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
said 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
said 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
|
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.
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. |
|
| |
said 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. |
|
Thaler
Premium Member
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA |
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? |
|
|
Rekrul
join:2007-04-21
Milford, CT |
to PinkyThePig
said 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
said 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. |
|
