dslreports logo
spacer
1
spacer
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer

view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2014-01-24 12:02:56: Speaking on yesterday's earnings conference call, Netflix CEO Reed Hastings confirmed that the company is going to be tinkering with some additional pricing options that charge users more or less money for accounts that provide multiple streams or HD.. ..

decifal

join:2007-03-10
Bon Aqua, TN
kudos:1

Still

Still not an option to use netflix at home via ATT/Verizon data cap wise :-/ But hey, areas where landline broadband is available netflix will get to fight with the other streaming providers for customers!!

RichInCT

@google.com

Re: Still

said by decifal:

Still not an option to use netflix at home via ATT/Verizon data cap wise :-/ But hey, areas where landline broadband is available netflix will get to fight with the other streaming providers for customers!!

said by decifal:

Still not an option to use netflix at home via ATT/Verizon data cap wise :-/ But hey, areas where landline broadband is available netflix will get to fight with the other streaming providers for customers!!

My mom uses Netflix as well as network show streaming over ATT U-Verse's cheapest offering and has never had any issues with caps or speed.
elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA

Re: Still

Nor do the vast majority of Netflix subscribers on capped plans, but it still would be nice for Netflix to buy out the caps.

PapaMidnight

join:2009-01-13
Baltimore, MD

Re: Still

Let me understand this: Are you saying that it would be nice for Netflix to pay ISPs to send their content with no effect on your monthly cap, or are you saying that it would be nice for ISPs to not impose a monthly cap on their users? I ask as these are two different things, and the first is in support of the multi-tiered internet which is the very thing those of us in favor of network neutrality are trying to avoid.

Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA

1 recommendation

Re: Still

I've got to agree. That would be a horrible situation.

From the content provider viewpoint: It would favor big companies over small ones. A small Netflix-competitor startup wouldn't have the cash to pay to all of the ISPs to let their content be cap-free. This would mean that large companies would become entrenched without fear of smaller competition.

From the user viewpoint: It would be fuzzy just what counted and didn't count towards your caps. Netflix doesn't, but does YouTube? What about Amazon VOD? Vidmeo? Hulu? iTunes? What if you switch providers (being lucky enough to live in an area with more than one ISP)? Does the new ISP have a different set of "cap free" services than the old one?

This type of system would just result in large companies pushing out small startups and customers getting overcharged due to cap confusion.
--
-Jason Levine
elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·EarthLink

1 recommendation

Yes, it would be better if Netflix paid, on behalf of its customers, to assure delivery of their streams, without meter anxiety, rather than having the ISP customer suffer performance issues or worry about their cap.

Netflix has the power to negotiate really great terms for priority delivery - the consumer does not.

The 30% of us who don't use any volume at all, who don't care for Netflix or equivalent, shouldn't be paying for the extra capital costs to support the new demand rate, or the ISP's cost to link up with OpenConnect.

Wired caps are a temporary phenomenon, which will be raised and eventually fade away in the next decade, but they'll be replaced by something else for Karl to complain about, i.e. IPV6-based per-device (or basket) charges, or SIM-card / Cablecard-IV authentication and charge for every connection.

Wireless caps will be with us for a very long time, so cap buy-outs (or co-pays) will be critical for video streaming products to succeed.
jjeffeory

join:2002-12-04
USA

Re: Still

Maybe you 3% should just get a special "grandma" tier that's super cheap and so the rest of us can be out of your hair and actually use the internet.

buzz_4_20

join:2003-09-20
Limestone, ME
Reviews:
·Vestalink
·Pioneer Wireless

1 recommendation

Re: Still

Doesn't everyone understand that IF Netflix were to pay the ransom to be held outside the cap that the cost would go right into a price hike?
Also, Netflix is paying for bandwidth... on their end and customers on this end... The ONLY place to lay blame is with the ISP...
TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH

Re: Still

How doe Netflix pay on the customer's end? Netflix doesn't pay part of anyone's bill. They pay for their own CDN charges and that is all. As far as the blame with the ISPs- again Netflix sets the standards to peer with them, it's not the ISPs fault that Netlix only requires a 10gig-e link. If Netflix wants more- they should pay more to peer. It's just another Cogent issue just this time with a CDN.
elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·EarthLink
Thanks. We do have that tier ($15/month, 2M/1M), and I'm the first to stipulate that remarkably, they're able to offer it without the cap they proposed a couple years ago.

