# Netflix's US Catalog has shrunk by 32% in the last two years



## SomeRandomIdiot (Jan 7, 2016)

http://www.businessinsider.com/netflixs-us-catalog-has-2500-fewer-titles-than-in-2014-2016-3

And you are going to pay more for it:

"Along with a decrease in titles, we might also see a continued rise in price, as Netflix leans in to originals.

Last fall, CEO Reed Hastings hinted at this: "The more we have incredible value, the more we have amazing originals, then we are going to be able to ask consumers for more to be able to invest more," he said."

Guess they have to make real money at some point in time....


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

Precisely. The size of the catalog is not what impacts customers - it is how the catalog, whatever size it is, resonates with viewers. It's wasteful to maintain a large catalog size if doing so doesn't result in commensurate customer purchasing behaviors.


----------



## schatham (Mar 17, 2007)

bicker said:


> Precisely. The size of the catalog is not what impacts customers - it is how the catalog, whatever size it is, resonates with viewers. It's wasteful to maintain a large catalog size if doing so doesn't result in commensurate customer purchasing behaviors.


Except what they lost was a big deal. Epix catalog was not only lost, it went to their competition Hulu.


----------



## jduffy (Feb 25, 2016)

I am a customer, not a stockholder. I don't want to pay more or "invest."


----------



## jth tv (Nov 15, 2014)

I've noticed it, but it is still a super good deal and at least for me, with 3Mbps internet, the picture quality has gotten better, it quickly goes to "720" per the TiVo Info button and most importantly stays there without problems. It used to blotch with fast camera pans, I haven't seen that problem in quite a while.

Their list of Trending Now seem to be more TV series, fewer movies. That follows my viewing habits. 

I'd also expect time of the year would make a big difference, depending on whether the major networks are showing new episodes or repeats. I watch a lot more Netflix when there is a lot less to watch on broadcast TV. And I appreciate that Netflix rotates what they show, if I've seen a show, I probably won't watch it again. 

There is a lot of value for the money, for me nothing else comes close.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

SomeRandomIdiot said:


> http://www.businessinsider.com/netflixs-us-catalog-has-2500-fewer-titles-than-in-2014-2016-3 And you are going to pay more for it: "Along with a decrease in titles, we might also see a continued rise in price, as Netflix leans in to originals. Last fall, CEO Reed Hastings hinted at this: "The more we have incredible value, the more we have amazing originals, then we are going to be able to ask consumers for more to be able to invest more," he said." Guess they have to make real money at some point in time....


Thanks for that. I've been saying Netflix is losing content and increasing costs and prices. I watch less Netflix and more of their competitors these days.

A sign of their losing quality product is pushing tv shows mixed in with movies. Hard to distinguish in their searches and categories these days.


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

I agree with the "value" is what matters opinions. Netflix has decided their users will find greater value in a smaller library that contains more new/original programing. Every consumer gets to decide if they agree or not as everyone/anyone can sub to Netflix or not.


----------



## SomeRandomIdiot (Jan 7, 2016)

atmuscarella said:


> I agree with the "value" is what matters opinions. Netflix has decided their users will find greater value in a smaller library that contains more new/original programing. Every consumer gets to decide if they agree or not as everyone/anyone can sub to Netflix or not.


and the greater value is to pay more for that...


----------



## SomeRandomIdiot (Jan 7, 2016)

TonyD79 said:


> Thanks for that. I've been saying Netflix is losing content and increasing costs and prices. I watch less Netflix and more of their competitors these days.
> 
> A sign of their losing quality product is pushing tv shows mixed in with movies. Hard to distinguish in their searches and categories these days.


I had seen you say it so I knew you would be interested when I spotted the story.


----------



## ncted (May 13, 2007)

If I ever run out of stuff to watch on Netflix, I will drop it, but, as of now, I cannot see that happening. I will sub/unsub Hulu, HBO Now, etc. as needed throughout the year, but Amazon and Netflix are pretty much the bedrock on which my streaming experience is built.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

schatham said:


> Except what they lost was a big deal.


No it wasn't.

Oh - you mean it was a big deal to you.

Thanks for clarifying.


----------



## rainwater (Sep 21, 2004)

I like Netflix now more than ever. Their original programming is why I watch it. Right now, they are right up their with HBO in terms of quality programming.


----------



## Barnstormer (Sep 23, 2015)

Some of the original programming is pretty good though some (House of Cards) has seen it's day and should be brought to an end.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

ncted said:


> If I ever run out of stuff to watch on Netflix, I will drop it, but, as of now, I cannot see that happening.


This. I have more quality programs in my queue than I can get to. If I run out, I'll unsubscribe. But the sheer number of titles in their catalog is irrelevant to me.


----------



## abovethesink (Aug 26, 2013)

Yeah. The service has evolved for me. Now I mostly subscribe for the originals and occasionally use it to get into another network's show.


----------



## tampa8 (Jan 26, 2016)

jduffy said:


> I am a customer, not a stockholder. I don't want to pay more or "invest."


That's why you are not a stockholder or own a company.... Very shortsighted because nothing lasts forever, particularly the entertainment field. Investment is a must.


----------



## foghorn2 (May 4, 2004)

In house programming sucks, weather its from Netflix, Amazon Prime or HBO. 

Lifeless garbage that says nothing.


----------



## sangs (Jan 1, 2003)

foghorn2 said:


> In house programming sucks, weather its from Netflix, Amazon Prime or HBO.
> 
> Lifeless garbage that says nothing.


Thank you Mr. Sunshine!


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

foghorn2 said:


> In house programming sucks, weather its from Netflix, Amazon Prime or HBO.
> 
> Lifeless garbage that says nothing.


It's actually really great!


----------



## tenthplanet (Mar 5, 2004)

schatham said:


> Except what they lost was a big deal. Epix catalog was not only lost, it went to their competition Hulu.


 And Amazon already had it, having the same things on multiple services may be good for the content provider, but it won't make things cheaper for you.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

ncted said:


> If I ever run out of stuff to watch on Netflix, I will drop it, but, as of now, I cannot see that happening. I will sub/unsub Hulu, HBO Now, etc. as needed throughout the year, but Amazon and Netflix are pretty much the bedrock on which my streaming experience is built.


Yes. I don't care what the total number of titles available is. What matters is what I like to watch. And for years my streaming queue has hovered around 100 titles. There is always something in my queue to watch. AS long as Netflix continues to have stuff I want to watch I will stay a subscriber. Plus I only pay $8 a month for the UHD tier. So it is extremely inexpensive for me..


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

foghorn2 said:


> In house programming sucks, weather its from Netflix, Amazon Prime or HBO.
> 
> Lifeless garbage that says nothing.


Like with any content provider some content is good and some is bad. That goes for Netflix, Amazon, and HBO.


----------



## zalusky (Apr 5, 2002)

Streaming content may have gone down but doesn't their DVD catalog pretty much have everything. When you look at it as an integrated service (even though they make it a pain). Its still an amazing value.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

I like the original programming and previous season TV stuff better then old movies anyway. Still worth the $8/mo to me.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

zalusky said:


> Streaming content may have gone down but doesn't their DVD catalog pretty much have everything. When you look at it as an integrated service (even though they make it a pain). Its still an amazing value.


Two different services.


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

Only matters if you get value for your money. 

Also I bet I didn't care about 98% of the 32% decrease in content.


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

I don't care about the quantity of the Netflix catalog, I care about the quality.


----------



## Johncv (Jun 11, 2002)

zalusky said:


> Streaming content may have gone down but doesn't their DVD catalog pretty much have everything. When you look at it as an integrated service (even though they make it a pain). It's still an amazing value.


