  digiblur
Premium Member
join:2002-06-03
Louisiana |
digiblur
Premium Member
2011-Jul-11 6:30 pm
Verizon icon?What does this have to do with Verizon? | |
|
 | | |
Mert
Anon
2011-Jul-11 6:54 pm
Re: Verizon icon?no, Netflix icon | |
|
 MemphisPCGuyTaking Care Business
Premium Member
join:2004-05-09
Memphis, TN |
As long the price stays low...... it's going to take the loss of quite a bit to make it not worth it, while allowng me to have a library on tap that doesn't require local storage and all that entails.
Isn't there some form of "fair market value" placed on programming? Can Hollywood single out Netflix to pay higher prices than other outlets and not be dragged into court ? | |
|
1 recommendation |
How to take billions and turn them into millionsHard for the content providers to take a billion dollar revenue stream they have today with existing TV distribution and turn it into a million dollar revenue stream business model that Netflix expects to be entitled to.
Is this really driving the costs up or rationalizing the business model that balances the ROI?
Do content providers really care who delivers it as long as they get roughly the same revenue stream? | |
|
|  Thaler
Premium Member
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA |
Thaler
Premium Member
2011-Jul-11 7:17 pm
Re: How to take billions and turn them into millionssaid by FactChecker:Do content providers really care who delivers it as long as they get roughly the same revenue stream?
Why go with the same old revenue stream when you can theoretically get 10x more of it? And simultaneously kill the online video business, but still...it's a shot at more money! | |
|
|  FFH5
Premium Member
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ |
to FactChecker
said by FactChecker:Hard for the content providers to take a billion dollar revenue stream they have today with existing TV distribution and turn it into a million dollar revenue stream business model that Netflix expects to be entitled to.
Is this really driving the costs up or rationalizing the business model that balances the ROI?
Do content providers really care who delivers it as long as they get roughly the same revenue stream?
Content providers won't sit idly by and watch Netflix take business away from the very well paying cable & telco companies and sell their content at a discount price. As cable and telco lose customers and end up paying less for content, the content companies will want more from Netflix, Google, Apple, etc. to make up the shortfall. Those who think Netflix won't be greatly raising prices for bypassing traditional outlets are in for a rude shock. | |
|
| | Thaler
Premium Member
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA |
Thaler
Premium Member
2011-Jul-11 8:06 pm
Re: How to take billions and turn them into millionssaid by FFH5:Those who think Netflix won't be greatly raising prices for bypassing traditional outlets are in for a rude shock.
And so to it would fall the online video market. No offense, but Netflix isn't exactly a super-premium service. You *might* have the content you want to watch on there, but at the low price point, it's worth keeping around for entertainment. Start bumping the monthly price up to $20-30 for a half-ass online video delivery attempt and just watch subscription numbers plummet. | |
|
| | | Ubee E31U2V1
(Software) pfSense
Netgear WNR3500L
|
Re: How to take billions and turn them into millionsits not worth responding to him. He is the mindset that the studios like. They want you to go back to the extremely profitable traditional outlets. I for one will never buy another DVD, and am very un-likely to buy any kind of physical media anywhere in the near future.
A) physical media takes up physical space exponentially greater than digital media
B) the content that is usually sold is not worth it. The DVD cost about 3 cents, and the actual content is worthless.
I am not for pirating, but look what steam did to the video game market. When companies embraced it, it took off, and game piracy plummeted a ton. There used to be dozens of top level warez groups that would put out games, now there are only 3.
