Netflix subscribers got a taste of the studios' new hardball approach last month, when hundreds of Sony (SNE) movies -- including high-profile titles like "The Social Network" and "Salt" -- abruptly vanished from Netflix's "watch now" catalog.
In a blog post, Netflix pinned the blame on a "temporary contract issue" between Sony and Starz, a pay cable network that licenses Sony's movie catalog. Back in 2008, Netflix struck a four-year deal with Starz that gave it streaming access to Starz' offerings.
The word needed in this discussion is "monopoly" and thats what Netflix is cutting into for Bell,Rogers & Cogeco.In the states its Comcast,Directv and Dishnet.
Consumers in the states are cutting the cords and going with thier free HD networks OTA and adding Netflix.that wont be so prevelant in Canada because of the lack of much good free tv except if your near the border.
Im doing it because I get about 22 free channels OTA plus Netflix.My cost $8mth........goodbye high priced cable/sat.
In my opinion cord cutting is very small and is related more to the economy than OTA or Netflix. The jury is not out on this one, but I believe most are using Netflix as a complement to their cable subscription.
I cut the cord. I have netflix, OTA and http://www.streaming-guide.com/. This applies in my Ottawa home and my Florida home.
The decision is not 100% finances. I get 10x the content I need with this. It simply does not make sense to pay $100.00 a month when I might only watch 10 TV shows a month.
Not sure if this is best place for this question but here goes:
Noticed that a few movies on Netflix now have the mention "available until September 15"
Anyone know where I can get a list of all of these? Don't want to miss my "last chance to see them" on Netflix. I wnt to Netflix site and there does seem to be a way to sort or search for these specifically.
It seems it's inevitable. Everyone looks at the success Netflix/Steam has in their particular realms and decide they want their own similar service and there's really nothing to do to stop it. Netflix is studio agnostic which is good but I fear more and more content providers will pull their content in favor of going out on their own. So Sony will want $8/month for their monthly service, ditto for WB/Fox etc. The next couple years will be crucial for Netflix, it will either hit a level of usage that will compel studios to have their content available or will continue to shrink until all that's left are the independent movies.
It was a minor miracle that Steam was and continues to be as successful as it is. It is essentially akin to Sony owning Netflix and convincing all the other studios to make their content available on Sony's platform.
The problem is that the studios have created a cartel. They are in sole control of delivery and pricing. If the studios decide not to distribute through Netflix, TMN, MC or SC then those companies suffer. If the studios decide to create their own distribution channels and raise prices, then consumers suffer.
And when you ask for a raise, are you being greedy?
That's a very disturbing point of view. IMHO, the studios are extremely greedy and their actions prove it. I guess it's OK for studio exec's to make billions of dollars in bonuses by raising prices and laying off workers while it's not OK for workers to organize in order to get job security, decent wages and reasonable benefits. I don't want to turn this this thread into a union debate, just make the point that it's not always ethical or legal for companies to raise prices and it's unfair to categorize all unions as greedy.
If a business prices their product "too high" then they won't maximize their revenue. In the content licenses market companies like Netflix are the consumer. If a "cartel" of studios get together and price fix (and avoid US Justice Department attention at the same time) then who will buy the more expensive movies?
Remember, even if all studios got together and raised movie prices they would still need to compete with other forms of entertainment as well as piracy. This is why it doesn't cost $50/person to go see a movie at your local cinema.
If licensing content just got three times as expensive, Netflix would walk away and so would other companies who buy content; especially ones that are ad-supported.
Personally I think this is just a bunch of companies that are involved in streaming content are negotiating on how to slice up this pie; especially now that everyone realizes that it is a extremely popular (and lucrative) market. At least, it sure looks that way when you see NFLX go from $50-$200 in the past two years.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums
1.7M posts
114.9K members
Since 2001
A forum community dedicated to Canadian TV, computing and home theatre owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about home audio/video, displays, troubleshooting, styles, projects, DIY’s, product reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!