That one thing Netflix's should do is restore the DVD catalog into the streaming service, so you search/order the DVD from the streaming service.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

zalusky said:


> Streaming content may have gone down but doesn't their DVD catalog pretty much have everything. When you look at it as an integrated service (even though they make it a pain). Its still an amazing value.


Their disc catalog is also smaller. I know there are some titles I rented years ago on BD that either aren't available any more or are only available on DVD.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

aaronwt said:


> Their disc catalog is also smaller. I know there are some titles I rented years ago on BD that either aren't available any more or are only available on DVD.


At least older stuff is gone. I have things that are in the saved position of my Dvd queue that used to be live. Almost two dozen.


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

I have had Netflix since they were DVD only. It's been a great ride. I am totally underwhelmed with their original programming and have seem most of their catalog. Last September we signed on with Amazon. I don't watch Prime much, but it is less expensive and I get all sorts of discounts and credits.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

rainwater said:


> I like Netflix now more than ever. Their original programming is why I watch it. Right now, they are right up their with HBO in terms of quality programming.


I agree. This is why I have it too. I don't care about the quantity, because I'm never going to watch 1% of it. I want quality, and the original content brings me that. And the value is huge in that they have the only series available that I want to watch in 2160p.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

I just wish Netflix would hurry up and enable their HDR10.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

aaronwt said:


> I just wish Netflix would hurry up and enable their HDR10.


Do they have any content available for it? I hope they do soon, since it should just be a software upgrade for my Sammy JS850D...


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Bigg said:


> Do they have any content available for it? I hope they do soon, since it should just be a software upgrade for my Sammy JS850D...


Marco Polo and Daredevil are supposed to use HDR.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

aaronwt said:


> Marco Polo and Daredevil are supposed to use HDR.


Oh nice! If/when they enable it, I might just watch a bit of Marco Polo just to see how it looks, although I really want to see Narcos, House of Cards, and Breaking Bad on my new TV, which are 4k without HDR.


----------



## jth tv (Nov 15, 2014)

I've been getting Netflix at "720" with 3Mps (3.24) TWC internet. This morning "Republic of Doyle" season 6 is "1080" per the TiVo Info button . Catwoman and Rumble in the Bronx were also 1080 recently. 

For me, Netflix image quality is noticeably better.


----------



## RoamioJeff (May 9, 2014)

Meh. I value quality over quantity. Maybe it's good they trimmed out some of the weeds. Besides, Netflix rotates old stuff out and new stuff into their library every month. And I have enough stuff in my que that I'll never catch up.

The only time they made a change to their library where I was disappointed in the slightest about was when Miami Vice went away. It'll be back. 

Plenty to watch. Still commercial free.


----------



## dylanemcgregor (Jan 31, 2003)

dianebrat said:


> I don't care about the quantity of the Netflix catalog, I care about the quality.


Agree, but only up to a point. HBO Now has good quality programs, but the breadth is fairly low and it is more expensive than Netflix. We did the free month trial and I was planning on continuing, but found that we had watched a good amount of what we wanted to watch by the end of the month. That never seems to happen with Netflix. I've got about 300 items on my queue, and while lots of those are movies we'll probably never get to, there's always enough that I'm excited about watching that it always feels like a backlog.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Bigg said:


> Oh nice! If/when they enable it, I might just watch a bit of Marco Polo just to see how it looks, although I really want to see Narcos, House of Cards, and Breaking Bad on my new TV, which are 4k without HDR.


Marco Polo now shows up in HDR10 on my Sony UHD TV. Nothing with Daredevil yet.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

aaronwt said:


> Marco Polo now shows up in HDR10 on my Sony UHD TV. Nothing with Daredevil yet.


Nice! Is there a special logo for it or something?


----------



## JackStraw (Oct 22, 2002)

I subscribe to Netflix DVD. Sure it's primitive but I can rent just about any movie that is on DVD. Don't have to worry about Netflix no longer offering titles. Maybe one day in the future Netflix will be offering it's entire DVD catalog on streaming and not remove movies. Much of this is due to the greed of the studios. In a perfect world everything ever made in both TV and movies would be available in a cloud library.


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

JackStraw said:


> I subscribe to Netflix DVD. Sure it's primitive but I can rent just about any movie that is on DVD. Don't have to worry about Netflix no longer offering titles. Maybe one day in the future Netflix will be offering it's entire DVD catalog on streaming and not remove movies. Much of this is due to the greed of the studios. In a perfect world everything ever made in both TV and movies would be available in a cloud library.


Netflix DVD has an automatic limiting consumption factor and I assume Netflix has to purchase the DVD/Blu-ray disks so maintaining a larger library is not as much of a cost issue as it is for the streaming side.

Video producers are in the business to make money allowing all video every made to be available for unlimited streaming for $10/mo without any add revenue isn't in their best interests, in fact if that is all they got it would pretty much stop nearly all new video production. If such a service where ever available it would need to cost several hundred dollars per month (or more) to replace the revenue being generated by individual rentals, sales, adds, & pay TV subs.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

atmuscarella said:


> Netflix DVD has an automatic limiting consumption factor and I assume Netflix has to purchase the DVD/Blu-ray disks so maintaining a larger library is not as much of a cost issue as it is for the streaming side.


Well, actually, I think some distributors authorize Netflix to produce cheap copies of DVDs, but they still have to pay a licence for each one, so effectively the result is the same.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Bigg said:


> Nice! Is there a special logo for it or something?


It shows up now as HDR instead of UltraHD.


----------



## JoeKustra (Dec 7, 2012)

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=10852758#post10852758

And it might cost more too.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

aaronwt said:


> It shows up now as HDR instead of UltraHD.


Do you know if they have it on the Samsung JS8500 series? I was looking on mine, and I didn't see it. I'm just curious, I'm not actually interested in any of their HDR shows at the moment. Narcos is not HDR, but I've been enjoying it quite a bit. It's extremely graphic, but I'm willing to tolerate that since it's basically historically accurate, and 4k is just icing on the cake, as you really feel like you're there. Up next will be House of Cards I think, and then Breaking Bad.


----------



## SomeRandomIdiot (Jan 7, 2016)

And this is what is coming next month to 30% of Netflix Subscribers - a 25% increase they are unaware of (and yes I realize TCF members pay attention and realize this is known - but clearly it is not for 30% of Netflix's subs).

http://time.com/money/4285562/netflix-price-hike-subscriptions/


----------



## RoamioJeff (May 9, 2014)

SomeRandomIdiot said:


> And this is what is coming next month to 30% of Netflix Subscribers - a 25% increase they are unaware of (and yes I realize TCF members pay attention and realize this is known - but clearly it is not for 30% of Netflix's subs).
> 
> http://time.com/money/4285562/netflix-price-hike-subscriptions/


This is disingenuous reporting. The increases were announced to subscribers in 2014, and that they would be grandfathered until now. I clearly remember the notice, and it was widely covered in the media. Sure, there may be a few folks out there that have been living under a rock, but it's a stretch to claim that 30% are unaware of widely announced increases nearly two years in advance. Does not pass the sniff test.


----------



## SomeRandomIdiot (Jan 7, 2016)

RoamioJeff said:


> This is disingenuous reporting. The increases were announced to subscribers in 2014, and that they would be grandfathered until now. I clearly remember the notice, and it was widely covered in the media. Sure, there may be a few folks out there that have been living under a rock, but it's a stretch to claim that 30% are unaware of widely announced increases nearly two years in advance. Does not pass the sniff test.