If the studios would embrace the future instead of fearing it, they could figure out that there is money to be made. Maybe not as much as they used to get, but that is the way the economy works. I will never buy any physical media again. I have all my games digital, I have all my music digital, and I want all my video digital too, and I will get it that way, regardless of what greedy investors want. This is almost akin to the VHS fight that sony put up, and then it happened to DVDs, and then it happened when Itunes went live(OMG Digital music, i dont have to pay for a shitty CD if i just want 1 song!!!). It will take time, but netflix will more than likely file for status as a media outlet like cable, and will get similar deals to them. I doubt that content companies will kill netflix altogether, and if they do, i can bet that there will be a lot of people not supporting mediocre content. | |
|
| | | | | |
Re: How to take billions and turn them into millionssaid by Chubbysumo:I am not for pirating, but look what steam did to the video game market. When companies embraced it, it took off, and game piracy plummeted a ton. There used to be dozens of top level warez groups that would put out games, now there are only 3. That is exactly how it worked out for me. I used to have no issue with pirating games if they were single player only or largely single player. After I discovered steam it was awesome. Not only would I never lose a CD Key again but I could install my games wherever I went and keep the saves etc. with them as well. Plus I no longer have to decide between crappy game A and crappy game B that were the only 2 games left at a local Best Buy. If the Movie market would wisen up and realize it is their business practices that are causing so many people to be file sharers then maybe they could reclaim some business. | |
|
| | | | | Rekrul
join:2007-04-21
Milford, CT |
Rekrul
Member
2011-Jul-12 3:13 am
Re: How to take billions and turn them into millionssaid by PinkyThePig:That is exactly how it worked out for me. I used to have no issue with pirating games if they were single player only or largely single player. After I discovered steam it was awesome. Not only would I never lose a CD Key again but I could install my games wherever I went and keep the saves etc. Provided it's on a system with Internet access. Try to install them on a system that's not connected and you're SOL. If Valve ever decides that you've violated their terms of service, your entire Steam-crippled game collection becomes useless. If Steam ever goes down, you'll lose all your games. That "promise" that Valve will release an offline patch doesn't mean a thing unless they're willing to put it in writing. And if Valve is ever sold to another company, THEY will have the final say about which games get supported and which ones don't. Also, when Valve decides to jack up the system requirements for Steam, you'd better be ready to upgrade your system (if you haven't already) or you'll suddenly find that you can no longer play your games. Did you know that retail packages of Half-Life II list the minimum version of Windows as 98, but you can't actually run it on Windows 98 anymore because they changed Steam's requirements? The same thing will happen when they change the requirments to Windows 7. Anyone still using XP is going to be forced to upgrade if they want to continue playing the games that they "bought". | |
|
| | | | | | Thaler
Premium Member
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA |
Thaler
Premium Member
2011-Jul-12 4:15 am
Re: How to take billions and turn them into millionssaid by Rekrul:Provided it's on a system with Internet access. Try to install them on a system that's not connected and you're SOL.
Use a backup install copy from an internet-connected computer. Problem solved. Also, if your primary computer(s) are not internet connected, then Steam really isn't a service for you. Having a 56k internet connection requirement isn't a big thing to ask of a gaming rig. said by Rekrul:If Steam ever goes down, you'll lose all your games.
Offline mode. It will continue to operate for some time without syncing with Steam servers, but I really doubt Steam will be out of commission for a time period of greater than a month. said by Rekrul:Did you know that retail packages of Half-Life II list the minimum version of Windows as 98, but you can't actually run it on Windows 98 anymore because they changed Steam's requirements?
If your gaming rig today is operating on Windows 98, you're already doing it wrong. Requiring XP or greater basically covers almost all the target audience. And if the OS really is make-or-break...then pay the $30 and get a new copy. This is all assuming there's absolutely no work-around for Steam on Windows 98. I will agree that the games you purchase from Steam are nowhere near as openly usable as those you purchase from GOG (Good Old Games - DRM free). However, since gaming studios aren't willing to go that route entirely just yet, putting up with unobtrusive DRM will do for now. I will gladly trade my nonexistant Steam troubles in exchange for eliminating my reliance on physical media & CD-keys. | |
|
| | | | | Thaler |
to Chubbysumo
said by Chubbysumo:its not worth responding to him. He is the mindset that the studios like. They want you to go back to the extremely profitable traditional outlets. I for one will never buy another DVD, and am very un-likely to buy any kind of physical media anywhere in the near future.
A) physical media takes up physical space exponentially greater than digital media
B) the content that is usually sold is not worth it. The DVD cost about 3 cents, and the actual content is worthless.
Personally, I only buy Blurays - and only when they're on sale for $5 or less a movie. Otherwise, the product is simply too overpriced. That being said, if there ever was to be a Steam-esque service for movie media, they'd rapidly make bank by customers. Unfortunately, the closest thing we get to that are 1-year rental "Digital Copy" permissions and/or 3-year rentals from online sales services. Again, if they insist on DRM-ing the hell out of the content, then at least guarantee unconditional access to my purchased files. If I can buy a game on Steam, wait 3 years, and then install it...why are movie files/rights that substantially different? | |
|
| |
still a bargainEven at $30 a month, Netflix would still be cheap. And of course, the users will cut their final strand of cable TV in order to save a few bucks.
Has no one in corporate(ex; copyright mafia) learned that removing choice and jacking the prices way up, will make people drop your sorry ass in an instant to be able to afford food.
