Netflix streaming

[Traab]

God I hate you. I swear 90% or more of the movies or tv series I want to see? Unavailable. Meanwhile my mother and my niece find everything they can think of. Is it really asking so much to be allowed to watch some of the older blockbusters and fun action films like most of Arnolds career or even a bit of mel gibson? Or any of the dozens of Anime I have heard awesome things about and want to watch? Hell, they just recently took down one of the few tv series I liked to watch, Deadliest Warrior. Apparently they realized they missed one of my favorites and hurried to correct the error.

[Equinox]

Netflix is geared toward the mainstream. You don't get to quintuple your stock price in a year by catering to esoteric tastes ...

[erikun]

For the most part, Netflix has to pay somebody to provide any particular show. If whoever owns the IP is asking for too much, or if the title is niche enough that the people who care (and would quit over it) smaller than the cost to host it, then they aren't likely to bother.

It's unfortunate, but likely expected cost of doing business.

[Traab]

Netflix is geared toward the mainstream. You don't get to quintuple your stock price in a year by catering to esoteric tastes ...

Schwarzenegger is esoteric? Im not looking for highlights from the latest indie movie festival or something. And yeah eri, I know thats always going to be an issue, it just kinda sucks that the streaming part at least, doesnt have a very full collection of my favorites in it.

[Mathis]

There are currently five movies starring Arnold Schwarzenegger on Netflix, six if you count the documentary Running With Arnold assuming you are getting the American selection. Some new, some older. They are all fairly well-liked and somewhat popular. That's roughly 500 minutes of Arnold-packed entertainment. That seems to me like a fair offer for the price Netflix is asking, more than fair if you are sharing an account with your mother. So what exactly is the problem you are complaining about here, Netflix's lack of variety in their offer or the fact that they as a service do not cater to your specific tastes? Because if it's the latter I'm going to suggest you find a local place that sells DvDs, or go to a place like Amazon and just buy from those instead. That way you can pay for the exact entertainment that you want. If Netflix's offer does not satisfy you then stop using it and go somewhere else. Not sure if you want a discussion about this or if you are just complaining?

[huttj509]

Mmmm, Mission Impossible.

[Traab]

Yes, and of those movies you get T-2 and Commando as the only 2 popular classics of his. Oh yeah, and the crappy conan. No Predator, no Terminator, no running man, no total recall, no conan the barbarian. None of his newer stuff except for expendables 2. No t-3, no true lies, we dont even get anything of his classic comedies like Twins. Sure alot of those stunk, but some were pretty good.

Lets take Mel Gibson. Now, there are a couple good ones there. But none of the lethal weapons, no patriot, no payback, basically, almost none of the movies that people want to watch or think of first when you talk about these people. Im honestly stunned to find braveheart on the list.

[Finlam]

Not sure if you want a discussion about this or if you are just complaining?

Well.....their selection does kind of suck. I tried the free month trial once and then a second time a couple years later and I found their selection to be terrible both times. In the end, I couldn't find enough to watch on Netflix to justify paying the 7 or 8 dollars a month.

--Now that's just my experience. I guess people who actually pay for/use the service are expected to not criticize it, but I don't have a subscription so I'm free to complain all I want, apparently.

[The Glyphstone]

I found everything you mentioned available on Netflix, just not in the Streaming section, only DvDs. Which should answer your question...Netflix doesn't like competing with itself. Keeping their DVD rentals and Streaming separate, and ensuring there isn't a lot of overlap between them, is part of their business strategy for increased profit by encouraging people to get the combined package.

[Traab]

I found everything you mentioned available on Netflix, just not in the Streaming section, only DvDs. Which should answer your question...Netflix doesn't like competing with itself. Keeping their DVD rentals and Streaming separate, and ensuring there isn't a lot of overlap between them, is part of their business strategy for increased profit by encouraging people to get the combined package.

