dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
22
share rss forum feed

elefante72

join:2010-12-03
East Amherst, NY
reply to rradina

Re: NetFlix International Subscribers

It's definitely a challenge for content licensing. My inlaws in Canada subbed then they came here and were shocked at how much more content is available in the US versus Canada. They went home and cancelled, and I got an extra Roku

HBO has no such limitations since they are the content provider they can control distribution.

That is the downside of distribution that as an aggregation you are beholden to the content provider. Netflix is a competitor to the content provider, time warner, comcast, at&T, etc are a channel for HBO.

So this is a channel conflict, nothing more. The traditional channel will survive, however there will be a growing channel conflict in the non-traditional (streaming) venue.


Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:1

This is why current licensing schemes are flawed and strictly designed to screw customers.

Netflix is allowed show x in the US but has to license and pay again in every country. That is just plain illogical in a global market where data is moved in seconds not days.

Same thing with DVDs when you think about, Unless you have a region-0 DVD player you cannot play a DVD from outside North America.

Regional licensing is one reason why US shows are so pirated overseas, Many times the licensing either takes forever to work out or requires built in delays that it is easier to pirate the stuff than it is to sit out of internet discussion forums for several weeks.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports


rradina

join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO

It's not illogical. The larger the market, the more the content creator deserves, no? If you go to a sporting event with half the seats empty, the event makes less money than when every seat is sold.

Regarding going International, what's ridiculous is if the content creator wants to negotiate a different rate for every country. If that's what you meant, I agree. If Netflix has an agreement that allows it to pay the content creator based on viewers, then it shouldn't matter whether it's a US viewer or an international viewer. As Netflix grows (whether domestically or internationally) the content creator gets more and more. However, if the monthly subscription cost in the US is a barrier for Netflix in another country due to a lower average income, then Netflix cannot afford to show that content there since they won't be able to charge the same customer rates as in the US.


kevinds
Premium
join:2003-05-01
Calgary, AB
kudos:3

Netflix Canada vs Netflix US is the same monthly charge, but there is a lot less content in Canadian version...
--
Yes, I am not employed and looking for IT work. Have passport, will travel.



intok

join:2012-03-15
reply to rradina

It's 2013, if your TV/movie or music company can't manage to launch their products world wide on a single day your company is terrible at it's job.


rradina

join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
reply to kevinds

My point wasn't necessarily what they are charging the customer. Rather, it was based on what NetFlix pays content creators/distributors in any given country. Didn't NetFlix's origins begin by partnering with Starz for the rights to stream the same content? At that time they were probably only concerned about the US market. As they grew and became a blip on the radar of incumbent competitors, additional content licensing is probably getting more difficult as their competitors twist the proverbial "screws of influence" with content creators.


kevinds
Premium
join:2003-05-01
Calgary, AB
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Shaw

But you said this,
However, if the monthly subscription cost in the US is a barrier for Netflix in another country due to a lower average income, then Netflix cannot afford to show that content there since they won't be able to charge the same customer rates as in the US.

Talking about the subscription cost, and lower average income (of the users?), when they are charing the same now, so you are confusing me a bit now.

I thought Netflix started as a DVD rental company that spun-off streaming as a bonus feature, that quickly took over.
--
Yes, I am not employed and looking for IT work. Have passport, will travel.


rradina

join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO

Sorry for the confusion. In my head, I was consistently thinking along the lines of it being natural for content creators to see the success of NetFlix's US operations as an opportunity. It's kind of like how lottery winners attract a lot of "flies".

I also wanted to acknowledged that even if opportunistic license fees don't occur, the same US rate may not work in economically disadvantaged countries. (If only 1% can afford the US monthly rate, regardless of merit, there's no significant growth for NetFlix. It's even worse if opportunistic license fees do occur. This results in even higher package prices or for the same price, a severely crippled package.)