It's not a stretch if you bothered to read it with up to date info instead of posting "it's disingenuous".

Anyone who uses "TiVo" in their nick posting online is not an everyday Joe when it comes up to CE news, nor is any TCF member, as I pointed out.


----------



## RoamioJeff (May 9, 2014)

SomeRandomIdiot said:


> It's not a stretch if you bothered to read it with up to date info instead of posting "it's disingenuous".


That has nothing to do with the fact that the price increase was clearly announced two years ago to all subscibers. It was made conspicuously clear, even for "average Joes". And there was much media attention on it, given previous widespread controversy over Netflix's attempted subscription price changes prior to that. The story just does not wash. It's a failed attempt to stir up more controversy.

So, we are to believe a service provider that clearly announces a price increase, to grandfathered subscribers, two years in advance, in the bright afterglow of a previous price change controversy, and this is supposed to be ... a "surprise" to an already sensitized subscriber base? Look, a squirrel!

Still not buying it.

Which begs the question ... what might be the motivation for blowing this out of proportion? That might be a more interesting question to follow. At least one that addresses a real agenda.


----------



## schatham (Mar 17, 2007)

RoamioJeff said:


> That has nothing to do with the fact that the price increase was clearly announced two years ago to all subscibers. It was made conspicuously clear, even for "average Joes". And there was much media attention on it, given previous widespread controversy over Netflix's attempted subscription price changes prior to that. The story just does not wash. It's a failed attempt to stir up more controversy.
> 
> So, we are to believe a service provider that clearly announces a price increase, to grandfathered subscribers, two years in advance, in the bright afterglow of a previous price change controversy, and this is supposed to be ... a "surprise" to an already sensitized subscriber base? Look, a squirrel!
> 
> ...


Seems to me the story was clear and straight forward. They probably got those statistics from somewhere, not just made up. It's a current story because the increase date is here.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

SomeRandomIdiot said:


> And this is what is coming next month to 30% of Netflix Subscribers - a 25% increase they are unaware of (and yes I realize TCF members pay attention and realize this is known - but clearly it is not for 30% of Netflix's subs).
> 
> http://time.com/money/4285562/netflix-price-hike-subscriptions/


Everyone was notified of the increase. It's just a matter of them remembering it. SInce they were notified two years ago.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Bigg said:


> Do you know if they have it on the Samsung JS8500 series? I was looking on mine, and I didn't see it. I'm just curious, I'm not actually interested in any of their HDR shows at the moment. Narcos is not HDR, but I've been enjoying it quite a bit. It's extremely graphic, but I'm willing to tolerate that since it's basically historically accurate, and 4k is just icing on the cake, as you really feel like you're there. Up next will be House of Cards I think, and then Breaking Bad.


I don't know about the Samsung models. Only that they Sony 2015 models got an update last week which enabled HDR10 from Netflix.


----------



## RoamioJeff (May 9, 2014)

aaronwt said:


> Everyone was notified of the increase. It's just a matter of them remembering it. SInce they were notified two years ago.


Exactly. You'd think some folks are hunting some deep dark conspiracy about this nonissue.


----------



## SomeRandomIdiot (Jan 7, 2016)

RoamioJeff said:


> Exactly. You'd think some folks are hunting some deep dark conspiracy about this nonissue.


No, it is showing that most people do not read details of TOS or even emails from vendors - and 80% certainly do not remember it 24 months later.

Given that some people cannot remember the position they took from post to post, I do not find this surprising.

Hell, even constant posters on TCF did not know that TiVO Guide Supplier TMS was now known as Gracenote despite posts in multiple threads!

Not a conspiracy. Just a simple fact.

Survey says 80% of those grandfathered in have no idea that an increase is coming.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Will the 4 stream plan be effected? Or just the lower end plan? I already pay for the 4 stream plan because my Niece and Nephew both use my account and I didn't want conflicts.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

I'm still curious if I will be affected. I'm on the UHD four sceen plan for $7.99 a month. And I was supposedly grandfathered indefinitely.


----------



## jlb (Dec 13, 2001)

I use Netflix via my AppleTV. Now, if Apple allowed Amazon to put a prime video channel on ATV, I would likely dump Netflix and finally suscribe to Prime.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

aaronwt said:


> I don't know about the Samsung models. Only that they Sony 2015 models got an update last week which enabled HDR10 from Netflix.


Interesting, mine must still need a future software update.



jlb said:


> I use Netflix via my AppleTV. Now, if Apple allowed Amazon to put a prime video channel on ATV, I would likely dump Netflix and finally suscribe to Prime.


Different service. Different catalog. There are only about a bajillion devices that support Amazon Prime.


----------



## tenthplanet (Mar 5, 2004)

Bigg said:


> Interesting, mine must still need a future software update.
> 
> Different service. Different catalog. There are only about a bajillion devices that support Amazon Prime.


 Including a little device known as a TIVO


----------



## kettledrum (Nov 17, 2003)

SomeRandomIdiot said:


> No, it is showing that most people do not read details of TOS or even emails from vendors - and 80% certainly do not remember it 24 months later.
> 
> Given that some people cannot remember the position they took from post to post, I do not find this surprising.
> 
> ...


Case in point - I just got a check in the mail for a Duracell class action settlement that I only vaguely remembered filling out. Looking up the settlement on the internet I discovered I would have filled out the claim form 2 years ago.

Now if I had netflix (which I don't) would I remember that my rate was going to increase? Hard to say although I had forgotten that the rate was still $8 for some people until I saw this thread.


----------



## b_scott (Nov 27, 2006)

what I hated is when films they no longer streamed started to be removed from your list without warning. It used to be they stayed on there so you knew which ones were gone and if they started to be streamed again they would re-add to your streamable list.

Now when movies are removed I don't even realize it. Especially bad for those of us with long lists.


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

b_scott said:


> what I hated is when films they no longer streamed started to be removed from your list without warning. It used to be they stayed on there so you knew which ones were gone and if they started to be streamed again they would re-add to your streamable list.
> 
> Now when movies are removed I don't even realize it. Especially bad for those of us with long lists.


I think it would be worse for those with short lists.


----------



## b_scott (Nov 27, 2006)

it's bad for long lists because say you were trying to watch the top 100 AFI and had the movies you A) hadn't seen and B) were on Netflix on your list. There's no way you are going to notice that some are missing.


----------



## jth tv (Nov 15, 2014)

If you log in via a pc, the streaming My List will show upcoming catalogue deletions, maybe a few weeks ahead. They've recently made My List less useful though, I can No longer renumber the list, I can only move one at a time to the top.


----------



## b_scott (Nov 27, 2006)

jth tv said:


> If you log in via a pc, the streaming My List will show upcoming catalogue deletions, maybe a few weeks ahead. They've recently made My List less useful though, I can No longer renumber the list, I can only move one at a time to the top.


Yeah, but if you just want to keep things on your list even if they're gone they stay on there. I don't keep up with the site deletions, which is kind of the point.


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

b_scott said:


> it's bad for long lists because say you were trying to watch the top 100 AFI and had the movies you A) hadn't seen and B) were on Netflix on your list. There's no way you are going to notice that some are missing.


I look at it the other way. If your list is so long that you don't notice when a show or two disappear then you have way more shows to watch than you have time for. That's a good problem to have.


----------



## b_scott (Nov 27, 2006)

trip1eX said:


> I look at it the other way. If your list is so long that you don't notice when a show or two disappear then you have way more shows to watch than you have time for. That's a good problem to have.


it's not about having time. I pay for the service. It should be able to at least keep a list current for me.