But don't flatter yourself. The low-volume users are about 30%, not 3%, and that doesn't count the non-subscribers who simply aren't interested or are unwilling to pay the market rate for service.

It is actually you who needs to get out of the way, and not overconsume common resources, so the rest of us, who don't, can access when we so choose.
Randamin

join:2010-11-29
Laredo, TX

Re: Still

The cap on that particular tier known as internet essentials was merely optional to save $5 but would limit the use to 5GB which to me is not worth the savings.
elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA

Re: Still

Actually, the first offering was for a $15 tier, not the $5 savings, but Karl and his merry band of populists shouted it down before we could even buy it.

The current offering ("Everyday Low Price Internet") is $15 without a cap.

Qumahlin
Never Enough Time
Premium,MVM
join:2001-10-05
united state
It's odd you would think wireless caps will be with us for a long time, when as time moves forward there is less and less of a need for them, whereas you think wired caps will eventually fade away. It would make more sense for you to think both will fade away.

Regardless, no streaming provider is going to pay for your wireless overage caps, nor should they. Video streaming products will still succeed and either the providers will change or the consumer will shell out more money. Either way you thinking the streaming provider is going to pay is simply not going to happen. Ever.
TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH

Re: Still

Google is a streaming provider and indeed does pay.
elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·EarthLink
There is a fundamental difference in capacity potential between wired and wireless. The former approaches infinity, the latter has real limits.

You watch.

As AT&T and Verizon offer up toll-free wireless video options, you will see ESPN, NFL/NBA/MLB/NHL and Nascar step up.

What you may misunderstand, is that they're not paying your "steep" overages, they're buying them out in bulk, for their traffic to you, for a penny on the dollar, in exchange for your patronage.

Netflix will fight for a while, but eventually, they'll make a deal as well.
rradina

join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
If wired caps disappear, what would motivate streaming providers to buy-out caps on the wireless side? Carrier wireless (as opposed to WiFi) is useful for many things but unless I'm camping or stranded, anywhere I find enough comfort to enjoy a Netflix movie, WiFi is available and I don't need to use my carrier wireless. Planes are an exception but that use case is evolving in its own direction.
jjeffeory

join:2002-12-04
USA
He's for data caps and pretty much anti-consumer/pro ISP. Which is strange, because they shouldn't have to be mutually exclusive.

chamberc
Premium
join:2008-08-05
Irving, TX

3 recommendations

said by PapaMidnight:

Let me understand this: Are you saying that it would be nice for Netflix to pay ISPs to send their content with no effect on your monthly cap, or are you saying that it would be nice for ISPs to not impose a monthly cap on their users? I ask as these are two different things, and the first is in support of the multi-tiered internet which is the very thing those of us in favor of network neutrality are trying to avoid.

Hopefully everyone is on board with content providers paying for what they use... why should everyone foot the bill equally for small providers who consume a lot of bandwidth. Net neutrality is simple socialism.
sonicmerlin

join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH
kudos:1

2 recommendations

Re: Still

said by chamberc:

said by PapaMidnight:

Let me understand this: Are you saying that it would be nice for Netflix to pay ISPs to send their content with no effect on your monthly cap, or are you saying that it would be nice for ISPs to not impose a monthly cap on their users? I ask as these are two different things, and the first is in support of the multi-tiered internet which is the very thing those of us in favor of network neutrality are trying to avoid.

Hopefully everyone is on board with content providers paying for what they use... why should everyone foot the bill equally for small providers who consume a lot of bandwidth. Net neutrality is simple socialism.

Go away troll.
TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH
And is a form of socialism that does NOT need to be created. It is something that is not a right.

r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·row44

3 recommendations

You cant be this stupid?
Net neutrality ensures the internet stays fair and people dont get double charged for the networks they already 100% paid for.
Every customers including you, me, netflix, cnn, fox news, hulu, dslreports, etc pays their ISP for internet access. It makes no sense to allow monopolies to gouge customers to double charge.
That is not socialism. Net neutraity is fair capitalism where everyone only has to pay once to get on the internet.

