costumers means losing profit then you're doing it wrong. Companies are about making money, not helping people (well for profit companies are anyways).