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

b_scott said:


> it's not about having time. I pay for the service. It should be able to at least keep a list current for me.


Yeah and if you have too much stuff to watch on a service you pay for that you don't notice if a show disappears then that's a good problem to have.



It's just perspective. half-full or half-empty.


----------



## b_scott (Nov 27, 2006)

trip1eX said:


> Yeah and if you have too much stuff to watch on a service you pay for that you don't notice if a show disappears then that's a good problem to have.
> 
> 
> 
> It's just perspective. half-full or half-empty.


I fail to see how this makes any sense at all. The entire point of a list is so you don't have to remember which movies you wanted to watch. Otherwise you'd just memorize them and search for them when you sit down to watch.


----------



## Johncv (Jun 11, 2002)

b_scott said:


> what I hated is when films they no longer streamed started to be removed from your list without warning. It used to be they stayed on there so you knew which ones were gone and if they started to be streamed again they would re-add to your streamable list.
> 
> Now when movies are removed I don't even realize it. Especially bad for those of us with long lists.


Cnet put out a monthly list of what going and what being added to Netflix and Amazon.


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

b_scott said:


> I fail to see how this makes any sense at all. The entire point of a list is so you don't have to remember which movies you wanted to watch. Otherwise you'd just memorize them and search for them when you sit down to watch.


Picture a list of 100 shows that you haven't watched and can't recall their names. And picture a list of 95 shows that you haven't watched and can't recall their names.


----------



## b_scott (Nov 27, 2006)

trip1eX said:


> Picture a list of 100 shows that you haven't watched and can't recall their names. And picture a list of 95 shows that you haven't watched and can't recall their names.


Picture someone who wants to set a goal of watching 100 specific movies. Now picture someone who pays monthly for a service, whose minimum function is to keep a list of movies. Now picture that service arbitrarily removes movies from that list without notice.

Would you still be happy with that service?


----------



## allan (Oct 14, 2002)

My problem would be, I might want to watch a specific movie or TV show. I'm currently watching other stuff, so I decide I'll watch Good Movie this Saturday. It gets deleted on Friday!


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

trip1eX said:


> Picture a list of 100 shows that you haven't watched and can't recall their names. And picture a list of 95 shows that you haven't watched and can't recall their names.


Man that would piss me off to not know what those five titles were that disappeared. Fortunately I don't look at my list too closely. The only time I would notice it is if I was in the middle of watching a show when the episodes disappeared. Which has happened to me before. But I also knew they were losing the rights. I was able to rent the discs to finish watching.

I typically have around 100 titles on my Netflix streaming list. So I always have something to watch when I actually get around to watching a streaming title from my list. I still need to get back to watching the show The 100 again. I initially streamed it and then watched from the BD rentals. But after watching the Blu-ray Discs I couldn't go back to the streaming versions. I'm still near the end of the first season of episodes.


----------



## realityboy (Jun 13, 2003)

trip1eX said:


> I look at it the other way. If your list is so long that you don't notice when a show or two disappear then you have way more shows to watch than you have time for. That's a good problem to have.


So if your TiVo just randomly deleted a few shows but you still had plenty to watch, you wouldn't complain? It doesn't even have to be a huge list. I have 6 movies on my list that I plan on watching. If they delete one, I'll probably notice immediately that the list is shorter, but I may or may not remember what the movie was. It would be nice if Netflix at least notified you that a title on your list had been deleted so that you can watch it by other means.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

realityboy said:


> So if your TiVo just randomly deleted a few shows but you still had plenty to watch, you wouldn't complain? It doesn't even have to be a huge list. I have 6 movies on my list that I plan on watching. If they delete one, I'll probably notice immediately that the list is shorter, but I may or may not remember what the movie was. It would be nice if Netflix at least notified you that a title on your list had been deleted so that you can watch it by other means.


They do that with the Dvd queue. It gets placed in another category.


----------



## TWinbrook46636 (Feb 9, 2008)

jlb said:


> I use Netflix via my AppleTV. Now, if Apple allowed Amazon to put a prime video channel on ATV, I would likely dump Netflix and finally suscribe to Prime.


_Apple was wrongly criticized by some in October for seemingly not allowing Prime Video on the new Apple TV, but shortly after the company provided a statement to BuzzFeed News emphasizing that all are welcome on the platform -- Amazon simply had not submitted a Prime Video app for the tvOS App Store._


----------



## jduffy (Feb 25, 2016)

tampa8 said:


> That's why you are not a stockholder or own a company.... Very shortsighted because nothing lasts forever, particularly the entertainment field. Investment is a must.


First, I am sure my portfolio well exceeds yours. Second, stockholders invest, not customers. A company needs the money to invest and as a company raises prices, if customers do not see the value, they will cancel. With Netflix, I am a customer not a stockholder. If Netflix wants to "invest", they can issue more shares. Right now the market has determined that Netflix is not a good value and the stock is not performing. Seems that Netflix is NOT investing in the right areas.


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

jduffy said:


> First, I am sure my portfolio well exceeds yours. Second, stockholders invest, not customers. A company needs the money to invest and as a company raises prices, if customers do not see the value, they will cancel. With Netflix, I am a customer not a stockholder. If Netflix wants to "invest", they can issue more shares. Right now the market has determined that Netflix is not a good value and the stock is not performing. Seems that Netflix is NOT investing in the right areas.


This thread is talking about paying for the content that Netflix either produces or licenses. Those are operational costs and for a business to be successful operating costs have to be paid out of revenue (paid for by the business's customers). Netflix can no more issue new stock to pay to license or produce content than GM can issue new stock to pay to buy tires for the cars they sell.

If you don't see the value in a Netflix subscription it is simple you don't sub. To make statements that a company should issue new stock to pay for operating costs is complete foolishness.

What I do agree with is that anytime a company talks about a customer making an investment in the company by buying the company's product, it is pure B.S. and nothing more than slick marketing to "help" people be OK with spending money to buy the company's product.


----------



## Johncv (Jun 11, 2002)

TWinbrook46636 said:


> _Apple was wrongly criticized by some in October for seemingly not allowing Prime Video on the new Apple TV, but shortly after the company provided a statement to BuzzFeed News emphasizing that all are welcome on the platform -- Amazon simply had not submitted a Prime Video app for the tvOS App Store._


Just guessing here, but Amazon probably is waiting for the Apple TV to support UHD.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Johncv said:


> Just guessing here, but Amazon probably is waiting for the Apple TV to support UHD.


???? Why? The vast majority of people will not be watching any UHD content.


----------



## b_scott (Nov 27, 2006)

realityboy said:


> So if your TiVo just randomly deleted a few shows but you still had plenty to watch, you wouldn't complain? It doesn't even have to be a huge list. I have 6 movies on my list that I plan on watching. If they delete one, I'll probably notice immediately that the list is shorter, but I may or may not remember what the movie was. It would be nice if Netflix at least notified you that a title on your list had been deleted so that you can watch it by other means.


Thank you.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

I would hope that if I have such rarefied interests that I'd acknowledge what is offered by service providers who offers any significant contribution toward satisfying my rarefied interest.


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

realityboy said:


> So if your TiVo just randomly deleted a few shows but you still had plenty to watch, you wouldn't complain? It doesn't even have to be a huge list. I have 6 movies on my list that I plan on watching. If they delete one, I'll probably notice immediately that the list is shorter, but I may or may not remember what the movie was. It would be nice if Netflix at least notified you that a title on your list had been deleted so that you can watch it by other means.