Now socialism started the internet and corporate welfare gave companies like ATT and Comcast free money to build their networks.
--
...brought to you by Carl's Jr.
Expand your moderator at work

Jim Kirk
Premium
join:2005-12-09
Westerville, OH

1 recommendation

said by elray:

Nor do the vast majority of Netflix subscribers on capped plans, but it still would be nice for Netflix to buy out the caps.

Go back under your bridge.
jjeffeory

join:2002-12-04
USA
HAHA. I see what you did there!
Bengie25

join:2010-04-22
Wisconsin Rapids, WI

1 recommendation

Why should I have to pay higher Netflix prices because Verizon wants Netflix to buy out caps?

chamberc
Premium
join:2008-08-05
Irving, TX

Re: Still

said by Bengie25:

Why should I have to pay higher Netflix prices because Verizon wants Netflix to buy out caps?

So you think others should have to pay for your consumption?
sonicmerlin

join:2009-05-24
Cleveland, OH
kudos:1

1 recommendation

Re: Still

said by chamberc:

said by Bengie25:

Why should I have to pay higher Netflix prices because Verizon wants Netflix to buy out caps?

So you think others should have to pay for your consumption?

I think you should have to personally pay for everyone's consumption.
65194623

join:2014-01-14

Re: Still

said by sonicmerlin:

I think you should have to personally pay for everyone's consumption.

+1, good idea.
Bengie25

join:2010-04-22
Wisconsin Rapids, WI
Reviews:
·Solarus

1 recommendation

95% of the cost of your Internet connection is to do with the line, not with bandwidth. Bandwidth is the cheapest part by far.

You're arguing about saving $1 of bandwidth on a $50 bill by increasing management cots by $20.

Charging people based on usage is not free, there is a lot of overhead involved, like paying more people at a call center to handle why my home router claims I only used 10mb/s, but the ISP is charging me for 11mb/s.

Also, the person torrenting 1TB per month probably costs less than the family of 4 that only transfers 60GB per month, but does so by watching 2-3 Netflix streams at the same time during peak hours.

mackey
Premium
join:2007-08-20
kudos:14
Last I checked Uverse is only a landline service. The OP is clearly talking about ATT wireless and Verizon Wireless and implies neither cable nor DSL (which is what Uverse is) is available in his area.

/M
smcallah

join:2004-08-05
Home

Re: Still

It was implied when he said ATT/Verizon at home.
jjeffeory

join:2002-12-04
USA

Re: Still

Agreed. He should have been more specific at the beginning of his sentence; att/Vz are really 4 services...
jjeffeory

join:2002-12-04
USA
said by decifal:

Still not an option to use netflix at home via ATT/Verizon data cap wise :-/ But hey, areas where landline broadband is available netflix will get to fight with the other streaming providers for customers!!

No Verizon FiOS data caps or issue with speed. :-/
You must be talking about wireless. Why would anyone use wireless? The caps are way too low...

Funny thing is that I remember when LTE first came out and I had Verizon Wireless. One of their sales reps were claiming that it was "faster than FiOS". My reply was: "bullshit, and FiOS doesn't have a cap. Why would you even try to lie to me like that?"
TBBroadband

join:2012-10-26
Fremont, OH

2 recommendations

Re: Still

VZ has a data cap on FiOS they never stated they didn't. And it's been found out by some people the hard way in fact they do have one.

Goliath2k
Premium
join:2013-12-28
united state

I would like the $7 SD Plan....

We're on grandfathered 3G plan and I would be all over the $7/SD/1 Stream plan. In fact I called in to try to get it but I was told that it's only available in "certain markets" and even then only for new customers (or customers who didn't have accounts for more than a year).

bmetelsky
Premium
join:2005-10-16
Elyria, OH

Already Raised?

I just got billed by Netflix yesterday. It has always been $7.99. I was billed $8.51.

••••••••••••••••

not quite right
I'm not cool enough to be a Mac person

join:2001-06-23
Puyallup, WA
kudos:1

Here we go ...

The cord cutters solution becoming the cord. I can see the Bi-yearly price hikes coming already.
--
Not many people know this, but I happen to be quite famous...

ProfitMax

@ecatel.net

Re: Here we go ...

said by not quite right:

The cord cutters solution becoming the cord. I can see the Bi-yearly price hikes coming already.