True, and in answer to an earlier post, this was mainly me venting over not being able to find much on there I care to watch. The rest of my family have found multiple tv series to watch as well as various films and such. It sucks because that would be awesome to work as a change of pace. Normally I spend all day switching between reading fanfics and playing free online games. Being able to chill out on the couch and watch some good movies for awhile would be nice.

[tomandtish]

Unfortunately, the problem has to do with licensing fees. And they are much worse for a streaming service than a DVD rental service.

When an old video store purchased a DVD from the studio distribution lists that they planned on renting, they paid a one-time fee (much higher than our purchase price). This fee allowed them to rent the DVD out. Since there's a physical limit on how many times the DVD could be played in a given time frame, the studio doesn't worry whether it's rented 10 times or 1000 times. They make their money up front. So a video store might purchase a copy of Avengers for $100, but can rent it as much as they like.

And they do the same thing with streaming licenses. The problem however, is that since a streaming video can be viewed any number of times at once in theory (if the streamer puts enough resources behind it), technically the entire world can be watching at the same time. The studios want to make sure they get their share so they demand their money up front. Netflix has to decide how much they think they'll make off subscribers and if they can afford to have that movie. They also have to decide for how long since streaming licenses are usually for a set duration.

Package content deals are also a possibility. For example, Netflix had an exclusive deal to stream EPIX movies (which include Thor, Avengers, etc.) for $200 million. The exclusive part of the deal lasted till 2012. They had a deal for STARs content for $30 million that expired in 2011, and the content left Netflix at that time. (Note: I've found conflicting info on the Epix deal. I can't tell whether the total deal was $200 million or only the exclusive part, and the total deal was $1 Billion).

So they can't afford to stream every movie that they have on DVD at their current price structure. They have to pick and choose. They'll have some (relatively) recent blockbusters, some timeless classics, a lot of mediocrity, and a bunch of stuff you've never heard of. And it will cycle in and out.

Now right or wrong, some movies never show up because Netflix has decided that the potential returns don't outweigh the expenses. This may be because Netflix expects a low return, or because the studio on question sets the fees too high.

Could they stream everything? Sure, if they (and you) wanted to pay for it, but not at $7.99 a month.

Also, if they streamed everything, there would be a huge infrastructure increase, as not only would the number of subscribers presumably increase a great deal, but probably how much each subscriber watched would increase as well.

[Soras Teva Gee]

I found everything you mentioned available on Netflix, just not in the Streaming section, only DvDs. Which should answer your question...Netflix doesn't like competing with itself. Keeping their DVD rentals and Streaming separate, and ensuring there isn't a lot of overlap between them, is part of their business strategy for increased profit by encouraging people to get the combined package.

Umm not really actually for awhile Netflix was going to sell its disc operation off. Didn't work out, but a rather clear sign they considered it an artifact of earlier times not a crucial part of the operation like your scheme would require.

In general this doesn't make sense since it means you are increasing competition with yourself. Denying one to the other doesn't net you more customers just forces them to make a medium selection, and offends some that insist on a certain medium. Better to offer as many options (as you can) to satisfy the widest range of customers. Then if one kills the other so what, you made money there.

Also I was under the impression the disc selection was far more expansive and that almost anything streamed was probably on disc unless it wasn't in stores. Not a subscriber (just leached off one for awhile) so if someone wants to correct me go ahead.

However that makes sense. When they buy a disc they own it outright and can lend it out as they choose ad nauseum. They don't rent it from the IP holder. Its First Sale doctrine under the law, and is how say your local public library operates too.

Online streaming is a different opposite animal entirely. When something is availible on DVD but not on streaming... well it means the IP holder and Netflix couldn't reach an agreement.

I'm not aware of this as fact but reading between the lines of them having multiple agreements expiring and being signed suggests to me that Netflix cuts particular deals on price. So clearly anything not there is simply asking more then Netflix thinks is worth paying.

[The Glyphstone]

Umm not really actually for awhile Netflix was going to sell its disc operation off. Didn't work out, but a rather clear sign they considered it an artifact of earlier times not a crucial part of the operation like your scheme would require.