I wouldn't complain if I had plenty of shows to watch and had plenty of opportunity to watch them.

My Tivo deletes stuff as it is if I don't watch the stuff in a timely manner.

and what I'm not hearing so much is that Netflix no longer streams xyz show that I just sat down to watch.

Instead what I hear is Netflix no longer streams stuff and I have no idea what it no longer streams but they are taking stuff away from me even though I pay them money and that's not right. blah blah blah. I have a long list and I have no idea what shows were on that list that I no longer can watch. And I want to know.

IT's all overblown. You have quite a lot of opportunity to watch shows and content doesn't just go out, it also comes in. And many movies that leave eventually come back to the service. Plus if your list is really long then you have more shows to watch then time on your hands as it is.

IT would be like worrying about what grocery store no longer carries on the shelf that you might have been interested in at one point in time but forgot.


----------



## realityboy (Jun 13, 2003)

trip1eX said:


> ...And many movies that leave eventually come back to the service...


This is part of the complaint. If a movie goes away, they now remove it from your list. If it returns, they no longer add it back, and they previously did.

I couldn't care less if Netflix loses a particular show or movie, but I'd like to be informed.

Speaking of dropped features, it's also annoying that my DVD/Blu-Ray queue (on my phone) no longer shows if a movie becomes available for streaming.

These are minor complaints, and I'm not dropping Netflix over them. We're not blowing them out of proportion. We're not picketing outside Netflix headquarters. We're expressing mild disappointment with a service that we pay for.


----------



## dianebrat (Jul 6, 2002)

b_scott said:


> what I hated is when films they no longer streamed started to be removed from your list without warning. It used to be they stayed on there so you knew which ones were gone and if they started to be streamed again they would re-add to your streamable list.
> 
> Now when movies are removed I don't even realize it. Especially bad for those of us with long lists.


Amazon has the same problem on Prime video, however things move a lot quicker than they do on Netflix, I routinely go through the Prime list and add things to my watchlist then sit down later to watch them and they're not longer Prime eligible.

However Amazon leaves them in the list just without the Prime flag just taunting you saying silently "if you REALLY loved this you would pay us money" Since Netflix doesn't have the multiple tiers they just remove and replace, I don't think it's that bad of a solution, obviously as this thread shows YMMV.


----------



## jth tv (Nov 15, 2014)

dianebrat said:


> ... Amazon leaves them in the list just without the Prime flag just taunting you saying silently "if you REALLY loved this you would pay us money"..


Yuck. When I tried Amazon's free month, I kept on thinking they were trying to trick me, pretty scary really.


----------



## realityboy (Jun 13, 2003)

Netflix doesn't have another streaming tier, but they do still have an impressive library of movies on disc. Maybe if they added a message saying, "this movie is no longer available for streaming, add a disc plan to your account for $x.xx and have it shipped to your mailbox," they could make a few bucks (at least until the disc plan eventually dies).


----------



## b_scott (Nov 27, 2006)

realityboy said:


> This is part of the complaint. If a movie goes away, they now remove it from your list. *If it returns, they no longer add it back, and they previously did. *
> 
> *I couldn't care less if Netflix loses a particular show or movie, but I'd like to be informed.*


EXACTLY. Thank you.



dianebrat said:


> Amazon has the same problem on Prime video, however things move a lot quicker than they do on Netflix, I routinely go through the Prime list and add things to my watchlist then sit down later to watch them and they're not longer Prime eligible.
> 
> *However Amazon leaves them in the list just without the Prime flag* just taunting you saying silently "if you REALLY loved this you would pay us money" Since Netflix doesn't have the multiple tiers they just remove and replace, I don't think it's that bad of a solution, obviously as this thread shows YMMV.


Yup. Netflix should leave them there in a separate section like they used to. But I guarantee why they don't is they don't want a list of "the movies they don't have" - they only want positive lists. Plus I don't know how they'd show that on the apps.


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

realityboy said:


> This is part of the complaint. If a movie goes away, they now remove it from your list. If it returns, they no longer add it back, and they previously did.
> 
> I couldn't care less if Netflix loses a particular show or movie, but I'd like to be informed.
> 
> ...


Exactly they are minor complaints and that's what I'm pointing out. You're looking at it half empty.

And you're just confirming what I've been saying. That's it's more about the notion of not being informed than any real problems created by not being informed. And that's because anyone with a long list has plenty to watch. And anything on the list that you forgot about is not too terribly important.


----------



## realityboy (Jun 13, 2003)

trip1eX said:


> Exactly they are minor complaints and that's what I'm pointing out. You're looking at it half empty.
> 
> And you're just confirming what I've been saying. That's it's more about the notion of not being informed than any real problems created by not being informed. And that's because anyone with a long list has plenty to watch. And anything on the list that you forgot about is not too terribly important.


My glass is about 7/8 full, lol. No one ever said these were anything more than minor complaints. Also as I pointed out, I do not have a long list. Right now, it's 4 movies.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

I'm getting my head together for the summer, when broadcast television offerings normally are much less plentiful. So I did a little comparison of our last Netflix DVD queue from September 2015 and the available offerings on Amazon Prime Video (something we're already paying for). Nothing from our Netflix queue was available on Amazon Prime Video. Now, of course, that's not a fair comparison. I suspect if I compare Netflix streaming to Amazon Prime Video I'll find that they're pretty close to comparable, i.e., both inadequate as compared to Netflix DVD. (Is there a way to check, without subscribing to Netflix?) As such, streaming is still a pale imitator of what Netflix DVD offers and has offered us for decades. And that's really frustrating.


----------



## waterlines (Apr 28, 2016)

Johncv said:


> That one thing Netflix's should do is restore the DVD catalog into the streaming service, so you search/order the DVD from the streaming service.


remember what a disaster that was when they spun off the DVD business? i can't even remember the DVD division's name any longer. like so many people at the time, instead of paying more $$ for twice the headache, i just said "screw it" and went with streaming-only for less $. brilliant strategy, Reed.


----------



## HobokenSkier (Oct 14, 2015)

bicker said:


> I'm getting my head together for the summer, when broadcast television offerings normally are much less plentiful. So I did a little comparison of our last Netflix DVD queue from September 2015 and the available offerings on Amazon Prime Video (something we're already paying for). Nothing from our Netflix queue was available on Amazon Prime Video. Now, of course, that's not a fair comparison. I suspect if I compare Netflix streaming to Amazon Prime Video I'll find that they're pretty close to comparable, i.e., both inadequate as compared to Netflix DVD. (Is there a way to check, without subscribing to Netflix?) As such, streaming is still a pale imitator of what Netflix DVD offers and has offered us for decades. And that's really frustrating.


Canistream.it


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

waterlines said:


> remember what a disaster that was when they spun off the DVD business? i can't even remember the DVD division's name any longer. like so many people at the time, instead of paying more $$ for twice the headache, i just said "screw it" and went with streaming-only for less $. brilliant strategy, Reed.


Qwikster

I never had a problem with it except for their plan of having to go to separate sites to manage streaming and discs. I didn't understand that decision.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

HobokenSkier said:


> Canistream.it


Thanks. That just confirmed how little of what we want to watch is available via streaming subscription services without a premium channel subscription.

Maybe that's the answer. Subscribe to a premium channel for the summer, wring its catalog dry via On Demand and TiVo Recordings, then cancel it after a month or two. I just wonder how much longer the premium services will allow 1-2 month subscriptions, even at full price.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

bicker said:


> Thanks. That just confirmed how little of what we want to watch is available via streaming subscription services without a premium channel subscription.
> 
> Maybe that's the answer. Subscribe to a premium channel for the summer, wring its catalog dry via On Demand and TiVo Recordings, then cancel it after a month or two. I just wonder how much longer the premium services will allow 1-2 month subscriptions, even at full price.