1st rule of a company in a capitalist economy - charge as much as you can get away with without losing enough customers to stop increasing the profits.

»www.cliffsnotes.com/more-subject ··· mization

needforspeed59
Cruise Ship Just Passing Through

join:2001-05-02
La Place, LA

Choice between SD and HD

I would like to see a choice in a plan between SD and HD depending on where I am at that month in relation to my data cap. For example, if I am at 85% -90% with several days left in the month, it would be nice to choose the SD stream so I can continue to enjoy the service without exceeding data plan limits. Right now it is 100% HD which makes for better picture quality of course, but letting me choose to SD would be a good option to have available.
--
Great success! High five!

••••••••

tshirt
Premium
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Comcast

1 edit

What is "generously grandfathered" ?

I understand grandfathered= allowing existing users to remain on a plan no longer available for a period of time=promo to retain existing customers
But "generously grandfathered"? what does the "generously" mean?
Can I go back to my under $10 for disks and streaming? (because that would be Generous IMHO)
Or Because Reed lead with that are we supposed to feel gratitude for a few months of grace or other temporary respite from the increase?
Seeing as it's a calculated retention offer to soften the blow of the price change, is it generosity or just good business?

Generous--showing a readiness to give more of something, as money or time, than is strictly necessary or expected.
smcallah

join:2004-08-05
Home

1 recommendation

Re: What is "generously grandfathered" ?

You'd still need the "grandfather" part to be "generously grandfathered." So if you left a plan, your grandfather is dead. Don't expect him to be resurrected.
ctggzg
Premium
join:2005-02-11
USA
kudos:2

1 recommendation

I'm willing to pay more

I'll pay $20 a month to get decent quality after 6 PM. Now with Comcast it's unwatchable.

••••••••••

Packeteers
Premium
join:2005-06-18
Forest Hills, NY
kudos:1

price by resolution too

I'd pay $5/mo for netflix if it was 720p on my Roku3 for a single stream.
why should I pay the same as one 1080p guy using 3x more bandwidth.
elefante72

join:2010-12-03
East Amherst, NY
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

Re: price by resolution too

Because you are paying for content, not resolution. Bandwidth is an operator function and a good portion of the streams are not SuperHD. 720p is still considered hi-def.

Netflix wants you to get higher resolution...If you have operator caps, well maybe you may have to think twice...

wdoa

join:2001-10-16
Spencer, MA

It's starting to look a lot like cable...

let's see is the plan something like this?
SD single device $7/month
HD feed just $3 extra a month
feed for mobile device $1 extra per device
feed for additional devices (Netflix ready TVs, Rocku, etc) $2 extra per month per device...
So let's sum it up if you have a computer, TV, and a Tablet and a phone that you want to watch HD on (not necessarily concurrently) total bill $13 per month...

kenn10

join:2003-09-10
Kennesaw, GA

Re: It's starting to look a lot like cable...

I'd just be happy if the conflict between Netflix and Comcast is resolved so I can actually watch a movie without "buffering" messages or a halting picture. Regardless of pricing, I'm ready to drop my subscription since between 8pm and 11pm EST, Netflix is largely useless to me.

SeriousSasuk

@telepacific.net

I would

Id pay more for unlimited tiers
DigitalManny

join:2014-01-08
Glendale, CA

High price for less movies

High price for less movies and TV Shows makes sense, thank god I still have cable.

•••
b10010011
Whats a Posting tag?

join:2004-09-07
Bellingham, WA
Reviews:
·Comcast Formerl..

2 edits

We rarely get a decent quality SD Netflix stream on Comcast

We average 4-5 out of 10 "quality squares" for the past year. If we manage to get more than 5 squares it never lasts more than a minute or two before in re-buffers down at a lower quality level. I haven't see it reach "HD" quality in well over a year.

So I can see us going for the $7 streaming option
--
Bellingham Scanner Kicks Ass! »bhamscanner.kicks-ass.org/

AnonProxy
Premium
join:2001-05-12

Netflix has ALREADY implemented new pricing

Before you could watch 4 devices at the same time. Now 4 devices require an upgrade of $4 from the base service. Base service only allows two. The real issue being is that the "two devices" is often just one running the service and one in suspend. I have an iPhone and an iPad and unless I actually task off the service, Netflix considers it running for up to 15 minutes.