Netflix's (NFLX) streaming service offers just 5 of the top 100 2011 movies compared to 10 one...

This news story has 13 comments:

Register or Login to rate comments »

Wyatt Junker Comments (4503)
 
They should continue their monthly subscriptions but add in a VOD pay as you go model to supplement it with higher prices and better content for one time purchases.

Why this is so difficult for these idiots to grasp is beyond me.
20 Jan 2012, 01:43 PM Reply Like

Canary Cash Comments (471)
 
seriously...
20 Jan 2012, 01:48 PM Reply Like

joey554 Comments (606)
 
Studios won't sell them the rights That's why.
20 Jan 2012, 02:45 PM Reply Like

pd58 Comments (26)
 
It is not a movie streaming service. The company is focused much more on adding television shows and their subscribers approve judging by the hours of viewing. Streaming recently released movies is a commodity service that many other sites already offer. Offering a deep and varied portfolio of television shows along with movies provides viewers with a viable alternative to what the cable/DBS offers all for $7.99 a month.
20 Jan 2012, 02:04 PM Reply Like

Canary Cash Comments (471)
 
pd58, none of what you said matters if they can't pay their bills...they need to make money not lose it
20 Jan 2012, 02:10 PM Reply Like

joey554 Comments (606)
 
this is all before Starz pulls all their movie titles in a couple weeks. NFLX streaming content sucks!!
20 Jan 2012, 02:46 PM Reply Like

OJoy Comments (2)
 
Most all of the movies we wanted to watch were not available for streaming ,,,, and these wer old movies, not recent releases.
How long do I want to pay for that??
21 Jan 2012, 09:58 AM Reply Like

pd58 Comments (26)
 
Watching television shows without commercials for $7.99 a month is much better deal then your $85 cable bill.
22 Jan 2012, 10:39 AM Reply Like

Canary Cash Comments (471)
 
PD of course it's a better deal...but it's not profitable...i.e. NFLX is not making money, and unless they change their model drastically or only buy cheap content they never, ever will...
22 Jan 2012, 10:51 AM Reply Like

Wyatt Junker Comments (4503)
 
Not really. I like sports, news, both national and local, HBO is absolutely brilliant, and the other 400 options of various goodies from bass fishing to cage fighting to comedy central to CNBC etc. etc. etc.

Cable is worth it.
22 Jan 2012, 01:54 PM Reply Like

joey554 Comments (606)
 
Agreed!!! Paying the $8.99 gets you what you pay for... old out of date TV land shows.
22 Jan 2012, 08:20 PM Reply Like

pd58 Comments (26)
 
No television network in history has been profitable early on, whether it be advertising supported or subscription. The simple fact is you incur programming costs before you attract viewers/subscribers. The negative costs can exist for three to five years. Netflix had the advantage of a cash flowing DVD business to subsidize the start up of their streaming business.

The reason subscriber growth has restarted is because consumers are no longer looking at the streaming business as substitution for the DVD by mail business. Originally, subscribers expected to see the latest box office releases amongst the streaming options. Now they are watching literally billions of hours of television shows and older movies without any commercial interruptions. When you line up what Netflix offers compared to a basic cable package you realize all you are giving up is your local news and ESPN.

Netflix streaming business is break even at 23 million subscribers
23 Jan 2012, 03:02 PM Reply Like

pd58 Comments (26)
 
If you like the price that's good for you. Overall cable subcribers have declined in each of the last three years. The cable companies say it's the economy. I say it's a segment of the population using Netflix, hulu, and an antenna.
23 Jan 2012, 03:05 PM Reply Like