Netflix Losing Streaming Rights to Movies, TV

[pppppppppppppppppp]

Ok, I'm done. I put up with the crappy redesign and the price hike, but I watched the Starz movies all the time.

Good luck with the downward spiral, dicks.

What, would you prefer another price hike for them to keep Starz? I'm unsure how it's their fault that Starz doesn't renew with them.

I really don't care if it's their fault; as a customer I can still be pissed. To make an analogy, if I walk into a restaurant and the place is redesigned in a terrible way, the prices for everything have been raised, and on top of that, my favorite menu items are unavailable, I'm not going to be a satisfied customer. It doesn't matter if it was the supplier's fault, it still adds to an already unpleasant dining experience, and I wouldn't want to go back.

Calling them dicks implies they're at fault, not just that you're dissatisfied. I'm not seeing how they're dicks for what happened.

Calling them dicks implies that I think they are dicks.

Which is true.


I'm more pissed about things that are completely their fault: the price hike and bs redesign they still haven't fixed. This is just the last straw on the camel's back.

 

[Oroboros]

I think I might just give up my subscription. The splitting the streaming and DVDs, and now this...and they already dropped Babylon 5 from streaming (while keeping dozen of garbage shows and movies on streaming). Netflix is going down the tubes, perhaps it is time for me to stop flushing money down the toilet after it?

 

[samsonguy920]

I've seen signs that Amazon is under the same difficulties. Inception and other movies are not being streamed due to licensing restrictions.
Studios are pulling real dickmoves to keep people sucking at their DVD and Bluray teat, having this unrealistic fear that streaming will be bad for profits. I better get the movies I bought digitally on Amazon downloaded before the studios decide Amazon doesn't have any rights to digital content.

...no, seriously? Does Starz just want to have it's catalog pirated?

I am not so sure it is Starz as it is most likely the studios pulling the strings here, raising what Starz has to pay itself for licensing fees. Check out Amazon sometime with their Instant service and see how many movies are listed under the service but are unviewable due to "licensing agreements."
Sometimes you have to climb the ladder higher to find the true culprit. Hollywood's never been happy about their movies being shown digitally, instead preferring to keep movies on physical format as DVD and Bluray. It is idiotic to the core, as digital distribution boosts profits since there is no material cost beyond server upkeep. But the eternal fight against movie piracy creates stupid acts. This is just one more.

Welcome to the technical age of the Inquisition.

 

[ace_of_something]

Hmmm... not good for them glad I sold my stock in nflx about a month ago.

 

[Nigh Invulnerable]

Man, I guess I'd care if I didn't work for Comcast and get all the free cable I want, but I don't care and I do get it all free!!!!

Anyway, I guess this is just another little straw on the camel's back towards determining if Netflix is worth it or not.

Comcast and it's bandwidth caps will help to destroy Netflix as well but I guess that's the point of the bandwidth caps isn't it. BTW, your cable isn't free, you get to watch commercials.

I find the bandwidth cap to be so high though that the average user will never even notice there is a cap. Netflix not negotiating better is going to destroy itself just fine, I suspect.

Also, there may be some advertising on the TV, but I don't pay the monthly service fees since I'm an employee. It's a nice perk to have, and between On-Demand and the DVR I don't even have to pay attention to commercials.

 

[tomtom94]

This could be problematic for Netflix...
It would appear they're over the same barrel as the cinemas; ie the TV/film companies own all the cards.

 

[geckorus10]

"This decision is a result of our strategy to protect the premium nature of our brand by preserving the appropriate pricing and packaging of our exclusive and highly valuable content," the Starz CEO said.

So you want to take away one of the few ways I can get movies* to make yourselves seem like the better quality? In an age of everything companies give us either breaking or being unusable unless we by "premium" or "plus" memberships movies should NOT be one of those.
And what will happen when people suddenly have to pay the extra money to watch something with semi-decent acting? They will either stop using their services, yell at the people behind them, or reluctantly fork over some more of their money to an economy that is slowly soaking up all the money around them.