I won't even subscribe to them at full price for a few months. I expect a discount even when I'm subscribing for three months. And with HBO and Starz, that is what I usually get. But I have no desire to subscribe for a year. If they do stop allowing those short term subscriptions then I just won't subscribe to them at all. Even at half price they aren't worth it.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

All the discounts I am offered included a 1 year commitment.


----------



## lew (Mar 12, 2002)

I'm sure Bicker already knows this. For others...Check your local library. Some have extensive videos which can be borrowed for free. Mine has current movies, classic movies and entire seasons of many TV shows. What they don't have can, sometimes, be requested via inter library loan.


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

bicker said:


> I'm getting my head together for the summer, when broadcast television offerings normally are much less plentiful. So I did a little comparison of our last Netflix DVD queue from September 2015 and the available offerings on Amazon Prime Video (something we're already paying for). Nothing from our Netflix queue was available on Amazon Prime Video. Now, of course, that's not a fair comparison. I suspect if I compare Netflix streaming to Amazon Prime Video I'll find that they're pretty close to comparable, i.e., both inadequate as compared to Netflix DVD. (Is there a way to check, without subscribing to Netflix?) As such, streaming is still a pale imitator of what Netflix DVD offers and has offered us for decades. And that's really frustrating.


You might as well compare HBO to renting dvds and then declare how HBO is still massively inferior after all this time.

I love how you know the comparison makes no sense and yet that doesn't stop you from reaching a grand conclusion.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

trip1eX said:


> You might as well compare HBO to renting dvds and then declare how HBO is still massively inferior after all this time.
> 
> I love how you know the comparison makes no sense and yet that doesn't stop you from reaching a grand conclusion.


A statement utterly devoid of rational consideration of the customer's experience. I have developers working for me who think like that... that the technical details of the context matter, when all that *really* matters to the customer is what the customer experiences.

I am open to better options. They're just not forthcoming. Streaming is "supposed" to replace DVD rental... so why doesn't it *actually* do so already? What is taking so long for streaming to actually provide a service as rich as DVD rental? The answer is obvious. Streaming is a ruse, intended to make people feel that cord-cutting is a viable alternative to cable (not even DVD rental), while it is so inferior a product that it cannot even compete with the option I generally use for filler over the summer.

In the end, I'm probably going to make it on backlog from the Spring and a few Amazon Prime Video options, because (despite your inane insinuation) I really don't want to subscribe to Netflix DVD this year, but there will be some bottom of the barrel scraping.


----------



## lew (Mar 12, 2002)

bicker said:


> I am open to better options. They're just not forthcoming. Streaming is "supposed" to replace DVD rental... so why doesn't it *actually* do so already? What is taking so long for streaming to actually provide a service as rich as DVD rental? The answer is obvious. Streaming is a ruse, intended to make people feel that cord-cutting is a viable alternative to cable (not even DVD rental), while it is so inferior a product that it cannot even compete with the option I generally use for filler over the summer.
> 
> In the end, I'm probably going to make it on backlog from the Spring and a few Amazon Prime Video options, because (despite your inane insinuation) I really don't want to subscribe to Netflix DVD this year, but there will be some bottom of the barrel scraping.


Streaming is, "sort of, replacing DVD rental. Your mistake is limiting your search to Amazon Prime and Netflix. Look at iTunes, Vudu, Amazon (not Prime). Look at your cable video on demand. Movies are generally available for streaming same day, sometimes even earlier, then DVD release.

Your complaint isn't with availability, its with pricing. Content owners want to be paid. Think of the movies in the unlimited streaming plans as being movies you can find the DVD bargain bin.

Postage costs were impacting Netflix. Movie Studios didn't think they were being properly compensated. Netflix was constantly fighting with the studios over availability and pricing. DVDs were priced to be owned. Netflix transitioned itself. Their focus is now original content streaming.

You, indirectly, make a great point. People who think cord cutting, stream services and unbundling packages will generate large cost savings may be in for a surprise. People who don't want expensive sports packages may be the only big winners.


----------



## b_scott (Nov 27, 2006)

aaronwt said:


> I won't even subscribe to them at full price for a few months. I expect a discount even when I'm subscribing for three months. And with HBO and Starz, that is what I usually get. But I have no desire to subscribe for a year. If they do stop allowing those short term subscriptions then I just won't subscribe to them at all. Even at half price they aren't worth it.


I don't get HBO for the movies, I get it for the TV shows.


----------



## dylanemcgregor (Jan 31, 2003)

bicker said:


> I am open to better options. They're just not forthcoming. Streaming is "supposed" to replace DVD rental... so why doesn't it *actually* do so already? What is taking so long for streaming to actually provide a service as rich as DVD rental? The answer is obvious. Streaming is a ruse, intended to make people feel that cord-cutting is a viable alternative to cable (not even DVD rental), while it is so inferior a product that it cannot even compete with the option I generally use for filler over the summer.


What makes you think streaming is supposed to replace DVD rentals? My assumption has been that the studios see this as a great way to mostly get rid of the rental market, which they were not huge fans of to begin with. Physical media comes complete with the first sale doctrine, which is what made the rental market originally possible. Digital copies don't have the same rules and you'll notice the PPV market has shrinking availability windows for rentals, with much longer availability to "purchase" the streaming version. And just about every move the studios have made in recent years with regards to DVD release windows has been explicitly aimed at getting more people to buy movies instead of rent them, like they did for a few glorious years when the DVD market was new.

That has been the one consequence of the move to streaming that I haven't been particularly happy with. But all in all I still find the options available today a much better value than what I had a decade ago. I cut the cord in 2007 because I moved from a place where cable was included in the rent to a place where the cheapest basic cable plan started at $90 a month (not including internet which was another $100). Since that time I've paid about $20 a month to Netflix (which I'd already been paying anyway), first just for DVDs and then both DVDs and streaming once the streaming launched. At some point I added on Prime, originally because my company was paying for the faster shipping, and then I kept it after they launched Prime Video. So for ~$30 a month I get both a cable TV replacement and a movie rental replacement. Before Netflix I generally spent around $20-$25 a month just on DVD rentals. So for my $5 extra a month I have so much good TV to watch that I can never hope to get through it all. I don't expect the good deal to last forever...but so far it's lasted a lot longer than I thought it would.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

b_scott said:


> I don't get HBO for the movies, I get it for the TV shows.


Yes. The same here. That is why I only subscribe to HBO and Starz for a few months each year. In the Autumn.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

lew said:


> Your complaint isn't with availability, its with pricing. Content owners want to be paid.


And I have no problem with that. And really my comments aren't a complaint: They're a question asking "Where can I get THIS, which I can currently get HERE for THIS AMOUNT, for LESS?" If there is no answer, then the message I get is that "HERE" is the best place to get "THIS". That's what I'm hearing.



dylanemcgregor said:


> What makes you think streaming is supposed to replace DVD rentals?


You can start with the leaders of Netflix.



dylanemcgregor said:


> My assumption has been that the studios see this as a great way to mostly get rid of the rental market, which they were not huge fans of to begin with.


Uh huh, but not to replace rentals.


----------



## lew (Mar 12, 2002)

bicker said:


> And I have no problem with that. And really my comments aren't a complaint: They're a question asking "Where can I get THIS, which I can currently get HERE for THIS AMOUNT, for LESS?" If there is no answer, then the message I get is that "HERE" is the best place to get "THIS". That's what I'm hearing.
> 
> You can start with the leaders of Netflix.
> 
> Uh huh, but not to replace rentals.


