Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoudman
So you've essentially been trained to notice this type of thing? Just saying, this puts you in a minority, not a majority.
|
Yes and yes. But is that any different from any videophile. Part of the reason was work and part of the reason was passion. That is also one of the reason I don’t participate in discussions on individual problems, teaching someone how to see the problems also means that you curse them with not being able to avoid them, once learnt it can’t be unlearnt.
But I don’t get your point. When discussing problems and quality if it is “I/others can see them” your answer is “but how do you know they are there” and if discussing “analyzing the picture and calculating the difference” you are “it does not matter if there is a difference if people can’t see it”
As for minority and not majority, does it matter? There is the old expression “if a tree falls in the wood and no one is there to hear it does it make sound” playing on the nature of sound but even if only one person is there to hear it the whole question makes no sense since the answer is obviously yes. Some people don’t care about quality, when I was a kid and we were asking our parents for Cable and my dad would look at the snowy pic and respond “looks good enough for me” it was not because he could not see the snow, it also does not matter if someone else can’t notice them, they are still there. Quality is an absolute.
Right, if an expert sees a painting and says “it is afake because Picasso never spelt his name with a K” it does not matter if you have 10 friends that think it is a real one and worth $$$$$
Quote:
|
I have to agree, if someone buys a BD they probably aren't going to watch the same title on Netflix. However, if they are away from said BD and they want to watch the movie, they might be inclined to use NIW -- which is often far more readily available wherever you go.
|
agree with the example but not what followed it. Yes if you are at a friends place and he has Netflix then it could be easier to watch it and not need to go back home and get the BD, but I find BDs more readily available/transportable. When I went to my sisters and my friends cottages this summer none of them have high speed there but it was easy for me to throw some BDs in my bag and go there. And I am guessing it is not that easy to add/remove devices from your list so the other option is to bring your Netflix player/laptop and then a BD is smaller/lighter.
Quote:
|
A better example would just be someone who doesn't have the money to buy the movie, even if they want it, so they spend some money to rent it now just so they can see it.
|
the first one does not hold (intent means decision if you decided to wait for a re-release, reviews or anything before a decision then it is not intent), but I will give you that one.
Quote:
|
Okay, I've been civil up to this point and I have every "intention" of remaining civil. That being said, this is just about the most ridiculous statement I've ever read
|
I am not sure what the rest has to do with the conversation, my eyes have nothing to do with it, I don’t remember why but I pointed out that people with 1000+ BDs don’t Netflix, You questioned the idea that buyers/collectors with big collections don’t rent. I never asked you to prove anything, I did not say come back and post your findings, just that at this point I can’t be bothered with this and if you care how true it is (which it is because it is the fundamental difference between buyer and renter, a renter can buy but a buyer does not rent) then you can continue your own research. Let’s face it, let’s say I did go to the +1000BD thread and I asked if anyone with 1000+ BDs also Netflixes and 3 guys said no, and came here and told you “see” what would you do, “those 3 guys don’t mean anything” and if I came back the next day and replied see now it is 5 guys, I would get the same response from you. For a movie collector the joy of owning is as important as the joy of seeing the film.
Quote:
|
So your point is...? Most means...most. Got it. Most infers a majority. A majority infers quite a few people. Do you have any evidence beyond your friend that 50% +1 of Netflix subscribers are less likely to buy something if they can get it on Netflix? If so, I'll concede this point.
|
yes I asked you how many movies do you typically see on Netflix in a month and how many of those do you end up buying? We have to start the poll somewhere
Quote:
|
Why would they want to offer content to those who weren't currently Starz subscribers for less money? Maybe, I don't know, to bring in more subscribers?
|
no, why do studios sell DVDs for less money when there is BDs? Do you think that is also so that the guy buying the DVD will say “wow I liked the DVD, I should run out and get the BD now”, like I pointed out in the original post someone without cable or sat can’t watch or pay for Starz speciality content.
Quote:
|
It works for several other studios perfectly fine. If it didn't wouldn't they be complaining?
|
they are, that is why Dreamworks (and others) are saying “you get the content 1 month later” so people that want it faster will get their fix elsewhere. That is why Netflixs royalty payments are skyrocketing. And honestly that is why I think Netflix deid the price change and split the new brand.