"On demand"(low cost streaming) is great.
On a "set schedule"(cable tv) ,with a million useless channels, is ignored and no longer subscribed too. DVR it? Except when a glitch(or the box enforces a certain delete date) erases all that content. | |
|
| | |
28619103 (banned)
Member
2011-Jul-11 6:56 pm
Re: still a bargainsaid by zalternate:Even at $30 a month, Netflix would still be cheap. And of course, the users will cut their final strand of cable TV in order to save a few bucks.
It would be great for Netflix too if they get the network for free and the content for below all traditional TV players. | |
|
| | | |
talz13
Member
2011-Jul-12 11:22 am
Re: still a bargainHow are the network connections that netflix is paying for "free"? | |
|
| | |
to zalternate
$30 per month, no commercials, and I get to pick what I watch? that would still be better than cable. Even at $50 per month its better than most cable offerings because of those 2 things:commercials, and on demand. | |
|
| | Mark F1
join:2007-08-01
Fort Wayne, IN |
Re: still a bargainThe networks would rather we watched cheap reality junk, which is why many people seek out older, well-made shows- over the internet and on DVD, from Netflix, Blockbuster, Amazon, Hulu, TV.com, AOL TV (the only place to watch WKRP In Cincinnati) etc. I remember when TVland, and similar channels, carried real classic TV. And, check out » www.tvshowsondvd.comPeter Falk's recent death reminded me that Columbo was far better than most shows on TV today, which is why more and more people are tuning out The World's Worst Skateboard Accidents, in favor of classic, well-done, scripted dramas and comedies from television's past. » www.goodtv.com has great examples of that. It's all about control. That's why they want to stifle Netflix and other services that let us watch what we want, instead of whatever stuff they want us to watch. Mark F. | |
|
| | |  MrMasterRum Connoisseur
Premium Member
join:2000-12-16
St Thomas, VI |
MrMaster
Premium Member
2011-Jul-12 7:54 am
Re: still a bargainDon't know if this is acurate or not but I do watch old shows. Currently going through Mission Impossible (1960's tv series) and the original twilight zone series.
Love Netflix. Hopefully they can show some type of collusion and take these companies to court.
This is more to do with online distribution rather than Netflix but does USA really think I am going to wait 30 days to watch a new Burn Notice Episode with commercials on Hulu? Or for that matter, actually WATCH it when airs?! Give me a break. | |
|
| gaforces (banned)United We Stand, Divided We Fall
join:2002-04-07
Santa Cruz, CA |
to zalternate
said by zalternate:Even at $30 a month, Netflix would still be cheap. And of course, the users will cut their final strand of cable TV in order to save a few bucks.
Has no one in corporate(ex; copyright mafia) learned that removing choice and jacking the prices way up, will make people drop your sorry ass in an instant to be able to afford food.
"On demand"(low cost streaming) is great.
On a "set schedule"(cable tv) ,with a million useless channels, is ignored and no longer subscribed too. DVR it? Except when a glitch(or the box enforces a certain delete date) erases all that content.
The price was already bumped up not too long ago. I'm afraid that if it goes up again I will cancel the service. | |
|
| |
JasonOD
Anon
2011-Jul-11 6:53 pm
Time for netflix to put on some big-boy pants....And pay back the true enablers of their success, the content owners. It's astonishing that they've come as far as they have since their entire business model is built upon entities that don't like them. | |
|
| Thaler
Premium Member
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA |
Thaler
Premium Member
2011-Jul-11 7:15 pm
Re: Time for netflix to put on some big-boy pants....They do pay them back. The problem is that they want to impose a dated & broken means of business rather than actually change with the times. These studios fear change, and this is just a move to price the service out of business. | |
|
| |  spewakR.I.P Dadkins
Premium Member
join:2001-08-07
Elk Grove, CA ·Consolidated Com..
|
spewak
Premium Member
2011-Jul-11 7:44 pm
Re: Time for netflix to put on some big-boy pants....said by Thaler:They do pay them back. The problem is that they want to impose a dated & broken and highly DRM'ed means of business
To add to your fine post: | |
|
| | | |
JasonOD to Thaler
Anon
2011-Jul-11 7:51 pm
to Thaler
Charging 10 cents on the dollar because it's 'internet delivered' content that netflix can afford to push ad-free can't be expected to continue. | |
|
| | | Thaler
Premium Member
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA |
Thaler
Premium Member
2011-Jul-11 8:03 pm
Re: Time for netflix to put on some big-boy pants....said by JasonOD :Charging 10 cents on the dollar because it's 'internet delivered' content that netflix can afford to push ad-free can't be expected to continue.
