jancol gessyca soldier

1 view

Skip to first unread message

Eunice Beady

unread,

Aug 2, 2024, 4:25:03 AM8/2/24

to issiggucon

It's hard to know what to do when you have millions of users and have such a huge market share. However, it seems like Netflix could have grandfathered in people, even for a period of time. I suspect their subscriber base is so large that it would not have been advantageous. I watch mostly streaming now anyway so I'll probably drop the 2 disk to 1 disk to keep my price point.

I don't really understand why people are so up in arms about this. Everyone that I know who has Netflix with the DVD plan simply did it because it was next to nothing over the price of streaming alone. The discs just sit on a bookcase or in a drawer somewhere and collect dust. It has been obvious through the way Netflix have been marketing themselves that they are trying to move away from the discs because of the hassle and cost of everything that goes along with having to mail the discs. They were probably hoping that this bump in price was the nudge that got people off their seats to find those discs, send them back, and switch to streaming only.

My thoughts exactly! The people who were with Netflix from the beginning should take a second and remember the prices and plans from back then. When the streaming was introduced, it wasn't unlimited, it was expensive, and the selection was pretty laughable.

Bottom line is, if you want Netflix to continue offering up a great selection of video AND continue (like they have) to aggressively add new content to the fold, then the pricing will have to periodically need to be adjusted. Especially since their contracts with the studios are about to end.

And I would rather have one big increase than several smaller ones. But that's my opinion. In a few days, it'll settle down (it already is), and I'm sure Netflix will be just fine. After all, they have more customers than Comcast (and if that company can hold onto customers, Netflix certainly can).

And I would much rather pay $15 or $20 to Netflix and have an almost endless supply of great things to watch than spend $80 to Comcast and be constantly flipping channels trying to find something decent to watch.

Where it gets complicated is Comcast is my ISP and I have been completely without cable television for almost 2 years. Comcast has recently set bandwidth caps for internet use. They also own several cable channels. What's to stop them from doing everything in their power from making Netflix's services run slower, lower the caps even more, or even block services like Netflix when they see that I am not dishing out the big bucks for their premium cable services?

These are interesting times we live in. As these companies that offer conflicting services along with services that rely on other companies to be fair and honest they will resort to shady actions. Not necessarily illegal, but the Comcasts and Time Warners are going to do everything in their power to make Netflix as inconvenient as possible.

I am considering the switch to Blockbuster for my Blueray rentals, the priciing is the same except you get moves a month earlier , they have a larger Blueray selection and with also having a larget inventory that means less waiting once a film is available.

Blockbuster does not have a streaming service that i would use but this means that I can reduce my Netflix bill from shy of $30- and now only pay them $8- per month or $96- per year and that is if Amazon Prime which has the same content as Netflix does not become my streaming provider.

so now that netflix has crush every mom and pop store and look's and feel above everyone knowing it was from the help of millions of people who have an account with them who thank's when someone say's i have something cheap then what you have would last forever this company did what they needed the do by putting people out of work and this company has now showed other company's if you wanna pocket millions of dollar's offer something cheap over the internet and by mail and you will shut down every local store and mall and in this store's are people who like you and i have the pay bills keep a roof over you and you kids head and food in they're mouth this company does not care cause if they did why don't you hear all hiring they're doing all you hear is how big this company is getting and all the money thats being made cause people love staying home and being lazy streaming all day so keep raving about have great is the stream and how cheap the price still is and that is the first of more the come

This is really about a price hike, with zero improvement to the plan. Netflix streaming has never been great. Typically old or foreign movies dominate the selection. Add to that the deals made with studio's to release new DVDs late, and you could argue that they are decreasing their services , and increasing prices. Not a good combination.

It's just amazing that Netflix didn't invest more in PR consultation. The method employed basically gave their customers REASON to LOOK for a better deal. It's hard to maintain customer loyalty when you basically say, "Yup, we're raising your bill! You've been getting a heck of a deal up until this point, now you're going to have to pay what you ought to for what you were (actually for less than you were) getting."