Quote:
|
The main complaint most people seem to have (which I still feel is baseless) is that there isn't enough content on NIW.
|
but then why is losing more contnt and having less content to choose from a good thing
The rise in price very may well be in response to their next few negotiations, but not as a result of anything Starz did. They want more money so they can afford to sign more contracts and get more content. [/quote]
But it is not raised prices. Right, if you are a streamer (and we are talking streaming content here) you paid 8$ before and 8$ now so where is there a price increase? If someone only wanted was to rent disks (and does not give a crap about streaming movies) then again the price went down. The only people that actually will see a price increase are people that want both and the difference might not be enough to make a lot more money for them. Assuming nothing else changes you need 1 guy picking both for every 3 that go streaming or disk only
i.e. 4*10 (1 DVD)=40= 3*8(1DVD or streaming)+ 16(both)
my guess the new pricing was about braking even on revenue and not making a lot more money (especially when you add the over 1M member lost because of it). But (and this is where we go back to the studios & Starz) instead of talking of 25M+ streamers they can use a smaller number which is the # of people that actually stream. And so devalue their contribution (i.e. “we are buying it for 10M people instead of 25M people so don’t charge us as much)
that is where the extra profitability would come in, not the difference in price.
Quote:
So you're saying that Netflix might just be a stepping stone or it might last a lot longer than we all think?
Well, with the way their stock is dropping, I'm afraid that regardless of how fair their prices still are, they might not be around for very long.
|
never speculated on how long it would be around, so longer or shorter don’t come into play. But like BD/HD-DVD or Beta/VHS, SACD/DVD-A……. different incompatible formats is not good and so some of the DL/streaming will either merge or disappear until there is one or two BIG players. Who they will be I have no idea.
As for Netflix stock price, it sucks to be an investor and it sucks to be Netflix but I don’t think it means anything for viability.
Quote:
|
I think we just disagree on why those stock prices are falling.
|
the stocks are falling because netflix is making mistakes, they applied their simple model that worked for disk to DL where it does not work as well. For two main reasons
1) with disks if the studio does not want to deal with you, you can go to Amazon or Walmart or the pawn shop down the street and buy copies. It does not matter where they come from (obviously from the studio should be more lucrative but you can always circumvent it), on the other hand, like this discussion shows, with streaming the studio has you by the balls. Since if you don’t agree on the value they pull the content and you don’t have any other choice.
2) I don’t know what studios charged Netflix for disks or for streaming now, and let’s be realistic, since each studio negotiates separately they where probably different. But for convenience and since redbox charges 1$/DVD, lets assume it is 50 cents. If with 1 DVD that means 5-6 DVDs at most that means 2.50$-3.00$ to the studio, then you need to add mail, maybe an other 2.50-3.00 and nNetflix makes 2$-3$ of the 8$. On the flip side when discussing rental you talked of the equivalent of 30-40 movies a month. I don’t know if that is what you actually watch but 30-40 movies a month times the same 50 cents means 15-20$ if someone wanted more DVDs they bought a 2 or 3 or 4 DVDs out at the time and that made up for the difference but with streaming, if they pay the equivalent in royalties) costs can (and should if they pay the studios fair price) skyrocket.
Quote:
|
I have no idea what they charge, either -- again, never seen one. If they did, they might charge something like $50. They tend to charge based on typical market value estimation, which is about what I was using as well.
|
then why would anyone buy one there when you can get a brand new one for close to 50$ and Amazon has used for close to 30$
Quote:
|
That's great if you're making a lot of money, but there are plenty of people living in this country that spend 50% or more of their income just on housing.
|
I am sure there are a lot of people (especially since you described someone making 20k as wealthy but even in the 50k-100k range) that spend more then 50% of their income on housing. Hell the whole housing collapse and the recession happened because people with middleclass + salaries where spending too much on their homes not saving anything and when interest rate moved a bit higher they could not make the payments anymore.
You asked me what I would do and I told you. If all I had at the end of the year/month was 50$ then I would not be spending it on anything and looking to save a bit more off of every pay check. That is what I would do. Don’t get me wrong, I aree sometimes you need to splurge a bit since life becomes morose otherwise, but that 50$ is extremely limiting and unless I had enough savings for a rainy day I would not spend it
Quote:
|
Again, why save for a rainy day when it's already pouring?
|
because even if it is pouring it can always get worst. I think when one is dirt poor that is even more important. I am sure it was easier when I was a student (tuition has gone up, food has gone up, I am guessing rent has gone up….) but I was still managing to save a bit.
Quote:
|
Well, your typical DVRs aren't cheap, but I honestly hadn't even thought about a tuner. Now that you mention it, I really want to try that. Thanks for the suggestion!
|
glad I could help
All countries
Argentina
Austria
Belgium
Brazil
Bulgaria
Chile
China
Colombia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Estonia
Denmark
Finland
Greece
Hong Kong
Hungary
Iceland
Indonesia
Ireland
Israel
India
Latvia
Lithuania
Malaysia
New Zealand
Norway
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Singapore
South Africa
South Korea
Sweden
Switzerland
Taiwan
Thailand
Turkey
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
" panic train, so nobody's innocent.
Linear Mode
