JimmyH:NonprayingMantis:
1) Unlike Sky, they sell to NZers in NZ but don't have to charge and pay GST (or any other form of tax in NZ)*
Correct. But, other than GST, the tax argument is a red herring. Netflix is liable to pay company tax on any profits in the US. If you are arguing that you shouldn't buy from companies that don't pay company tax in NZ then you are pretty much arguing against anyone importing anything at all. Just like NZ exporters pay company tax in NZ, US exporters pay company tax in the US, UK companies in the UK, etc.
the 'any other tax' was an aside. The important one is GST (but I do think if you are selling in NZ, to NZers, you should pay tax in NZ - see how Google and Facebook get away with it so much - I'm against that too.
The GST argument does have some validity. And if the government can find a way to cost-effectively collect GST on small imports (not just Netflix subs) then it should do so. However, in the Netflix vs Sky comparison, it's virtually irrelevant. It's $13 c.f., circa $100+ so loading 15% on wouldn't materially influence the decision. I'm far more likely to make a decision based on content range, release window, quality and ease of use than I am on a $2 closing of the enormous price differential.
correct, but consider this in light of lightbox, where the prices are much closer together and GST makes a bigger difference
regardless it is still a totally valid difference where Sky has to comply with the laws of commerce in NZ, and Netflix does not.
2) Unlike Sky, they are breaching their agreements with content suppliers to only supply in regions where they have paid for the rights
Probably not. They have made a reasonable attempt to comply by geoblocking. Plus, in my book, those agreements are close to a restrictive trade practice anyway.
given the geoblocking is so trivial that ISPs are flagrantly circumventing it, I'd say IP blocking is no longer a reasonable method of blocking access.
3) Unlike Sky, they don't have to abide by the Fair Trading Act
Ummm, yes, but so what? Companies are bound by the laws of the countries in which they reside. This is true for anything - books, music, clothing, powertools. It's a known risk that a NZer chooses to take when they opt for purchasing from offshore rather than onshore. If anything, NZ retailers should be treating this as an advantage and marketing it - buy from us and you get legal rights - parallel import and you don't. Caveat emptor.
the 'so what' is the whole point. Sky has to abide by the laws of commerce in NZ when selling to NZers. Netflix does not - that was my point!
4) Unlike Sky, They don't have to abide by the Consumer Goods Act
Again, true but so what? Same issue as the Fair Trading Act. It's something that you should bear in mind when making a purchase decision for *anything* from offshore. But, for solid companies like Amazon with decent customer support reputations, it's actually rarely an issue in practice.
Note: as an aside - it's actually the Consumer Guarantees Act (not Goods).
the 'so what' is the whole point. Sky has to abide by the laws of commerce in NZ when selling to NZers. Netflix does not - that was my point!
5) unlike Sky, They don't have to abide by the NZ censorship rules - so they don't have to submit any of their content to the censor, pay for it to be vetted, wait for them to pass judgement, before finally selling it.
Another red herring. In practical terms, mostly neither does Sky. My understanding is that we recognise many censorship classifications from comparable other countries (the UK and Australia) for films etc - and if it gets the equivalent of a G, PG, M, or R16 etc in those countries, it automatically gets the equivalent rating here - sight unseen - unless the rating is challenged. Plus, for most content, its the makers who arrange the classification, not the broadcaster. It's only R18 equivalents where a separate NZ classification is pretty much always required.
upon further research, I think we are both wrong on that one. Broadcasting is covered off totally separately under an industyr system.
6) unlike Sky, they don't have to provide any level of support whatsoever for their product - if you call them up and report a fault, one of the first things thing are going to ask is "who is your ISP" and after that good luck getting any help out of them
Yep - and you should take account of that when comparing options. But, if worst comes to worst, you can always cancel and possbily be out of pocket for a whole $13. Gasp.
my point to all of that was that the 'laws of commerce' that should apply when selling in NZ, to NZers, do, in fact apply to Sky. They do not apply to Netflix.
The only point I'll concede is the censorship one - the others are real examples.
So when your previous post claimed that it was Sky who thought the laws of commerce didn't apply to them, I thought I'd point out that the opposite is true.
And you have said nothing to refute that.
Trusted