Check vudu. They have an extensive number of videos available for rent. Like a traditional dvdvrental you'll pay per title /per viewing window. Your question/comment is about pricing. The movie studios never thought they were being compensated properly for rentals. Streaming rentals cost us $ but generates real income to the studios. The studios hope digital rentals replace rentals of physical media.

I'll speculate a company could offer unlimited streaming of current titles for a flat monthly fee, as long the company paid the movie studios fee of a few dollars every time you viewed it.

I think Redbox is a better value then streaming for rentals.

An analogy. Think of the pay one low monthly price for unlimited streaming as an inexpensive buffet. Think golden corral or the buffet offered by some pizza huts.

edited to add:

There are circumstances where a business can't effectively enforce terms and conditions. Changes are made which allow a business to effectively enforce terms.

Security requirements at airports allow easier enforcement of airline rules prohibiting ticket transfer. Disney use of biometrics made sharing/selling of unused ticket days harder. The transition from physical media to digital makes it easier for movie studios to enforce their policy of not wanting rental of movies sold for personal viewing. Netflix could, and did, send employees to Toys R Us to purchase movies, intended for personal viewing. Refusing to sell new titles to Netflix didn't really stop Netflix from obtaining new titles for their rental inventory. Purchasing a digital copy doesn't make it available for renting. The movie industry is now able to get paid per rental. That increases your cost, and makes monthly fee for unlimited viewing of new titles untenable.

Bicker--My memory is you'll sometimes use the summer months to "binge" watch series you never watched when they were first aired. Take a look at CBS All access. They have entire series available, and not just shows which were originally aired on CBS. Subscribing for a month or two might be worth it.
Take advantage of the one week free trial during a down week.


----------



## dylanemcgregor (Jan 31, 2003)

bicker said:


> Uh huh, but not to replace rentals.


Perhaps I misunderstood your statement. When you said replace, I assumed you meant actually replace, but I might have missed the subtlety in the last half of your statement. But as lew already mentioned, streaming has moved to "sort of replace" rentals on places like Amazon and iTunes, but the content is more expensive _and_ more limited than what we had at most video rental stores or what we used to have with Netflix DVD (Netflix DVD is still pretty good, but their library seems to be much smaller than it was a decade ago). And I think that is what the studios want. They want you to either go to the theater to watch a movie, or pay a similar amount to watch it at home. They definitely don't want customers thinking that a $0.99 rentals is the going rate to watch a movie.

So maybe we agree on that part more than we disagree. Streaming all-you-can-eat services like Netflix are certainly not a perfect substitute for Netflix's DVD by mail service. And PPV options like Amazon are not a very good substitute for your corner video store. A combination of these services _can be_ a great substitute for cable TV as long as you don't mind being a season behind on most shows and don't want to watch sports.


----------



## b_scott (Nov 27, 2006)

aaronwt said:


> Yes. The same here. That is why I only subscribe to HBO and Starz for a few months each year. In the Autumn.


ah I watch HBO shows year round. Girls, Veep, Silicon Valley, Game of Thrones, etc - all in the spring.

Also Last Week Tonight, Real Time, and VICE every week.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

That's fine but despite it all Netflix DVD still provides me better selection and pricing than all these other options. I guess I'm surprised, given some of the other discussions on the forum about streaming and pricing and such that no one else finds that strange.


----------



## dylanemcgregor (Jan 31, 2003)

bicker said:


> That's fine but despite it all Netflix DVD still provides me better selection and pricing than all these other options. I guess I'm surprised, given some of the other discussions on the forum about streaming and pricing and such that no one else finds that strange.


But you subscribe to cable TV, right? I think Netflix DVD is likely the best option as a rental replacement (Redbox might be better for some, but there aren't any of those convenient to me). But I think comparing Netflix streaming to cable TV, Netflix comes off as a tremendous value. It doesn't have as large of a selection overall as cable, but the average quality seems to be better and I don't have to think about recording it ahead of time, or using an on-demand feature that comes with ads, or god forbid actually knowing what day, time , and channel the shows I want to watch are on. One of the strangest developments in the streaming world over the last year or so has been the rise of streaming competitors like SlingTV that both cost more than something like Netflix, and mostly make you watch shows live...and use that last part as a selling feature instead of a bug! There's some shows like Game of Thrones that it's kind of nice to be relatively current on, but that just means watching within a month or two of broadcast, as opposed to a year or two later as I normally do. Besides breaking news I can't think of anything else that I'd ever want to watch live.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

dylanemcgregor said:


> But you subscribe to cable TV, right?


Yes, but as lew recalled, over the summer, it is almost as if I don't... or at least for this comparison it is as if I don't.



dylanemcgregor said:


> I think Netflix DVD is likely the best option as a rental replacement (Redbox might be better for some, but there aren't any of those convenient to me). But I think comparing Netflix streaming to cable TV, Netflix comes off as a tremendous value.


Except it doesn't. Let's fast forward past the summer, to the fall. I have a similar choice to make, but there Netflix streaming is competing against cable television. There is no amount of money I could pay Netflix that would fill our leisure time with programming that [a] we have not yet seen, and * satisfies our discretionary preferences for programming.

I've said for years (almost decades?) that if we were in a coma for three years, these computations would have a much different result. After three years without television, we could bounce between streaming services watching three year old television effectively time-shifted for us by the streaming services, and save loads of money in the process. However, said coma didn't happen, thankfully.

There was a period of time there, roughly from 2005 to about 2008, when television was getting "so good" that there were series we would want to view that we were missing, just because there were so many other choices. We're on our way down from that now, and the few we missed during that period we've caught up with in the intervening eight years.



dylanemcgregor said:



... I don't have to think about ... using an on-demand feature that comes with ads...

Click to expand...

Yet. *


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

dylanemcgregor said:


> I think Netflix DVD is likely the best option as a rental replacement (Redbox might be better for some, but there aren't any of those convenient to me). But I think comparing Netflix streaming to cable TV, Netflix comes off as a tremendous value. It doesn't have as large of a selection overall as cable, but the average quality seems to be better and I don't have to think about recording it ahead of time, or using an on-demand feature that comes with ads, or god forbid actually knowing what day, time , and channel the shows I want to watch are on.


Netflix DVD is slow. At the end, I got about 25% discs that were not playable. A lot of stuff had a long wait list. It was a lot of work and, in the end, you did not get to watch what you want when you wanted to watch it. Streaming is fine as long as everything from your home to the source is working and you like what is being streamed. Right now, neither is compelling for me, but Prime is kind of free considering the other features (I got three $ in credit this week for being patient).



dylanemcgregor said:


> One of the strangest developments in the streaming world over the last year or so has been the rise of streaming competitors like SlingTV that both cost more than something like Netflix, and mostly make you watch shows live...and use that last part as a selling feature instead of a bug! There's some shows like Game of Thrones that it's kind of nice to be relatively current on, but that just means watching within a month or two of broadcast, as opposed to a year or two later as I normally do. Besides breaking news I can't think of anything else that I'd ever want to watch live.


These are for OTA'ers who miss cable content and/or want to be part of the water cooler crowd. Mostly a novelty, I think as currently configured. Eventually, I expect satellite and cable to go this way.