In general this doesn't make sense since it means you are increasing competition with yourself. Denying one to the other doesn't net you more customers just forces them to make a medium selection, and offends some that insist on a certain medium. Better to offer as many options (as you can) to satisfy the widest range of customers. Then if one kills the other so what, you made money there.
.

That wasn't 'selling it off', so much as splitting the company. All the money would have still ended up in the same place, just with different branding...and I'll bet had the customer base not risen up in furious rage, Netflix would not have had movies/shows available to stream that Qwikster had available to rent.

And giving both sides 'exclusive' options (because Streaming has things DVD doesn't as well) absolutely does increase revenue, unless you consider the number of sales lost due to people insisting on one medium and canceling their service in outrage greater than the number of people who will just pay for both mediums to maximize their options. It's kinda scummy, but it's the same reason DVD Special Edition boxes or video game releases will offer unique/exclusive bonus options depending on which retailer (Best Buy, Walmart, etc.) you purchased it at.

[HamHam]

For the most part, Netflix has to pay somebody to provide any particular show. If whoever owns the IP is asking for too much, or if the title is niche enough that the people who care (and would quit over it) smaller than the cost to host it, then they aren't likely to bother.

It's unfortunate, but likely expected cost of doing business.

You would think people with niche titles would be willing to license them on the cheap. As for hosting, computer memory is cheap.

[Grinner]

You would think people with niche titles would be willing to license them on the cheap. As for hosting, computer memory is cheap.

I imagine there's quite a bit of financial overhead in addition to the time and effort needed, though. Plus, it's not just memory or processing time they need to worry about. Bandwidth is just as much, if not more, of a concern, especially considering the sheer volume of data they put out.

[AKA_Bait]

Just as a related observation, is it just me or did Netflix recently lose all of its really good anime series recently? I had gotten used to being able to call up Mushi-shi, Cowboy Bebop, Death Note, etc. and now they are all unavailable.

[CarpeGuitarrem]

Netflix anime appears to blip in and out of existence as a natural cycle of nature. (For me, it was Naoki Urasawa's Monster.)

[The Glyphstone]

Netflix anime appears to blip in and out of existence as a natural cycle of nature. (For me, it was Naoki Urasawa's Monster.)

Please report to the Department of Redundancy Department for remedial education.

[Karoht]

Yes, and of those movies you get T-2 and Commando as the only 2 popular classics of his. Oh yeah, and the crappy conan. No Predator, no Terminator, no running man, no total recall, no conan the barbarian. None of his newer stuff except for expendables 2. No t-3, no true lies, we dont even get anything of his classic comedies like Twins. Sure alot of those stunk, but some were pretty good.

I watched all of those on Netflix not more than 2 months ago. In fact, Netflix was the first place I ever watched the Conan movies.
And I'm talking the Canadian version of Netflix which has VASTLY less selection. I think the Canadian version only gets certain films/shows for a certain run length at a time, and it's either a short run or it's perminant.

I've strongly considered setting up my PS3 to run through a proxy and get the US Netflix which is supposed to be much better. No idea on the legalities of this, user beware, etc.

[Kudaku]

I can state that the US Netflix is significantly better than the Norwegian one, but there is surprisingly little overlap - I can find films on the norwegian or UK Netflix that are not available in the states and vice versa. Seems like they're being forced to pay for national licences instead of buying international licenses.

There are some exceptions though - for instance all the netflix exclusive series are released simultaneously across the globe.

[JoshL]

Netflix anime goes in cycles. No Death Note, but they added Fairy Tail (which I enjoyed for different reasons). They seem to have titles available for a while, and then rotate them. Which is good, because I've been watching a few things I wouldn't have, but sucks when I catch something on the end of a rotation. The stuff I really like I buy anyway, so there is that. They had all of the Slayers not too long ago, but they're down to none now.

That said, I wish I would have finished Gilgamesh before it was taken out, because I liked what I had seen, but not sure I liked enough to buy a copy...