Netflix's new pricing model starts, Starz content stops
Today's the day when Netflix's new, and potentially more pricy, split DVD/streaming plans start, and also the day Starz says they've broken off talk for Netflix to carry their content.
Starz said it made the decision to “protect the premium nature of our brand by preserving the appropriate pricing and packaging of our exclusive and highly valuable content,” according to a statement issued today.
And once again I'll counter by saying when Hollywood thinks they're content is undervalued, they fail to realize it's being massively overvalued already.
Consumers have shown time and time again that they're willing to pay a fair price for the content they want to enjoy, when they want to enjoy it. Hollywood has shown time and time again that they consider customers the enemy. But if Starz isn't available where the market wants it, the market will turn to something else, or will find an alternate way to get it. Apple figured this out years ago with iTunes Music. We'll see if Hollywood ever does, or if the greed of past, artificially inflated business models blinds them to the potential of new, consumer friendly ones.
[Bloomberg via the all new, all great looking The Loop]
Editor-in-Chief of iMore, Executive Producer at Mobile Nations, co-host of Iterate and ZEN and TECH, cook, grappler, photon wrangler.
| Tweet |
|
|
Leave a Reply
Note: Comments must be civil, respectful, and on-topic. If a comment does not add to the conversation, if it contains spam advertising, or inappropriate language or content, it will be removed. Insulting the topic, author, staff, site, network, or other commenters will result in the comment being marked as spam and potential prevent future comments from appearing on the site. Do not post as a business or your comment will likely be confused with spam. Comments containing links may be held for moderation. Relax, enjoy, and share in the discussion.
That was rape what they were asking for and Netflix was right to pass it up. Content owners seriously over value their content. And in this economy? Who is going to pay 15 plus bucks to watch a film one time and probably never watch again? Netflix has the only sustainable business model and the quicker the content owners realize this... the better.
The reality is the price of their content also covers the cost of good stuff and bad stuff. For every great quality movie or song that is worth our money, there's at least 2 or 3 failures. So until something else replaces the model for distributing risk then content owners will overcharge for the content which has real value.
Yeah so why pay $150 a month for Internet and crappy shows with a mixture of good shows. Oh so I can talk about these shows while they air. Forget that, I moved to Hulu and Netflix streaming 4 years ago, and started bringing my lunch to work. I am cutting out those costly expenses that take food out of my family's mouths. How about we pay a reasonable amount, and you just spend it on the good films, and not all the sucky ones!
Records used to have 2 good songs and 10 fillers, and you had to buy all 12 to get the 2 you wanted. The internet and iTunes killed that, now any song that wants to be bought has to be good enough to be bought.
Likewise, Hollywood has sold crap for years and bundled it as a way to force us to pay for the crap if we want the good stuff. Internet and things like Netflix again remove that artificial model. Every show, movie, event, etc. has to earn its own way.
That's good for everyone, consumers, Hollywood, etc. (Except crappy content makers/pushers).
I hate to be that guy, but it has not been an unalloyed good.
One thing it has not been good for is the album format (at least in widepsread pop music). For example, way back in the day, Genesis might score pop success with "Selling England by the Pound," which mixed some popular songs with others that would never sniff the Top 40. Taken together, these songs made one coherent theme, even to the point where riffs in some songs echoed riffs in another when the same point is made.
That sort of concept is largely lost in a world where every song has to live or die on its own hook. A few bands out there still experiment with it, but the commercial pressure has accelerated the trend towards highly polished, stand-alone singles only.
God, I'm old. GET OFF MAH LAWN!
Though, actually, I'm like you -- I vote with my dollars, and I largely buy singles, so I am part of the problem.
Preach!
The bad thing about Netflix is that they are following the same model as Blockbuster and Hollywood Video which is.....drive the competition out of business with low prices then jack up the prices. If Netflix fails to innovate, like Blockbuster and Hollywood Video, somebody else will come along and drive them out of business too.
Ehhhh....sort of. Netflix also negotiated contracts for content back when the studios were thinking that streaming was a few extra bucks trickling next to their existing large theater/DVD revenue streams. They gave Netflix relatively cheap terms at the outset to see if this trickle might amount to anything.