----------



## realityboy (Jun 13, 2003)

For me, Netflix streaming isn't a competitor to cable but rather premium channels like HBO or Showtime. They all have enough originals that I can justify paying the premium for that, but none have very recent movies, and I'm not that interested in Netflix's back catalog of TV shows so it's just a matter of picking the 1 or 2 that I want. 

The Netflix disc plan is my chosen method for rental. It's in a sweet spot where it's more convenient than Redbox and cheaper than Vudu or other on demand services. It's a good compromise.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

wizwor said:


> Netflix DVD is slow. At the end, I got about 25% discs that were not playable. A lot of stuff had a long wait list. It was a lot of work and, in the end, you did not get to watch what you want when you wanted to watch it. Streaming is fine as long as everything from your home to the source is working and you like what is being streamed.


And this points out another thing: "It depends." I never found Netflix DVD to be "slow". My "not playable" rate was closer to 1%. Very little had a long wait list. It was relatively little work, and in the end, we got to watch what we wanted when we wanted. *However*, that may be a reflection of what we wanted to watch and when we wanted to watch it. As alluded to, above, we were mostly filling in the summer with HBO and Showtime series and movies from two and three years ago. (We didn't need the coma, because we never had premium channels until we moved to Georgia and HBO was "forced" on us, and went to a movie theater perhaps twice each year.) I suppose it is possible that that specific set of choices are [a] generally more playable since they weren't old discs stored up in the warehouse for years, * generally more playable since they were discs that often seemed as if Netflix was pressing them (under license) themselves whenever damaged, [c] generally available because they were two or three years old, so, while they had a wait when they were released it generally dissipated within a week or so, [d] generally available because I was especially good at timing my returns of prior discs so that I got many of those series' Disc 1's on day of release and therefore had a golden path to the rest of the series discs.

Incidentally, over the last year and a half, we've used both HBO and Showtime On Demand to catch up on all their original series, and my spouse prefers to purchase the discs for certain Starz original series. This accounts for my general inclination away from Netflix DVD this year. Our filling-the-gaps behaviors over the last year and a half have undercut Netflix DVD's value to us somewhat.*


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

realityboy said:


> For me, Netflix streaming isn't a competitor to cable but rather premium channels like HBO or Showtime. They all have enough originals that I can justify paying the premium for that, but none have very recent movies, and I'm not that interested in Netflix's back catalog of TV shows so it's just a matter of picking the 1 or 2 that I want.
> 
> The Netflix disc plan is my chosen method for rental. It's in a sweet spot where it's more convenient than Redbox and cheaper than Vudu or other on demand services. It's a good compromise.


When my older sister moved to a place with cable in the 70s, she had HBO. We would sleep over her place on weekends and eat pizza or mcdonalds in front of really good movies. By the time I had my own place and cable, HBO had already begun showing prime time sporting events. By the time I left cable, HBO was running sports programming, original shows, and a lot of other stuff I did not care to watch -- never mind pay for.

During our first go at cord cutting (1990-2000ish), we discovered tape and disc rentals. Around 2009 we signed on to Netflix. When Netflix split disc from stream, we went with stream. In September, I got the $70 Prime deal for Christmas shopping. Last month, I dropped Netflix. Going forward, I see me sampling various services for short periods of time with lapses where I subscribe to nothing. My last 'must see tv' was AMC (Mad Men, Breaking Bad). While I could use Sling TV to watch AMC, I binged these on Netflix.


----------



## dylanemcgregor (Jan 31, 2003)

bicker said:


> Except it doesn't. Let's fast forward past the summer, to the fall. I have a similar choice to make, but there Netflix streaming is competing against cable television. There is no amount of money I could pay Netflix that would fill our leisure time with programming that [a] we have not yet seen, and * satisfies our discretionary preferences for programming.
> 
> I've said for years (almost decades?) that if we were in a coma for three years, these computations would have a much different result. After three years without television, we could bounce between streaming services watching three year old television effectively time-shifted for us by the streaming services, and save loads of money in the process. However, said coma didn't happen, thankfully.
> 
> There was a period of time there, roughly from 2005 to about 2008, when television was getting "so good" that there were series we would want to view that we were missing, just because there were so many other choices. We're on our way down from that now, and the few we missed during that period we've caught up with in the intervening eight years.*


*

There's definitely a period of adjustment, but for us at least it wasn't nearly 3 years long. When we first cut the cord Netflix streaming didn't exist yet and Amazon had only recently started offering PPV titles that we could download to TiVo. So what we did was up our DVD disc plan to the 4 at a time,and buy Season Passes to 1 or 2 shows from Amazon. We used the DVDs to catch up on old shows that we'd never seen from HBO and the like, and the SPs for the shows we'd been watching that we would have missed the most. During this period I don't think our TV watching went down at all and we only rarely felt like we didn't have anything to watch.

About a year in, Netflix streaming launched on a device we already owned and since we were already disc customers it was free to give it a try. At first it seemed like there wasn't all that much on there, but it was still enough that there were always a few things we were interested in whenever we sat down. There were a lot of times that we felt like Netflix was running out of shows we wanted to watch, but they always ended up getting a bunch of new stuff right as we were finishing up the last few episodes of the previous show. And for the last couple of years there's been enough of a backlog that the feeling is more how are we ever going to watch all of this stuff.

We watch what I think is a lot of TV, about 2 hours most nights. And our tastes are mostly of the middle-brow "prestige drama" type. We don't watch a lot of sitcoms or reality TV or procedurals...and it seems like Netflix is well-catered to our tastes (although it could just be that it knows our tastes well enough that it only shows us the things it thinks we'll like). If you watch a lot more or different TV than we do, or always had the full premium cable package so that you don't have many shows that you've missed over the years that you'd like to eventually watch, then Netflix and the like are probably not the best option for you. And if that's the case, that's great. For the system to work we need people willing to pay premium prices to see shows when they come out instead of waiting a year for them to hit the bargain bin of streaming providers. *


----------



## dylanemcgregor (Jan 31, 2003)

My DVD experience has been closer to Bicker's. Most discs play fine, I probably have problems with 3-4% of them, which could be partly due to my DVD player not being the best. They used to be incredibly fast on the turn-around, sending something out on Monday meant you'd have a new disc in hand by Wednesday. They aren't that fast anymore, which I think is partly their fault, but probably the bigger fault is that the mailman doesn't seem to pick up mail from our box everyday, so sometimes things sit in there for a day or two. But since we pay for both streaming and discs, the extra time doesn't really bother me that much. There's always something we're in the middle of watching that we can watch if a DVD takes longer to get to us.


----------



## bicker (Nov 9, 2003)

dylanemcgregor said:


> We watch what I think is a lot of TV, about 2 hours most nights.


That may be an important differentiator. If there are no evening events at church that week, and we don't have friends over for an evening get together, then we'll consume about 23 hours of television a week... perhaps a bit more if you count the cooking shows we watch while cooking dinner.


----------



## dylanemcgregor (Jan 31, 2003)

bicker said:


> That may be an important differentiator. If there are no evening events at church that week, and we don't have friends over for an evening get together, then we'll consume about 23 hours of television a week... perhaps a bit more if you count the cooking shows we watch while cooking dinner.


That's probably not too far off where we are. I wasn't counting the news that we've been watching in the morning, or The Daily Show that I sometimes watch during lunch. And if we're not doing something on the weekend we'll often times stream a movie during the day and still watch 2 hours of TV that night, so our average daily could easily be 2.5hrs a day vs. the little bit more than 3 hours a day you do. But after staring at a computer monitor all day, I find that too much more than the couple hours of TV we already watch ends up hurting my eyes, so I try to switch to a non-screen activity before going to bed.


----------