 

[Delusibeta]

THAT MEANS WE LOSE TORCHWOOD? NOOO!

Torchwood: Miracle Day, perhaps. Older series of Torchwood should still be under BBC Worldwide's control, and thus should be unaffected.

Ditto the vast majority of anime on the service, come to think of it. Funimation has most of the US licenses since 4kids went bust, although what few US licenses Manga Entertainment has (most notably Akira) will probably disappear. Does suck for UK anime fans in the event of Netflix crossing the pond, since Funimation use Manga Entertainment to distribute all their stuff in the UK.

 

[Albino Boo]

[
That's corporate speak for "We tried to gouge the shit out of Netflix and they wouldn't pony up the money, so we're taking our toys and going home."

And as people above me said, all this does is encourage piracy. I really wonder when these studios are going to get it in their head that jacking up prices and depriving people of content at reasonable rates just means that people will take the low road and get it for free. Some revenue is better than no revenue.

As usual the Escapist never fails bring out the factually wrong. It was Netflix who were price gouging when they were the only streaming service. When Starz signed the original deal Netflix had no competitors and thus could force the price down to low levels. Guess what now there are competitors and content providers don't have to take the undervalued prices of the price gouging anti competitive company that is Netflix. But hay never let facts get in the way mindless repeating other peoples opinions.

 

[yuval152]

I can't use netflix,but after few googling it dosne't really matter, all of their shows is shit.

 

[ironfist86]

Meh. I just flipped through 39 pages of Starz Play and it all looks like drek to me - not a single item in my near-200 instant queue. I'd say this would drive people to find other, more-scandalous ways to obtain Starz content but... I'm pretty sure no one will even bother with that.

 

[Something Amyss]

Can't they just add the option to pay a little extra for starz? I like the movies that service provides. *sigh*

That would likely set a bad precedent, too.

 

[Therumancer]

They're taking the blame for it because it's entirely their own fault.

With Netflix essentially doubling its prices for all of its customers, Starz likely figured they deserved a bigger piece of that financial pie....

They could have just kept their price down to what it was before, and lose money and go out of business as an alternative. I understand that Netflix had to raise their prices, and I understand why they did. I can't fault them for it. Once you have a business that doesn't make any money, it stops being a business, and it's a hobby.

Yeah I am sure they are doing terrible right now, with the way they completely destroyed all their competition and all. You know, wiping out video stores all throughout the nation.

Well, I think this is exactly why groups like STARZ are looking at services like Netflix and wanting a bigger cut from them.

It's sort of like with STEAM, the service works because there is so much content there and it's so cheap, however due to it's success the individual companies decide they would like to have more of that and want to launch their own service for their own products. Of course splitting everything up and raising prices that way leads to a lot of backlash, sort of like what we're seeing with EA and Origin. Nobody wants to have 30 differant services or can afford to pay for them all seperatly, especially when those various services all decide they want top dollar for their product.

To an extent I also think we're looking at a situation where the media producers are looking back at the video store model and thinking that they benefitted more that way as well. After all a media company tended to charge a lot of money for the ultra-high grade copies of material for video stores, not to mention replacement copies when they are lost and broken, and of course brokering exclusives and special features to companies like Blockbuster. For them it's a better deal than working through a third party digital distributer who has no dependency on physical media (no need for replacements and such).

I'm increasingly wondering if greed is going to destroy the digital model by causing too many competing services and expensive liscences to effectively chase off the consumer base. A return of the old video store might be in the cards if they can't sort things like this out.

 

[Raithnor]

It seems to me the cable channels are circling the wagons around old media. Basically, the cable companies want you to watch everything through their propitiatory cable system first. After they have your money they'll let you watch it online as an afterthought.

They're running into the problem that internet ads don't pay as much as traditional advertising or paid cable subscriptions. However, that also could mean the advertising market has over-inflated.