It seems that Netflix wanted to send two messages with this tactic:
1. Netflix is going to move to primarily a streaming service, and that's final.
2. Netflix is supremely confident that they have a superior service at the lowest price, and will continue providing said superior service for the foreseeable future.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Cable companies were ticked off when "cut the cord" became a rallying cry in 2009, with disgruntled consumers vowing to cancel their expensive TV plans in favor of cheaper options -- namely, Netflix.

But fast forward two years, and lots of Netflix rivals have popped up. They've each nabbed their own piece of the streaming video pie, fragmenting the market and making things complicated for consumers.

On Friday, a new player is jumping into the fray: Blockbuster, acquired out of bankruptcy in April by DISH (DISH, Fortune 500) Network, is holding a press event titled "A Stream Come True." The site is widely expected to unveil its own streaming service.

Want to stream current seasons of your favorite TV show? Hulu's probably your best bet. But wait! If it's a CBS show, you're out of luck -- Hulu doesn't have U.S. rights to those. Netflix (NFLX) has some, but rarely from recent years.

And what about Amazon (AMZN, Fortune 500) Instant Video, the company's experiment with free streaming for Prime subscribers who pay a yearly fee? You can snag some recent movies there, plus a smattering of TV shows from Showtime -- but none from HBO, which streams its content exclusively to its cable subscribers.

"The studios' business philosophy is to work with multiple outlets, don't let any single one gain strength, and carve up the space," says Will Richmond, founder of consulting firm Broadband Directions.

If Netflix and its rivals get into bidding wars, the price of that content will keep climbing higher. In fact, one analyst predicts that Netflix's streaming content licensing costs will rise from $180 million in 2010 to a whopping $1.98 billion in 2012.

Meanwhile, consumers are the ones caught in the crossfire. Movies keep disappearing from their Netflix queues as streaming rights to them come and go, and it's a chore to figure out which services offer their favorite shows.

Is a rebellion looming? A decade ago, when listeners got fed up with the price of CDs and the hassles of buying legal music online, they turned en masse to Napster and other illegal file-sharing services. At least that way, they got a one-stop shop.

A legal fusillade from the record studios put Napster out of business, but the piracy wave really died down only when someone offered a cheap, easy solution: Apple's (AAPL, Fortune 500) iTunes. At 99 cents a track, it illustrated that consumers are willing to pay for digital content when the price tag is low and access is easy.

"This 'we have X content, but if you want Y you need to go to another service' ... drives consumers mad," Weyer added. "Sufficiently tech savvy consumers will just drop the whole mess and go the less legal route because the legal one is broken."

An all-you-can-eat, monthly subscription model for video remains the more attractive option -- and a big catalog is the ideal. But as the ongoing Netflix fracas illustrates, a simple solution seems a long way off.

this is not working at all. i have comcast for 12 megabytes and a new wifi too. the download stops everytime. stupid. i hope i didnt get charge 4 bucks for retnals. and i read the FAQ it says no HDMI in their

Why would anyone pay such high fees for a movie? Netflix is $9/month and I get as much on my iPad as I want. Even iTunes is cheaper, movies are just $15 to buy in HD. Who would pay this much for a Droid-only copy of a film? Do you get a second download for a computer?

NFLX is $9 a month, but streaming is old movies and still a limited selection. And, how many old titles do you have to watch to justify a $9/m fee? For lighter users, and those who want new releases, an a la carte pricing plan from BBI works better.

I just downloaded a movie on my Droid X and it took LESS than five minutes. This writer is obviously a Iphone fanboy. I will continue to use the Blockbuster app if they continue to get new movies on a regular basis.

netflix has never charged a late fee. i pay $14.00 a month and they arrive in the mail two at a time. i watch them whenever i want and theres never a late fee. never has been. plus i stream movies all the time through my xbox and bluray and pc. i dont even pay for postage either way. turn around time from when i put the movie in the mail is 3 days so in doing the math on a 30 day month thats 20 movies i can receive per month plus all the unlimited streaming i want for under $15.00 per month versus 20 movies from block buster at $3.99 per movie equals $79.80. how is that a better deal?