So increasing these costs to a dollar per dollar earned (the 10x these studios are proposing) would be a sustainable business model?  Put it this way, without Netflix, these studios would be looking at a potential $0 from their online monthly rentals. Hell, if they truly got their way, all online video streaming would be stopped, and everyone would only have the choice of $20 a DVD, $30 a Bluray off store shelves. | |
|
| | | |  TCub
Premium Member
join:2008-09-03
Olmsted Falls, OH |
TCub
Premium Member
2011-Jul-11 9:46 pm
Re: Time for netflix to put on some big-boy pants....quote:
and everyone would only have the choice of $20 a DVD, $30 a Bluray off store shelves.
Fuck that. $20 DVD, $30 Bluray, or I'll download that shit for free. I'm not for piracy by any means - in fact I find people who pirate things to be pretty god damn annoying.. however, you make it difficult for me to enjoy your shit and guess what? Now, I'm not saying 'oh I want all the content I want for $10 a month! it's my right!' .. I do have a pretty large iTunes library (45+ movies and over 500 TV shows) and I gladly payed for all of it and I will continue to do so. Just make it easy for me to get your content and I'll gladly pay!!!! As for DRM, I'm sure iTunes has something on it but it's never bothered me. I've always got an iOS device (iPhone 3G, 3GS, 4, iPad, iPad 2) and my MacBook Pro and I take responsibility and back it up.. it hasn't been an issue for about 3 years so far so... Better than watching three hours of "FBI WARNING" screens then commercials before getting to the movie.... | |
|
| | | | | Thaler
Premium Member
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA |
Thaler
Premium Member
2011-Jul-12 4:18 am
Re: Time for netflix to put on some big-boy pants....said by TCub:As for DRM, I'm sure iTunes has something on it but it's never bothered me.
Unfortunately, I own a wide spectrum of hardware (XBox, Windows, Android) that all have their own versions of DRM. Therefore, purchasing online for anything other than sheer convenience is almost a guarantee that it will not work on something I want it to, lol. | |
|
| | | | | | TCub
Premium Member
join:2008-09-03
Olmsted Falls, OH |
TCub
Premium Member
2011-Jul-12 5:16 am
Re: Time for netflix to put on some big-boy pants....Okay, I'll buy that. It works for me personally though because the platform I using is OS X, Mac which is something I don't foresee not using anytime soon! Otherwise it would be kind of silly. | |
|
| | |
to JasonOD
Oh please. The content owners are nothing but whores looking for the highest bidder. They'll sell to whoever has the cash while keeping their revenue stream similar. The idea that any of this crap is 'premium' content is an idea that has been perpetuated over and over but people aren't falling for it any more. $7.99 a month I'll keep it around for giggles but much more and I'll drop the whole shebang as 99.99% isn't worth a penny. | |
|
| | 88615298 (banned)
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness |
88615298 (banned)
Member
2011-Jul-12 4:27 am
Re: Time for netflix to put on some big-boy pants....said by pabster:Oh please. The content owners are nothing but whores looking for the highest bidder. Yep. If Netflix is the highest bidder then they'll sell to Netflix. The studios don't hate Netflix they just want MORE than what Netflix is currently wanting to pay. If Netflix offered twice as much for Tranformers 3 than say HBO or Showtime or whatever. Guess what Netflix gets Transformers 3. Studios are going to take the money who offers the most. | |
|
| | | Thaler
Premium Member
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA |
Thaler
Premium Member
2011-Jul-12 12:57 pm
Re: Time for netflix to put on some big-boy pants....said by 88615298:Yep. If Netflix is the highest bidder then they'll sell to Netflix...Studios are going to take the money who offers the most.
