![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
ockel:MediaLight: Just putting my 2 cents in i believe they have to say this to keep their content partner agreements happy.
But it will be a slow move forward and DNS providers will be even quicker to keep their subscribers.
However if netflix start to block via the location of the credit card registered to pay for subscriptions this could be an issue...however Netflix makes too much money off people to go risking this.
I say we will be fine...or should i say the geeks out there will be, maybe just the average joe that will suffer.
If Netflix were really serious instead of this half hearted effort then surely we'd see a repeat of the HBONow threats:
"Dear HBO NOW User: It has come to our attention that you may have signed up for and viewed video content on the HBO NOW streaming service from outside of the authorized service area (the United States, including D.C. and certain US territories). We would like to take this opportunity to remind you that the HBO NOW streaming service is only available to residents of the United States, for use within the United States. Any other access is prohibited by our Terms of Use. If you feel that you have received this message in error, and that you have both met the eligibility requirements for HBO NOW and have been using the service within the United States, please call us at 1-855-366-2183. If we do not hear from you by April 21, we will proceed with deactivating your HBO NOW account without further notice to you. Please note that it is your responsibility to cancel any automatic billing with your Subscription Provider to avoid incurring charges for any future months."
what ever happened to that anyway??? http://www.geekzone.co.nz/forums.asp?forumid=151&topicid=171148&page_no=5
And with the actual and threat of account deactivation of streaming from Netflix it might make life difficult for the subscriber but Netflix illustrates to the content providers that they mean business. Not kinda-mean-business as they'd currently saying.
Of course driving users to piracy over streaming increases Netflix's ability to negotiate with the content providers....... short term pain for Netflix, long term gain as a global content monopoly.
ockel:MediaLight: Just putting my 2 cents in i believe they have to say this to keep their content partner agreements happy.
But it will be a slow move forward and DNS providers will be even quicker to keep their subscribers.
However if netflix start to block via the location of the credit card registered to pay for subscriptions this could be an issue...however Netflix makes too much money off people to go risking this.
I say we will be fine...or should i say the geeks out there will be, maybe just the average joe that will suffer.
If Netflix were really serious instead of this half hearted effort then surely we'd see a repeat of the HBONow threats:
"Dear HBO NOW User: It has come to our attention that you may have signed up for and viewed video content on the HBO NOW streaming service from outside of the authorized service area (the United States, including D.C. and certain US territories). We would like to take this opportunity to remind you that the HBO NOW streaming service is only available to residents of the United States, for use within the United States. Any other access is prohibited by our Terms of Use. If you feel that you have received this message in error, and that you have both met the eligibility requirements for HBO NOW and have been using the service within the United States, please call us at 1-855-366-2183. If we do not hear from you by April 21, we will proceed with deactivating your HBO NOW account without further notice to you. Please note that it is your responsibility to cancel any automatic billing with your Subscription Provider to avoid incurring charges for any future months."
what ever happened to that anyway??? http://www.geekzone.co.nz/forums.asp?forumid=151&topicid=171148&page_no=5
And with the actual and threat of account deactivation of streaming from Netflix it might make life difficult for the subscriber but Netflix illustrates to the content providers that they mean business. Not kinda-mean-business as they'd currently saying.
Of course driving users to piracy over streaming increases Netflix's ability to negotiate with the content providers....... short term pain for Netflix, long term gain as a global content monopoly.
hagfish: If they'd done this a year ago, they'd have lost us all as subscribers. Now that we have a (lite) version in NZ, they hope to that - pissed off though we are - we'll keep subscribing. Sorry, NF - the NZ offering is not worth it.
Sixth Labour Government - "Vision without Execution is just Hallucination"
Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos
MikeB4:
Hahaha I just went back to Sky.
iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!
These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.
Rikkitic: I have accounts with Unotelly and Stremr.TV (free). I just checked both and both are working just fine with Netflix USA. I don't actually subscribe to Netflix in any country, but I can see where they think I am by going to the free trial page.
iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!
These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.
SaltyNZ:MikeB4:
Hahaha I just went back to Sky.