Netflix though really needs to up it's game though. Their on-demand service will only work if people want to watch what's available. Splitting the two services like they did was a mistake. People are going to be less inclined to wait for DVDs in the mail as time goes on. If they get frustrated with the lack of on demand they're going to go elsewhere.

The trouble is, the only groups with a sizable on-demand library are the cable companies.

 

[Epona]

Man, I guess I'd care if I didn't work for Comcast and get all the free cable I want, but I don't care and I do get it all free!!!!

Anyway, I guess this is just another little straw on the camel's back towards determining if Netflix is worth it or not.

Comcast and it's bandwidth caps will help to destroy Netflix as well but I guess that's the point of the bandwidth caps isn't it. BTW, your cable isn't free, you get to watch commercials.

I find the bandwidth cap to be so high though that the average user will never even notice there is a cap. Netflix not negotiating better is going to destroy itself just fine, I suspect.

Also, there may be some advertising on the TV, but I don't pay the monthly service fees since I'm an employee. It's a nice perk to have, and between On-Demand and the DVR I don't even have to pay attention to commercials.

The bandwidth caps will only get smaller with time and you know it. Even at 250 GB a month, if you really use the streaming service I suspect you can easily reach it. Luckily I don't live in a Comcast area because we will sometimes spend entire weekends watching a tv series on Netflix. Recently it was Lost which is shown in HD. Bandwidth caps also affect digital distribution so add up Steam and Netflix and it can add up. Some months I might buy 10 games from Steam while other months I might not buy any, it depends on my mood.

It's cool if you think free cable is a good deal but as a person who gave up television years ago because of all the commercials (1/3 of every hour is wasted being advertised to, I won't pay for that), I can honestly say that cable is not a value, even if it's free. Give me a 10% discount at any big box store and that is more of an employee perk than free cable. That's just me though. I do often wonder how many people have walked away from tv and never looked back.

 

[Nigh Invulnerable]

Man, I guess I'd care if I didn't work for Comcast and get all the free cable I want, but I don't care and I do get it all free!!!!

Anyway, I guess this is just another little straw on the camel's back towards determining if Netflix is worth it or not.

Comcast and it's bandwidth caps will help to destroy Netflix as well but I guess that's the point of the bandwidth caps isn't it. BTW, your cable isn't free, you get to watch commercials.

I find the bandwidth cap to be so high though that the average user will never even notice there is a cap. Netflix not negotiating better is going to destroy itself just fine, I suspect.

Also, there may be some advertising on the TV, but I don't pay the monthly service fees since I'm an employee. It's a nice perk to have, and between On-Demand and the DVR I don't even have to pay attention to commercials.

The bandwidth caps will only get smaller with time and you know it. Even at 250 GB a month, if you really use the streaming service I suspect you can easily reach it. Luckily I don't live in a Comcast area because we will sometimes spend entire weekends watching a tv series on Netflix. Recently it was Lost which is shown in HD. Bandwidth caps also affect digital distribution so add up Steam and Netflix and it can add up. Some months I might buy 10 games from Steam while other months I might not buy any, it depends on my mood.

It's cool if you think free cable is a good deal but as a person who gave up television years ago because of all the commercials (1/3 of every hour is wasted being advertised to, I won't pay for that), I can honestly say that cable is not a value, even if it's free. Give me a 10% discount at any big box store and that is more of an employee perk than free cable. That's just me though. I do often wonder how many people have walked away from tv and never looked back.

I fail to see why the bandwidth cap would decrease as the technology and capacity increases, but sure, whatever you say. I suppose "greed" is the correct answer if you want to be a cynic about it all. Also, having spent an entire week while unemployed watching the entirety of a TV series on Netflix I can safely say that you'll likely not hit that cap.

Also, free is free, man. I can just watch whatever I want via On-Demand or DVR, so I don't sweat the commercials these days.

