Spark New Zealand begins formal process to select a growth partner for Lightbox

Forums › Sky, Neon, Lightbox › Spark New Zealand begins formal process to select a growth partner for Lightbox

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5

BDFL - Memuneh
79253 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#2210482 4-Apr-2019 07:38

That is your conclusion. Don't put words in someone else's mouth.

If in doubt ask "Do you mean...?" instead of jumping to conclusions.

tdgeek

29743 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2210509 4-Apr-2019 07:48

@Steve98 given that Lightbox is one of many SVOD providers, and that its content is quite new, and it has exclusives as they all do, why is Lightbox largely irrelevant and offers no competition?

IMO , like every other provider, it is relevant, they all are, and they all compete for the finite consumer dollar. I can't see why Lightbox is any different

ockel

2031 posts

Uber Geek

#2210555 4-Apr-2019 09:24

tdgeek:

Ok

@Steve98 given that Lightbox is one of many SVOD providers, and that its content is quite new, and it has exclusives as they all do, why is Lightbox largely irrelevant and offers no competition?

IMO , like every other provider, it is relevant, they all are, and they all compete for the finite consumer dollar. I can't see why Lightbox is any different

In basic microeconomic theory what we are talking about here is substitutes. In Steve98's opinion Lightbox is an inferior substitute and as such its market uptake (paid, not free) has meant it is largely irrelevant in this marketplace and offers no (weak) competition.

Comparing the economic substitutes:

Netflix offers movies and general entertainment. Lightbox offers general entertainment only - so its a weak substitute. Usually a weak substitute has lower utility to the consumer and hence a lower price.

Lightbox and Neon (TV only) are direct substitutes with a near homogeneous offering. One is offered at $13/mth, the other at $12/mth. The difference would be the exclusive content that the consumer seeks.

Both are still weak substitutes against Netflix. Netflix's direct substitute would be Neons TV+movies offering. One is offered at $15/mth, the other at $20/mth. Neons is an inferior substitute based on price - if prices were equal then the difference would the exclusive content that the consumer seeks.

Question from an economics perspective - is Neon's offering overpriced (and competition should reduce the price over time) or is Netflix's offering below its long run cost (and hence unprofitable in the short run) to which economic theory would suggest prices must rise over time to its long run cost.

There are plenty of competitors in the SVOD space - each are heterogeneous in their offering (on the basis of exclusive content alone). They are all competing - however some are inferior substitutes relative to their nearest competitor.

Sixth Labour Government - "Vision without Execution is just Hallucination"

tdgeek

29743 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2210562 4-Apr-2019 09:39

Weak is objective. NF has more, LB has newer. No one subscribes to watch 4000 titles, nor whatever LB's lesser volume is. All providers have a lot of filler content (old, not popular) and much less "real" content (popular) plus their own exclusives. They all have enough spread of real, non filler content to watch, so the key is exclusives. Neon isn't talked about much, but it has GoT so on that its not weak. same with LB. Any subscriber will see ant provider as weak or strong, it all depends on their taste and who has got what. A few dollars, or variances on content volume (which is mainly fillers anyway) isn't that important.

ockel

2031 posts

Uber Geek

#2210569 4-Apr-2019 09:51

tdgeek:

Weak is objective. NF has more, LB has newer. No one subscribes to watch 4000 titles, nor whatever LB's lesser volume is. All providers have a lot of filler content (old, not popular) and much less "real" content (popular) plus their own exclusives. They all have enough spread of real, non filler content to watch, so the key is exclusives. Neon isn't talked about much, but it has GoT so on that its not weak. same with LB. Any subscriber will see ant provider as weak or strong, it all depends on their taste and who has got what. A few dollars, or variances on content volume (which is mainly fillers anyway) isn't that important.

Weak as in the economic definition of substitutes - two homogeneous offerings would be direct substitutes, two heterogeneous offerings with very similar characteristics would be strong substitutes - and there would a continuum of substitutes from strong down to weak.

Its weak in the economic substitute sense not weak as in describing the characteristics of any offering.

Sixth Labour Government - "Vision without Execution is just Hallucination"

steve98

1395 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#2210883 4-Apr-2019 19:15

tdgeek:
Weak is objective. NF has more, LB has newer.

Unsure if you’re trolling, but nobody is pumping out more new and original content than Netflix. To say LB has “newer” content is really quite a stretch. And “more” is quite an understatement. The entire LB catalogue can be browsed over the course of a few clicks.

other ramblings...

What it boils down to is this. LB launched shortly before NF NZ and managed to chip a tiny sliver of their catalogue away in the process which, by itself, is not worth paying for hence they can barely now give it away. Their presence in the market has achieved little, and has had zero influence on the price or quality of Netflix.

If you want to put words in my mouth and convince yourself that LB is anything other than a failed experiment by a telco that has a history of betting on the wrong horse when it comes to media, you go right ahead but forgive me if I leave the room first.

tdgeek

29743 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2210909 4-Apr-2019 20:25

steve98:
tdgeek:

Weak is objective. NF has more, LB has newer.

Unsure if you’re trolling, but nobody is pumping out more new and original content than Netflix. To say LB has “newer” content is really quite a stretch. And “more” is quite an understatement. The entire LB catalogue can be browsed over the course of a few clicks.

other ramblings...

What it boils down to is this. LB launched shortly before NF NZ and managed to chip a tiny sliver of their catalogue away in the process which, by itself, is not worth paying for hence they can barely now give it away. Their presence in the market has achieved little, and has had zero influence on the price or quality of Netflix.

