Netflix to crack down on unblockers

Forums › Online streaming services › Netflix to crack down on unblockers

1 | ... | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | ... | 70

29590 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1532925 14-Apr-2016 11:34

dclegg:

tdgeek:

Yes, thats it, your not paying for NZ and US. Cancel US and it doesnt affect revenue as the US is free. Some will cancel NF, that happens, not a big number by any stretch

Oh, I understand that. Having US access was a lingering side-effect of getting access to Netflix at all from the days when we couldn't get Netflix here via official channels.

I only cancelled Sky once I was confident we'd be served well enough by official local options, should our current geo-unblocking measures ever come undone. With the strengthening catalogues of both Netflix NZ and Lightbox, we're now there. Although it would be sad to lose access to other services we currently parallel import. Some of these contain content not available here at all.

I sympathize with those that may want to cancel Netflix to send a protest vote that the current regionalized content distribution business model is out dated. But for us, we're taking a more pragmatic approach, and Netflix NZ still has a place in our viewing roster.

I agree. saying its archaic is bizarre. its actually archaic as some bury their head in the sand and chose to ignore the economics that are in play. Its like saying that AB games should be free on air, and choosing to ignore the reveue streams generated not just to the rugger owners, but advertisers, the provider of the content etc. It will all work itself out. You cannot dissolve contracts at 3pm today. It will take time to re hash the redistribution of the revenues down the food chain, while allowing a greater distribution to be available

GoodSync

GoodSync. Easily back up and sync your files with GoodSync. Simple and secure file backup and synchronisation software will ensure that your files are never lost (affiliate link).

SaltyNZ

8119 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#1532926 14-Apr-2016 11:35

watsonash:

What worries me most is that annoying 2 factor auth reminder each time I log in to put a phone number in. That makes it trivial for Netflix to see where you are from (excluding the small percent on global roaming).

Yeah, my first thought when the option to add a phone number popped up on the landing page was 'Nice try, Netflix.'

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

SaltyNZ

8119 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#1532933 14-Apr-2016 11:38

tdgeek:

You cannot dissolve contracts at 3pm today. It will take time to re hash the redistribution of the revenues down the food chain, while allowing a greater distribution to be available

But by the same token, not doing what you can to protest the status quo is a tacit green light for them to continue bending you over. You're right: there are economics in play here. The economics are "I have money that I can choose to give to you, or not. But you need my money to survive." If enough people realised that, this discussion would be over, because all providers would have everything tomorrow or else be selling off their remaining fixed assets at cents on the dollar as they went out of business.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

tdgeek

29590 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1532955 14-Apr-2016 11:46

SaltyNZ:

tdgeek:

You cannot dissolve contracts at 3pm today. It will take time to re hash the redistribution of the revenues down the food chain, while allowing a greater distribution to be available

But by the same token, not doing what you can to protest the status quo is a tacit green light for them to continue bending you over. You're right: there are economics in play here. The economics are "I have money that I can choose to give to you, or not. But you need my money to survive." If enough people realised that, this discussion would be over, because all providers would have everything tomorrow or else be selling off their remaining fixed assets at cents on the dollar as they went out of business.

Im not talking about your economics. I'm talking about the economics of the businesses, the creatirs who need revenue to make the contact, the businesses that support and ubnderwrite that, the ones that take the raw contact and put it into the finished product, the media distributors who sell it to their customers, the advertisers that can charge more due to it being new and premium, the whole nine yards. Netflix, Sky, Neon, LB, HUlu, and many many others want exclusivity. When a model arrives that retains those revenues, there will be no reason to be exclusive, at leats geologucally, there will still be exclusivity between providers in the same geo region, which some here dont want

dclegg

2806 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1532957 14-Apr-2016 11:49

SaltyNZ:

But by the same token, not doing what you can to protest the status quo is a tacit green light for them to continue bending you over.