 

[Epona]

Man, I guess I'd care if I didn't work for Comcast and get all the free cable I want, but I don't care and I do get it all free!!!!

Anyway, I guess this is just another little straw on the camel's back towards determining if Netflix is worth it or not.

Comcast and it's bandwidth caps will help to destroy Netflix as well but I guess that's the point of the bandwidth caps isn't it. BTW, your cable isn't free, you get to watch commercials.

I find the bandwidth cap to be so high though that the average user will never even notice there is a cap. Netflix not negotiating better is going to destroy itself just fine, I suspect.

Also, there may be some advertising on the TV, but I don't pay the monthly service fees since I'm an employee. It's a nice perk to have, and between On-Demand and the DVR I don't even have to pay attention to commercials.

The bandwidth caps will only get smaller with time and you know it. Even at 250 GB a month, if you really use the streaming service I suspect you can easily reach it. Luckily I don't live in a Comcast area because we will sometimes spend entire weekends watching a tv series on Netflix. Recently it was Lost which is shown in HD. Bandwidth caps also affect digital distribution so add up Steam and Netflix and it can add up. Some months I might buy 10 games from Steam while other months I might not buy any, it depends on my mood.

It's cool if you think free cable is a good deal but as a person who gave up television years ago because of all the commercials (1/3 of every hour is wasted being advertised to, I won't pay for that), I can honestly say that cable is not a value, even if it's free. Give me a 10% discount at any big box store and that is more of an employee perk than free cable. That's just me though. I do often wonder how many people have walked away from tv and never looked back.

I fail to see why the bandwidth cap would decrease as the technology and capacity increases, but sure, whatever you say. I suppose "greed" is the correct answer if you want to be a cynic about it all. Also, having spent an entire week while unemployed watching the entirety of a TV series on Netflix I can safely say that you'll likely not hit that cap.

Also, free is free, man. I can just watch whatever I want via On-Demand or DVR, so I don't sweat the commercials these days.

Let me get this straight. Comcast went from UNLIMITED to LIMITED via a bandwidth cap and you don't think they will continue going in that direction? What is your justification for that?

Further, if the bandwidth cap isn't likely to be hit, then what is the point of having it?

 

[Raithnor]

I fail to see why the bandwidth cap would decrease as the technology and capacity increases, but sure, whatever you say. I suppose "greed" is the correct answer if you want to be a cynic about it all. Also, having spent an entire week while unemployed watching the entirety of a TV series on Netflix I can safely say that you'll likely not hit that cap.

Also, free is free, man. I can just watch whatever I want via On-Demand or DVR, so I don't sweat the commercials these days.

It's basically the principle of "If it ain't broke, don't fix it". The infrastructure for the Phone and Cable companies is very expensive once the overall system is in place there is little need to upgrade equipment unless it fails as part of a maintenance cycle. Implementing new technology will always lag behind it's development.

It also doesn't help that the majority of areas in the United States have basically two options for High-speed broadband service: the cable company and the phone company. Sure you have wireless providers, but the caps on them are much smaller and the pricing scheme is much worse.

We're rapidly re-approaching the age where our internet usage will be priced by the number of hours used like AOL used to be.

 

[Diddy_Mao]

Okay, looking through the "Starz Play" menu.

There's some really good movies on that list and I'd be sorry to see them go if they weren't all movies that I've owned on DVD for years.

The rest of it is stuff I've never given a second look at.

Yeah there's some good classic films on here as well, stuff that I'd have a harder time finding on DVD but it's also not the kind of stuff that I would queue on Netflix to begin with because old grainy black and white movies tend to suffer noticeably from the usually small reduction in picture quality that you see from streaming videos on Netflix.

Over all I'm not really concerned about this particular move.

 

[Royas]

I was already planning to dump the streaming as soon as I finish watching all the episodes of Futurama. There just isn't enough on there to be worth the extra cost.