A few years later, Netflix has shown that trickle is a big stream in its own right -- taking away from DVD, at the very least, and come contract renewal time, the studios are demanding a bigger cut -- an extra cost the Netflix is largely passing on to us. You are correct that Netfilx has little credible competition left, which is why the studios are playing hardball -- they are rightly terrified of being beholden to a single distributor.
"And once again I’ll counter by saying when Hollywood thinks they’re content is undervalued, they fail to realize it’s being massively overvalued already."
'nuff said.
I canceled today. Too much or DVD/streaming and so a friend ndi share streaming and split the cost...
That sucks for consumers. Netflix is ready to be overthrown as the ruler. I called it a few months ago. Someone is going to knock them down for sure.
Wow...check this out: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2011/09/netflix-offered-300-million-plus-but-starz-wanted-higher-prices.html.
Starz got greedy. They are going to hurt Netflix with this but trying to force their hand to charge customers a tiered plan to access their content is just wrong, IMHO.
[source: SplatF]
I feel like such a Netflix apologist when I point this out, but they new pricing is the cheapest unlimited DVD rental pricing Netflix has offered. Yes, the combo price with streaming has gone up, but that seemed inevitable. I think their real mistake was not clearly indicating that the free streaming was an introductory situation. Plus, the prices they introduced last November were pretty silly: $2 extra over steaming for 1 disc at a time never made sense.
I think they'd have gotten a much better reaction if they had not offered streaming only last year but had started offering streaming as a $4-6 add-on. Then, they could have introduced the $8 streaming-only plan now, but left the $4-6 streaming add-on along with the new DVD rental prices. Se la vie.
The problem is that they set up at the bottom, and are DOUBLING their costs, while still ignoring the serious need to upgrade their content. It's sick how little is available when you look at it from a purely movie standpoint.
Tv shows, which I primarily watch, are at least mildly decent, but for movies?? It's a joke, streaming wise. And from a family perspective, losing Starz is a big hit, so I'm bummed.
But still, Netflix streaming is an okay price, but without continually adding content, which they seem to be slacking on SEVERELY, they don't even warrant $4 a month.
To go back a step, pulling the rug out on the pricing is still a pile of garbage. Netflix continually thinks they know what is right for us, and they fail every step of the way n
The crummy UI alone, plus the assumption that they always know what is right, what we want and ugh. If only there were other options
How cheap are you that you think $4/month is too much? That's one movie rental. Netflix is by far the cheapest option and they have good content.
Pathetic argument. Just because people can afford it does not mean its worth the money. $4 would be worth it. Charging the same as the DVD plan when it's got far, FAR less content is a rip off. You can't just increase te cost by 60% with no increase in quality of product and call that a successful business model.
Price is dictated by demand. Most Netflix users I'd wager are people who use it because it was affordable, not because we couldn't live without the content. Thus, with the price hike it no longer becomes affordable and we drop what it's worth the price. Netflix will keep the hardcore movie/TV lovers but lose the average joe who uses it because it's convenient, not because it's necessary.
Sorry for the typos, for some reason Disqus will not let me go back and edit anything...
Hollywood wants to nickel and dime viewers. Viewers would rather look at drying paint than pay premium prices for poor quality content. Thus Netflix is easier than torrenting, but torrenting is easier than overpaying.
Remember: easy will always win over free.
Remember: easy always wins over free.
I honestly could care less. I haven't subscribed to cable or any TV service for like 10 years as Netflix has become my "TV". I still think it's a good deal. I just hate that I won't be getting any Starz content now.
I don't mean to go all grammar nazi... But you CAN care less? Or are you done, you can't care any more... Right? Right. So you can't care less
Douche
"I don't mean to go all grammar nazi..."
Then don't!
BTW, It's Nazi, not nazi... (a taste of your own medicine...)
im curious why cant netflix go straight to the studios instead of starz or hbo, etc. and work a deal with them? seems like they would cut out the middle man.
I think Starz controls the content. I'm not sure but I saw that mentioned somewhere.