If you want to put words in my mouth and convince yourself that LB is anything other than a failed experiment by a telco that has a history of betting on the wrong horse when it comes to media, you go right ahead but forgive me if I leave the room first.

Not trolling and feel free to leave that room first. You may be aware there are a number of SVOD providers, all of whom have exclusives. NF has a LOT of content, most of it is old and cheap, but to looks good. LB has TV only, but newer, everyone knows that. And exclusives. I assume Neon that is rarely mentioned is also no good? A failed experiment? Its about what you have not who owns you. If 4000+ items that are old and old and cheap, that's ok, too much for me to watch. We all ONLY look a the key content.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79253 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#2210911 4-Apr-2019 20:28

Netflix has a lot of new content and some of then are in-house productions that achieve extreme success. I disagree with your assessment.

D.W

725 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2210913 4-Apr-2019 20:30

tdgeek:

Not trolling and feel free to leave that room first. You may be aware there are a number of SVOD providers, all of whom have exclusives. NF has a LOT of content, most of it is old and cheap, but to looks good. LB has TV only, but newer, everyone knows that. And exclusives. I assume Neon that is rarely mentioned is also no good? A failed experiment? Its about what you have not who owns you. If 4000+ items that are old and old and cheap, that's ok, too much for me to watch. We all ONLY look a the key content.

As a fairly regular Netflix viewer, I'd say 90% of the content I watch on Netflix is new and exclusive to Netflix (as in, produced or distributed by Netflix).

The days of Netflix being mostly old cheap content are long gone.

tdgeek

29743 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2210919 4-Apr-2019 20:35

D.W:

tdgeek:

Not trolling and feel free to leave that room first. You may be aware there are a number of SVOD providers, all of whom have exclusives. NF has a LOT of content, most of it is old and cheap, but to looks good. LB has TV only, but newer, everyone knows that. And exclusives. I assume Neon that is rarely mentioned is also no good? A failed experiment? Its about what you have not who owns you. If 4000+ items that are old and old and cheap, that's ok, too much for me to watch. We all ONLY look a the key content.

As a fairly regular Netflix viewer, I'd say 90% of the content I watch on Netflix is new and exclusive to Netflix (as in, produced or distributed by Netflix).

The days of Netflix being mostly old cheap content are long gone.

90% of the 4000+ items are new and exclusive? That's huge and I am clearly wrong. If that is the case.

tdgeek

29743 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2210921 4-Apr-2019 20:40

freitasm: Netflix has a lot of new content and some of then are in-house productions that achieve extreme success. I disagree with your assessment.

They all have new content. And exclusives. NF has marketed itself on thousands of titles. What relevant is how many are modern titles. And numbers like 4000 or 5000 are not relevant. The other poster says about 3200 of them are new and/or exclusive. Now that is a lot.

My point is they all have their own MO. They all have exclusives that make them all relevant and desired. And they all have a cost, which amount to a lot to have all of them. The thread is about LB, which IMO, and that applies to ALL of them, is relevant.

D.W

725 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2210928 4-Apr-2019 20:44

tdgeek:

90% of the 4000+ items are new and exclusive? That's huge and I am clearly wrong. If that is the case.

That isn't what I said and I'm not sure if you intentionally misinterpreted that or not.

Dial111

978 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2210931 4-Apr-2019 20:47

tdgeek:
D.W:

tdgeek:

Not trolling and feel free to leave that room first. You may be aware there are a number of SVOD providers, all of whom have exclusives. NF has a LOT of content, most of it is old and cheap, but to looks good. LB has TV only, but newer, everyone knows that. And exclusives. I assume Neon that is rarely mentioned is also no good? A failed experiment? Its about what you have not who owns you. If 4000+ items that are old and old and cheap, that's ok, too much for me to watch. We all ONLY look a the key content.

As a fairly regular Netflix viewer, I'd say 90% of the content I watch on Netflix is new and exclusive to Netflix (as in, produced or distributed by Netflix).

The days of Netflix being mostly old cheap content are long gone.

90% of the 4000+ items are new and exclusive? That's huge and I am clearly wrong. If that is the case.

I’ve put in bold the part you must’ve missed.

tdgeek

29743 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2210935 4-Apr-2019 20:51

D.W:

tdgeek:

90% of the 4000+ items are new and exclusive? That's huge and I am clearly wrong. If that is the case.

That isn't what I said and I'm not sure if you intentionally misinterpreted that or not.

Im talking about 4000+ items so why would you respond with what you watch? Its replying to a question that was not asked, to put your point across

You could say that yes there are 4000+ items and off course they aren't all new and exclusive, but I only watch mainly new and exclusive. Which is a fair comment but doesnt really add anything. Im sure most NF viewers, and those that view any SVOD players would say the same.

tdgeek

29743 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2210936 4-Apr-2019 20:52

Dial111:
tdgeek:

D.W:

tdgeek:

Not trolling and feel free to leave that room first. You may be aware there are a number of SVOD providers, all of whom have exclusives. NF has a LOT of content, most of it is old and cheap, but to looks good. LB has TV only, but newer, everyone knows that. And exclusives. I assume Neon that is rarely mentioned is also no good? A failed experiment? Its about what you have not who owns you. If 4000+ items that are old and old and cheap, that's ok, too much for me to watch. We all ONLY look a the key content.

As a fairly regular Netflix viewer, I'd say 90% of the content I watch on Netflix is new and exclusive to Netflix (as in, produced or distributed by Netflix).

The days of Netflix being mostly old cheap content are long gone.

90% of the 4000+ items are new and exclusive? That's huge and I am clearly wrong. If that is the case.

I’ve put in bold the part you must’ve missed.

I didn't miss it, my point was not based on what one poster watches

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5