1 edit | reply to BF69
Re: Vicious circle Got it. NO Netflix isnt competing with FREE. Netflix is competing with the MSO's product. Big difference. |
|
 Camelot OnePremium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Greenwood, IN
kudos:1 | His point seemed pretty clear to me. He is willing to pay the $15 a month fee for HBO, just not the $60 a month cable subscription just for the ability to pay another $15 for HBO. Sell him HBO directly for $15, and he will buy.
That business model makes perfect sense. You get someone like Google to build a net player that "tunes" the various networks just like a TV, and let people subscribe to the ones they want. The only reason that isn't happening is that the content companies and the cable companies are all intertwined. |
|
 BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | reply to ITALIAN926
said by ITALIAN926:Got it. NO Netflix isnt competing with FREE. Netflix is competing with the MSO's. Big difference.
Since Netflix has emerged people pirate less. FACT. |
|
| Citation? |
|
|
|
slckusrPremium
join:2003-03-17
Maumee, OH
kudos:1 Reviews:
 ·AT&T U-Verse
| I do  |
|
BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | reply to ITALIAN926
According to a publication of internet research company Sandvine, Netflix is helping to fight piracy. Sandvine researched global internet traffic and noticed that torrent traffic decreases when the traffic generated by Netflix increases.
»www.myce.com/news/netflix-respon···c-64722/ |
|
TheMGPremium
join:2007-09-04
Canada
kudos:1 | reply to Camelot One
said by Camelot One:His point seemed pretty clear to me. He is willing to pay the $15 a month fee for HBO, just not the $60 a month cable subscription just for the ability to pay another $15 for HBO. Sell him HBO directly for $15, and he will buy.
That is an excellent point.
Personally I will NEVER subscribe to a streaming service that also requires me to subscribe to traditional TV (satellite/cable). That completely defeats the purpose of internet streaming in the first place, which is to dump traditional TV in favor of a service that is more portable, flexible, and on-demand. |
|
KearnstdElf WizardPremium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | said by TheMG:said by Camelot One:His point seemed pretty clear to me. He is willing to pay the $15 a month fee for HBO, just not the $60 a month cable subscription just for the ability to pay another $15 for HBO. Sell him HBO directly for $15, and he will buy.
That is an excellent point. Personally I will NEVER subscribe to a streaming service that also requires me to subscribe to traditional TV (satellite/cable). That completely defeats the purpose of internet streaming in the first place, which is to dump traditional TV in favor of a service that is more portable, flexible, and on-demand. The funny thing is for HBO, They would not lose any revenue if people cut the cord and bought HBO Go instead. HBO is already a premium channel that people pay around $15 for on top of their cable bill.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports |
|
 KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | reply to ITALIAN926
Netflix doesn't compete with free? Really? Are you just trolling, or...... |
|
| Since I got Netflix I have pretty much stopped torrenting tv shows |
|
| reply to ITALIAN926
Actually, Netflix is competing with free. Let's say you want to watch a film online. You can:
A) Find a torrent to download the film. Now you need to wait for it to download and hope it's a good version and not one that someone shot with a shaky camera snuck into a movie theater. You've also got to hope that you don't download a file containing a virus. Finally, you've got to hope that the MPAA doesn't catch wind of your actions (because, thanks to BitTorrent, you shared the file out while you were downloading it).
or
B) You load the movie up on Netflix.
Option A is free but has many obstacles and dangers. Option B requires payment, but not that much ($8.99 a month) and you're pretty sure to get good quality (and no viruses or MPAA lawsuit letters).
So Netflix is competing with free (piracy) and winning. It's a lot easier to subscribe to Netflix than it is to be a pirate. If the content owners really wanted to destroy piracy, they'd put all their content onto Netflix streaming. Yes, a core group of pirates would remain (nothing would ever dissuade them), but most pirates would just go to the easier, less risky Netflix. (As a side benefit for the content owners, they'd get more money.)
--
-Jason Levine |
|
Camelot OnePremium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Greenwood, IN
kudos:1 | The problem here is that you are applying logic to idiots. The MPAA companies still believe that getting $20 a movie from 10 people, and bitching about piracy costing them more sales, is somehow better than selling movies to 1000 people for $2 each.
It is the same issue the RIAA went through over $15-$20 CDs to a few people, or 99c tracks to millions. |
|
| Heres logic for ya Mr. Brain. If everyone pirated, there would be no money to make movies and shows. Move along now, nothing to see here. |
|
 tc1uscg
join:2005-03-09
Saint Clair Shores, MI | reply to TheMG
I think Camelot One it the nail on the head. Why do I want to pay 60.00 a month for crap I don't want just to pay more for HBO? Last time I checked, you had to subscribe to HBO to get HBO go. Why not just pay for HBOG and stream it on your roku or dvd player? Because big cable doesn't want them to.  |
|
| reply to Camelot One
You're absolutely right. I also think the problem with both the RIAA and MPAA is one of control, not piracy. They want control over everything from the creation of the music/movie to where and how the people view it. Technology gives people freedom to watch movies and listen to music in many more ways. It also helps to make the RIAA/MPAA irrelevant which (of course) frightens the heads of the RIAA/MPAA. Therefore, instead of allowing this freedom to drive more sales - and possibly lead to their demise, the RIAA/MPAA try to tighten their control over the technology to slow down any progress and bleed as much money as they can out of the system for as long as they can.
Ironically, had they embraced technology instead of fighting it, the RIAA would have come up with a good online music solution during the Napster era. This would have prevented the whole file-sharing fight before it started and we'd likely be getting all of our movies/TV shows online from MPAA-Net now.
--
-Jason Levine |
|
| reply to Camelot One
I don't think people will be willing to pay $15 for Netflix and $15 for HBO. At that point you've past the threshold of pain that moves people to piracy. People can, and do compete with free when they provide an simple integrated approach for a decent price. |
|
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
1 edit | Wow, the "competing with free" concept, mentioned again. Why does this exist? Because right now its a pain to get stolen content to those big ole TV's. Just wait till STB's that stream stolen content to TV's are released. (which should be illegal btw)
Netflix has like 20+ million subscribers. Now what % of them do you think came from previous PAY TV companies, what % do you think came from the moral-free Torrent community?
Id like you to build a lemonade stand next to mine, you charge $10 a cup, and at my stand, Im selling it for the rock-bottom price of $0. See how well you do.
Competing with free, what an intelligent concept. |
|
Camelot OnePremium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Greenwood, IN
kudos:1
1 edit | Do you by chance work for the MPAA? If not, you should consider applying for a position. Your blatant closed mindedness and unwillingness to even consider that people are willing to purchase what they want, would make you a perfect fit for the current industry.
And since we have 4 full pages of discussion on a topic you started to say shouldn't be discussed, I will now now bow out. My work here is done. |
|
| You dont have to work for the MPAA to follow the rules and laws of this country. |
|
| reply to ITALIAN926
Really? I am pretty sure people made movies and entertained well before there were millions and billions to be made in the industry.
Same with music, same with doctors and same with just about any other industry that provides a service.
Your overall statement that people would just stop doing what they enjoy and know how to do because they can't make millions in it is downright ignorant and against all of history. |
|