Yeah, and the half hour of ads in between every twenty minutes of programming gives you plenty of time for toilet breaks, reading Tolstoy etc. too!
Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos
Rikkitic: Just to dislocate this thread entirely, has anyone ever stopped to ask just how much profit the content providers should expect to be entitled to? In the days of music downloading, the recording industry was weeping over the unfed mouths of all the starving artists' children and banging on and on about how much money was being lost to piracy and how that just made it utterly impossible for artists to create at all!
Now we have a situation where content providers are already making a profit on their home turf through normal sales, and then trying to increase that profit by selling the same thing over and over again based on accidents of geography and politics. Yet if they are already in profit, and the rest is just cream, it seems a little excessive to be complaining about geo-unblocking. How many times should they be entitled to sell the same thing? I say sell it once to the whole world, be satisfied with the enormous income that produces, and go easy on the greed for a change.
Sixth Labour Government - "Vision without Execution is just Hallucination"
ockel:hagfish: If they'd done this a year ago, they'd have lost us all as subscribers. Now that we have a (lite) version in NZ, they hope to that - pissed off though we are - we'll keep subscribing. Sorry, NF - the NZ offering is not worth it.
Lets say the 20,000-30,000 unblockers in NZ cut Netflix completely. Thats cUSD3.6m per annum. Of annual revenues of greater than USD6.6bn. Tiny. Do you really think they'll care? Globally, who knows. But if it drives a greater degree of piracy then its not Netflix's problem. In fact its the content producers problem who may then be more likely to do global deals.
Thought I might do the global math. If 30k represents the NZ households that use unblockers then thats about 2%. There are about 140m households (pre 2016 expansion) that have roughly the same library as NZ. c2.8m households using unblockers on a 2% penetration. It'd take c5% off Netflix's revenue if they all unsubscribed due to this "effort".
If Netflix are doing this to get access to China with its 179m households........ wouldn't it be worth it?
Rikkitic: Just to dislocate this thread entirely, has anyone ever stopped to ask just how much profit the content providers should expect to be entitled to? In the days of music downloading, the recording industry was weeping over the unfed mouths of all the starving artists' children and banging on and on about how much money was being lost to piracy and how that just made it utterly impossible for artists to create at all!
Now we have a situation where content providers are already making a profit on their home turf through normal sales, and then trying to increase that profit by selling the same thing over and over again based on accidents of geography and politics. Yet if they are already in profit, and the rest is just cream, it seems a little excessive to be complaining about geo-unblocking. How many times should they be entitled to sell the same thing? I say sell it once to the whole world, be satisfied with the enormous income that produces, and go easy on the greed for a change.
rugrat:ockel:hagfish: If they'd done this a year ago, they'd have lost us all as subscribers. Now that we have a (lite) version in NZ, they hope to that - pissed off though we are - we'll keep subscribing. Sorry, NF - the NZ offering is not worth it.
Lets say the 20,000-30,000 unblockers in NZ cut Netflix completely. Thats cUSD3.6m per annum. Of annual revenues of greater than USD6.6bn. Tiny. Do you really think they'll care? Globally, who knows. But if it drives a greater degree of piracy then its not Netflix's problem. In fact its the content producers problem who may then be more likely to do global deals.
Thought I might do the global math. If 30k represents the NZ households that use unblockers then thats about 2%. There are about 140m households (pre 2016 expansion) that have roughly the same library as NZ. c2.8m households using unblockers on a 2% penetration. It'd take c5% off Netflix's revenue if they all unsubscribed due to this "effort".
If Netflix are doing this to get access to China with its 179m households........ wouldn't it be worth it?
It's more people then New Zealand households. If they succeed in blocking possible that they'll lose millions. It disadvantages every region with limited content, which I guess is most of the world.
If they succeed in blocking I'll only subscribe when on holidays, after all only monthly contract, and that's only if haven't found something better.
It's not pre 2016 expansion any more so if someone doesn't join that still counts as lost customer, therefore could be a lot more then 140 million households.
Sixth Labour Government - "Vision without Execution is just Hallucination"
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |