Netflix Turns Focus Back to Disc

[rdodolak]

Originally Posted by slick1ru2

Yeah, so what you do is call them, pay for a $75 install and for only $5 month more get a business account which has no cap. The $5 is a modem lease, they won't let you use your own. And you have to sign a 3 year contract. Besides being a more solid connection, it seems to never go down like residential did. It also has preferred packets so your traffic is given priority over residential while on the Comcast network. Easy solution. I have been racking up over 250 GB every month since I switched, going to watch NFL Network on PS3 this afternoon which will add about 9GB to my total. And I pay for like 16mbps and get over 30. And do I need to prove I am a business....nope.

It's an option but not one I can do at the moment. The 3-year contract is a no go since I won't be in my current area for the next three years and depending on where I move to there may or may not be Comcast service available.

The no cap w/ Business Class is a pro but there are some differences between the services. For example, Comcast is offering Performance w/ 20Mbps downloads and 4Mbps upoads for $45.95/month (standard pricing not a special limited time deal). You also get 7 residential email accounts with 10GB each. The business class costs $59.95/month for 12Mbps download/2Mbps upload and you only get 2 email accounts with 2GB of email storage.

However, if too many switch from residential to business class then it's only a matter of time before one of two things happens: 1) business class is slapped with a cap or 2) the cost goes up.

[slick1ru2]

Originally Posted by rickah88

Easy there, tiger...don't shoot the messenger! It's not a question of "if", but "when". Caps are going to happen, there's just too much supply/demand for it not to happen. It's kind of similiar to online sales tax. Some states have it, some don't. The government is not going to let all that commerce go untaxed for long.
Again, I'm all for no caps & no online sales tax...but I'm also a realist!

Networks with huge excess capacity like Verizon, who said that a cap for their network would be like telling someone how many cups of water they can take from Niagara Falls (their analogy), caps won't happen. And when a company like Comcast says you have a 250gb cap as a resident, and for the same price don't as a business, I doubt they have capacity issues too. But having to pay more to their backbone provider, that is probably the real issue. And if it is, they need a tier structure. I forgot which cable provider it was, but one had at its top tier a 400gb cap. I am a HUGE streamer and haven't broken 300gb yet. That is a better solution than saying at this number, you can no longer DL media and we will boot you as a customer.

[slick1ru2]

Originally Posted by rdodolak

It's an option but not one I can do at the moment. The 3-year contract is a no go since I won't be in my current area for the next three years and depending on where I move to there may or may not be Comcast service available.

The no cap w/ Business Class is a pro but there are some differences between the services. For example, Comcast is offering Performance w/ 20Mbps downloads and 4Mbps upoads for $45.95/month (standard pricing not a special limited time deal). You also get 7 residential email accounts with 10GB each. The business class costs $59.95/month for 12Mbps download/2Mbps upload and you only get 2 email accounts with 2GB of email storage.

However, if too many switch from residential to business class then it's only a matter of time before one of two things happens: 1) business class is slapped with a cap or 2) the cost goes up.

That's what I have the 12/2. Here's the connection I have:




I have an 8GB mailbox with Gmail. As many as I need. Business accounts also include, top of the line Norton Security suite, for up to 25 computers, we have 6. And also,we have 24 hour service and preferred packet routing. And obviously, since I am getting over 3 times the service I pay for, there is no cap in sight and I am locked into a contract for that price for 3 years. I have known about Comcast Business since I signed with Comcast 18 months ago, it was my fall back in case I started streaming enough to hit the limit. I wanted to make sure of the quality of the line and service too before signing a contract. And I may be wrong, but to d/c from the contract, its like $50, not much if I remember correctly.

[Bnokes]

Originally Posted by jpb07

Not surprising for those following the situation for the past year or so. They are nearing the end of several distribution deals (Starz for one) that were signed for pennies on the dollar. When those come up you're going to see content go down and/or prices go up. People criticized them for the 28 day delay but it was a shrewd move. They locked up content at a lesser cost in return. Also I think they realized that a lot of ISPs were not going to sit back and allow them to make money off their bandwidth without taking a cut (caps/overage charges.)

Personally if they are going to go back to concentrating on physical media, the first thing they ought to do is slap a surcharge on streaming and go back to the flat $1 BR fee. At the very least they owe it to their BR customers to get all of the releases...new or catalog. Considering that the cost differences for the media are negligible, I'm sick of my surchage fee going to support this streaming BS.

Netflix has not consistently ordered blu-ray titles, even for new releases. Since I'm paying extra for blu-ray access, I would expect them to stock blu-rays of new releases and catalog titles. Meek's Cutoff is a recent example of a new release that Netflix didn't bother to get on blu-ray. Rocky Horror, which was remastered with a 7.1 channel HD soundtrack, is a good example of a catalog title they should have updated (and now that The Conversation is out on blu-ray, there can't be a good excuse for Netflix not having it.)

[Beta Man]

Originally Posted by Bnokes

Netflix has not consistently ordered blu-ray titles, even for new releases.

Well...

We canceled our account and piggy-backed on one of the other accounts (we pay for an account for my parents as well as my wife's) for streaming access, and for the first time since then we decided to run out to pick up a movie at Blockbuster.

I get there, and they have a dozen copies of "Tree of Life" on DVD, and they said they weren't sent any copies on Blu-ray

I picked up the DVD, but this is yet another reminder to why I simply choose to BUY movies.... damn I should have ordered this one so long ago.

I just bought it on Amazon...... it'll be here in 2 days, and I'm about to pop in the DVD to watch tonight with the wife.

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by Beta Man

Well...

We canceled our account and piggy-backed on one of the other accounts (we pay for an account for my parents as well as my wife's) for streaming access, and for the first time since then we decided to run out to pick up a movie at Blockbuster.

I get there, and they have a dozen copies of "Tree of Life" on DVD, and they said they weren't sent any copies on Blu-ray

I picked up the DVD, but this is yet another reminder to why I simply choose to BUY movies.... damn I should have ordered this one so long ago.

I just bought it on Amazon...... it'll be here in 2 days, and I'm about to pop in the DVD to watch tonight with the wife.

There's something to be said about being thorough!

[sinsinling]

At the very least they owe it to their BR customers to get all of the releases...new or catalog.

[slick1ru2]

Originally Posted by sinsinling

At the very least they owe it to their BR customers to get all of the releases...new or catalog.

They changed their focus a couple of years ago. They no longer consider themselves a video rental company, they are a streaming company. And that was evident when they tried the split. Which of the two kept the Netfix name? The streaming portion. Its been like two years since they started putting more money into streaming rights than disc purchases.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by slick1ru2

They changed their focus a couple of years ago. They no longer consider themselves a video rental company, they are a streaming company. And that was evident when they tried the split. Which of the two kept the Netfix name? The streaming portion. Its been like two years since they started putting more money into streaming rights than disc purchases.

Which is why(in my opinion) they are losing customers at an alarming rate.

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by slick1ru2

They changed their focus a couple of years ago. They no longer consider themselves a video rental company, they are a streaming company. And that was evident when they tried the split. Which of the two kept the Netfix name? The streaming portion. Its been like two years since they started putting more money into streaming rights than disc purchases.

That's because Netflix was the first to get exclusive content deals, those deals are now expiring and all the other big boys(Amazon, Comcast, google, etc) are jumping into the streaming game. As one poster(Pro-B), correctly, points out: Netflix tried to become the streaming market.
As for their "renewed" focus on disc, I've only seen ONE of my movies(of about 30 non-BD saved) upgraded to blu-ray. This has been my biggest beef with Netflix for years. Now I understand they can't get everything at their preferred cost, but for all the BD subscribers that pay extra it would be nice if they made more of showing to get some of the older catalog BD's that have come out recently.

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Which is why(in my opinion) they are losing customers at an alarming rate.

No, they are losing customer "at an alarming rate" because, quite simply, they raised their rates and those customers didn't like it. No need to mention, that the rate increase just made Netflix about the same price model as most every other stream/disc rental business in the game. So, basically, you have a bunch of customers that wanted their cake and eat it too. Sorry! A great deal like the one Netflix has going for years, was too good to last!
As for the BD renter who didn't care for streaming, like myself, I actaully saved $3/month when I dropped the streaming service I never used. So win for me!

[slick1ru2]

Losing customers was a temporary bump in the road for them. I had them before HD DVD or Blu-ray was out and when they went from UNLIMITED 5 discs at a time out a month for like $12.99 to $19.99 for like 3, I dropped them for a couple of years. That probably was the other big drop they had in 2004 that they recovered from. When the format war was on, I was getting both HD DVD and Blu-ray because I could play both. That was awesome, because the studios were split and if you had one, you couldn't see many titles in HD.

As noted, the largest chunk of US internet data is NetFlix streaming, bigger than any other single site including YouTube. I haven't heard where that has dropped, only risen.


NetFlix will add more customers, trust me. The new Kindle supports NetFlix and they just added new features for Android.

Related:

In Canada today, there will be a big ruling on how independent ISPs are charged by their backbone. Bell started charging overage fees to the ISPs like they did to their retail customers. And, the regulatory agency (probably in Bell's pocket) allowed it at first and later, after some pressure, gave a 15% discount to the ISPs. Then the PM asked them to revisit that or the government is going to step in after seeing the public's response which included a petition with hundreds of thousands of signatures.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/st...t-billing.html

I expect as higher quality content is available online, more and more customers will be revolting where ever Draconian usage caps still exist.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by slick1ru2

Losing customers was a temporary bump in the road for them.

call it what you want, nearly a million customers lost is not good no matter how you try and downplay it.

As noted, the largest chunk of US internet data is NetFlix streaming, bigger than any other single site including YouTube. I haven't heard where that has dropped, only risen.

how is that a good thing? Netflix makes money (revenue) off of customers, Netflix bills probably get bigger with more traffic. Now if they made money per GB that would be good news, but who cares how much traffic they are creating on the internet in this discussion?

[slick1ru2]

Anthony, you are the most anti-internet person on here. Why do you even own a computer?

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by slick1ru2

Anthony, you are the most anti-internet person on here. Why do you even own a computer?

Slick, some could say the same about some people on here owning a Bluray player? They spend more time defending Netflix than talking about the best way to watch movies. You are the most biased person on here for pro-streaming, so you cannot really have a go at Anthony.

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Slick, some could say the same about some people on here owning a Bluray player? They spend more time defending Netflix than talking about the best way to watch movies. You are the most biased person on here for pro-streaming, so you cannot really have a go at Anthony.

Again, you forget that blu-ray is NOT the preferred/dominant method of movie watching in the world...and it probably won't ever be the preferrred/dominant method of movie watching.
As a matter of price/conveinence, I'm sure many more stream than invest in blu-ray(discounting those that do both)...and don't bother factoring in dvd watchers as they lead the way bigtime.
What about all the movies AND tv shows that are not, or most likely never will be, on blu-ray? But yet are available via stream?
I'm not bashing blu-ray, far from it, as I'm a huge supporter...but I don't ignore the facts either! Neither should you.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by rickah88

Again, you forget that blu-ray is NOT the preferred/dominant method of movie watching in the world...and it probably won't ever be the preferrred/dominant method of movie watching.
As a matter of price/conveinence, I'm sure many more stream than invest in blu-ray(discounting those that do both)...and don't bother factoring in dvd watchers as they lead the way bigtime.
What about all the movies AND tv shows that are not, or most likely never will be, on blu-ray? But yet are available via stream?
I'm not bashing blu-ray, far from it, as I'm a huge supporter...but I don't ignore the facts either! Not should you.

Does that mean i should or i shouldn't?

[rickah88]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Does that mean i should or i shouldn't?

Sorry, I spelled it out for you.

[Allforce]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

how is that a good thing? Netflix makes money (revenue) off of customers, Netflix bills probably get bigger with more traffic. Now if they made money per GB that would be good news, but who cares how much traffic they are creating on the internet in this discussion?

It's demonstrating how astronomically popular Netflix is. And their "bills" don't go up for streaming, what kind of nonsense thinking is that? You pay your ISP for service, they charge YOU and not content providers. And even then it costs the ISP nothing to transmit more and more data (as much as they'd like you to believe otherwise), the lines are already in place. It's just a matter of the ISPs throttling more or less data and charging customers for it, as shady as that is.

[kefrank]

Originally Posted by Allforce

It's demonstrating how astronomically popular Netflix is. And their "bills" don't go up for streaming, what kind of nonsense thinking is that?

Are you really suggesting that Netflix doesn't incur more costs as more people stream? They absolutely do. There's a whole network infrastructure required to serve those streaming movies to customers and there are plenty of costs associated with scaling up that infrastructure to support more people streaming. That's true for Netflix itself as well as for ISPs that see a spike in bandwidth due to Netflix users.

You pay your ISP for service, they charge YOU and not content providers. And even then it costs the ISP nothing to transmit more and more data (as much as they'd like you to believe otherwise), the lines are already in place.

There are fundamental bandwidth limits with those lines that are in place and supporting more bandwidth costs money for upgrades. I'm a little surprised anyone would think otherwise.

It's just a matter of the ISPs throttling more or less data and charging customers for it, as shady as that is.

Bandwidth is a limited resource. I'm not saying there aren't shady billing practices employed by ISPs, but in general, charging people more for using more of a limited resource is just good business.