I don't believe it's a case of this situation - no service is offering more money for content than Netflix (and actually, no serious service is really competing with them on the online streaming subscription either). The studios basically just feel that their services are worth much more than Netflix is currently offering. If Netflix doesn't pony up, then they're more than willing to walk home with their ball and forgo online streaming services entirely. | |
|
| | | | | |
TEKSAVVVYYY
Anon
2011-Jul-14 3:39 pm
Re: Time for netflix to put on some big-boy pants....the alternative of piracy is cheaper! | |
|
| | | | | Thaler
Premium Member
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA |
Thaler
Premium Member
2011-Jul-14 6:13 pm
Re: Time for netflix to put on some big-boy pants....What's cheaper than free? | |
|
 EdrickI aspire to tell the story of a lifetime
Premium Member
join:2004-09-11
San Diego, CA
2 recommendations |
Edrick
Premium Member
2011-Jul-11 7:08 pm
Time to startSending the Execs nasty letters at the production studios telling them how freaking retarded they are and informing them if they screw with things like that we'll just go back to pirating. | |
|
axus
join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC
1 recommendation |
axus
Member
2011-Jul-11 7:24 pm
Not as much leverage when you suddenly have competitionThe only reason studios can raise their prices 10-fold is they don't have any competition. I'm not sure what can be done about that. I think Netflix has done more to decrease video piracy than anything else. | |
|
| | |
Re: Not as much leverage when you suddenly have competition"...The only reason studios can raise their prices 10-fold is they don't have any competition..."
The studios make the movies and television shows. There are not going to be 2 manufacturers of the same movie. That would be like having the Susan Company competing against the Sam Company to make the exact same automobile and retail it through their own dealerships.
The studios compete against each other. Disney creates movies that come out at the same time as ones from Warner Brothers. You decide that cute cartoon characters(Disney) are more important than high tech assassination plots(Warner Brothers) on a particular Saturday night. You buy your ticket for the Disney film and Warner Brothers groans from loosing that revenue. On that day you had a choice from competitors. | |
|
 HB61Maru Maru Mori Mori
Premium Member
join:2011-06-21
00000 |
HB61
Premium Member
2011-Jul-11 7:48 pm
Studios should be careful what they ask forFor many people, Netflix is getting to be an essential service like gasoline and they will cut other entertainment to keep it. The studios will just end up swapping dollars if Netflix prices go up. People will simply drop HBO, Starz, Skinemax or other CATV tiers or drop those services all together.
Or Netflix will accelerate purchase or production of their own programming, making them Netflix exclusives. | |
|
|
••• |
| |
PiracyWell, with the increasing restrictions being set forth against Netflix and similar services, the studios should expect an equivalent increase in piracy. I for one currently obtain most of my video materials legally through Netflix. However I will steer back towards Piracy if forced to by A: exponentially increasing prices to/from Netflix or B: upcoming lack of content provided to/from Netflix. | |
|
|
•••••••• |
| |
cyber
Anon
2011-Jul-11 7:54 pm
netflix need to invest in ther own ispnetflix needs to buyout the isp's | |
|
| | |
Re: netflix need to invest in ther own ispThat would require a massive price increase for Netflix. And which old infrastructure would they buy and how would the get the money to upgrade to FTTH(Fiber To The Home) to every single location? Look at all the work Google is doing to get one medium sized city equipped with FTTH for all locations, and the money they have to spend to do it. You are talking about spending at least 2,000 times as much for the entire USA. | |
|
| |
ZeddicusToo
Anon
2011-Jul-11 8:13 pm
One (at least) problem with that...The studios have nothing that's essential to anyone's existence. And MTV has been irrelevant for decades. (I want my MTV... to just go away and die already.) Pay more? I'm already thinking about never again buying anything from "Hollywood" and their ilk at the current prices. I'm currently trying Netflix for 6 months or so--a good service I suppose. But pay more than $10/mo. for anything I've already seen a bunch of times? I don't think so. Even if they got a lot more new stuff, well, that might make them worth as much as $15/mo... to someone who doesn't mind sending money to a bunch of thieves and ne'er-do-wells (the "studios", I mean... not Netflix). | |
|
| MemphisPCGuyTaking Care Business
Premium Member
join:2004-05-09
Memphis, TN |
Re: One (at least) problem with that...If you rely on Netfix / OTA for about 8 months as your primary movie/tv entertainment you will find new movies you have never seen before  | |
|
| |
anon6
Anon
2011-Jul-11 8:17 pm
greedits all about greed! | |
|
| |
Chuckem
Anon
2011-Jul-11 8:33 pm
Why I'll Ditch ThemThe content providers had better be careful. I tried an experiment and went without my DirecTV for a month voluntarily. What I found was that I didn't need to pay $64.00 a month to watch 12 channels. I ditched DirecTV and I'll ditch any means of content that I deem unreasonably priced. I currently use Netflix but if their price gets too high I'll ditch them. With the advent of cheap professional digital movie cameras and post-processing computers I can watch a lot of good, innovative and inexpensive content over the internet and be more entertained than watching some of these 300 million dollar "blockbusters" that hollywood puts out. | |
|
| | |
Re: Why I'll Ditch ThemThat is a great point. The new studios will not be putting out BluRay or DVD disks. They will not be shown in movie theaters. They will not have giant expensive premieres. Content will flow from them through internet channels. Since the new studios never had all the old style overhead, they will not be paying the pension costs for all the old style overhead. The newest music created outside traditional labels is internet distributed. No expensive tours requiring flying to and fro. No promoters to pay. No arenas to fill with people. Now if we can get an internet infrastructure everywhere in the USA that supports decent bitrates for streaming, downloading, and uploading content content. | |
|
| | | |
Re: Why I'll Ditch Themsaid by davidhoffman:That is a great point. The new studios will not be putting out BluRay or DVD disks. They will not be shown in movie theaters. They will not have giant expensive premieres. Content will flow from them through internet channels. Since the new studios never had all the old style overhead, they will not be paying the pension costs for all the old style overhead. The newest music created outside traditional labels is internet distributed. No expensive tours requiring flying to and fro. No promoters to pay. No arenas to fill with people. Now if we can get an internet infrastructure everywhere in the USA that supports decent bitrates for streaming, downloading, and uploading content content.
which means people without a viable internet option get left behind even farther | |
|
Kamus
join:2011-01-27
El Paso, TX |
Kamus
Member
2011-Jul-11 9:09 pm
Can't stop the internet...Sure, they can try to mitigate the damage with caps if you are an ISP, and with outrageous prices if you are the content owners. For now...
Can't stop reality, as much as they try they can't change the fact that the internet has made their old business models obsolete.
If they keep capping like that, they'll go out of business even faster than they should, someone will find a way to get a new way to connect to the masses, the technology is available, and will only keep getting faster and faster.
So it doesn't matter what they do, there's really not a whole lot they'll be able to limit us with once gigabit connections become so cheap, that we don't even need to get it from them.
As far as the content industry goes, just how long do they think they can be the middle men?
What happens when companies like Netflix, that compete in a truly open market start becoming content owners?
They don't stand a chance. Netflix is just the start. In a few years, when bandwidth becomes even more abundant there are going to be a lot more opportunities for companies like that.
Just look at companies like justin.tv who specialize on live tv and do an amazing job at it. | |
|
| |
prices go up, guess what happens?that market which can no longer afford legal alternatives does what....? expect itunes and others to follow along with the pack.. afterall, they really wanna see if the isps will do what they say they'll do... put themselves at risk of NOT having customers..
what else is new... fear mongering is a new 21st century -ing..
20th cenury was "-ism"s... | |
|
 NOCManMadMacHatter
Premium Member
join:2004-09-30
Colorado Springs, CO |
NOCMan
Premium Member
2011-Jul-11 10:00 pm
IdiocyLook at Netflix's profit reports, they do not have the money to absorb the costs so it will be passed onto the consumers.
Face it Studios, Netflix is doing you a service, they have a client for everything including tv's built into refrigerator doors. Just Joking, but hey that would be cool.
Studios streaming their own crap would just product a plethora of crap that would not play on 1/10th of 1% off what netflix is capable.
They should be paying Netflix for being so awesome when it comes to getting people to use streaming. | |
|
|  r81984Fair and Balanced
Premium Member
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX |
r81984
Premium Member
2011-Jul-11 10:23 pm
Re: Idiocysaid by NOCMan:They should be paying Netflix for being so awesome Lol | |
|
NyNexit
join:2009-11-01
Huntington, NY |
NyNexit
Member
2011-Jul-12 12:40 am
in an ideal worldAll ISP's would be classified "title 2" carriers
The positive ramifications for consumers are endless... | |
|
mob (banned)On the next level..
join:2000-10-07
San Jose, CA |
mob (banned)
Member
2011-Jul-12 12:52 am
WellThe studios and producers of content need to make compelling, attention grabbing content before they can charge more.
Right now the studios are coasting on fumes from the dried out husks of their older material. In the last 10 years I have seen more content that is not worth watching than is worth watching.
Netflix is a bit overpriced already, in some regards. | |
|
 dvd536as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium Member
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ |
dvd536
Premium Member
2011-Jul-12 2:25 am
Eventually. . . . .Netflix will cost the same as cable with the content owners holding all the best cards! | |
|
Rekrul
join:2007-04-21
Milford, CT |
Rekrul
Member
2011-Jul-12 3:14 am
Another example...Just another example of the Entertainment industry trying to stifle innovation and keep new technology out the public's hands. | |
|
|
|
·