Yes, that is a concern. But being a pragmatist that watches a metric crap tonne of TV to unwind, and who won't pirate content due to ethical concerns, sometimes I have to leave that particular battle to other soldiers to fight.

But at least I get to send a big "STAHP!" to one of the local content distributers here. For years we've been paying Sky a premium for what ends up being very poor content for us (both in terms of content type and video quality. Unless we want to be price gouged even further and stump up for SOHO and the HD ticket.

We can now pay other local content distributers a combined total of around 1/2 what we were paying Sky, and actually have a decent amount of content to watch. The only downside is that I no longer have access to live rugby. But because I was generally timeshifting it & watching it once my wife has gone to bed, its not a major loss. I just use the delayed coverage on Prime.

SaltyNZ

8119 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#1532960 14-Apr-2016 11:53

tdgeek:

Im not talking about your economics. I'm talking about the economics of the businesses, the creatirs who need revenue to make the contact, the businesses that support and ubnderwrite that, the ones that take the raw contact and put it into the finished product, the media distributors who sell it to their customers, the advertisers that can charge more due to it being new and premium, the whole nine yards. Netflix, Sky, Neon, LB, HUlu, and many many others want exclusivity. When a model arrives that retains those revenues, there will be no reason to be exclusive, at leats geologucally, there will still be exclusivity between providers in the same geo region, which some here dont want

I know what you mean: but if we - the people who have the money that the other people want to have - don't give them any incentive, it won't happen. They will continue to hold onto their outdated regional models until their hand is forced. Because why wouldn't they? They believe they are maximising their profit this way. They might even be right. But whether they actually are or not is irrelevant; only what they think is.

And they won't change unless they are made to realise that they are an optional budget line item. So I, personally, will simply cancel if it gets too hard. They can have my optional money on my terms, or not at all.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

dclegg

2806 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1532962 14-Apr-2016 11:54

tdgeek:

Im not talking about your economics. I'm talking about the economics of the businesses, the creatirs who need revenue to make the contact, the businesses that support and ubnderwrite that, the ones that take the raw contact and put it into the finished product, the media distributors who sell it to their customers, the advertisers that can charge more due to it being new and premium, the whole nine yards. Netflix, Sky, Neon, LB, HUlu, and many many others want exclusivity. When a model arrives that retains those revenues, there will be no reason to be exclusive, at leats geologucally, there will still be exclusivity between providers in the same geo region, which some here dont want

There's still room to move there, I reckon. I'd be happy to pay a little for for my SVOD services if it meant being able to provide a global catalogue. I also wouldn't be adverse to having ad supported content.

tdgeek

29590 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1532968 14-Apr-2016 12:06

SaltyNZ:

tdgeek:

Im not talking about your economics. I'm talking about the economics of the businesses, the creatirs who need revenue to make the contact, the businesses that support and ubnderwrite that, the ones that take the raw contact and put it into the finished product, the media distributors who sell it to their customers, the advertisers that can charge more due to it being new and premium, the whole nine yards. Netflix, Sky, Neon, LB, HUlu, and many many others want exclusivity. When a model arrives that retains those revenues, there will be no reason to be exclusive, at leats geologucally, there will still be exclusivity between providers in the same geo region, which some here dont want

I know what you mean: but if we - the people who have the money that the other people want to have - don't give them any incentive, it won't happen. They will continue to hold onto their outdated regional models until their hand is forced. Because why wouldn't they? They believe they are maximising their profit this way. They might even be right. But whether they actually are or not is irrelevant; only what they think is.

And they won't change unless they are made to realise that they are an optional budget line item. So I, personally, will simply cancel if it gets too hard. They can have my optional money on my terms, or not at all.

Who is "they"? What they do know is currently they each recieve revenues that they are happy with, all those sectors I outlined. Thats the archaic model. Its working well. If you wish to change it to a new non geo model, I doubt they really care as long as they all get the same revenues. Changing that isnt easy as contracts are already in place. Advertsisers will need to be told to go away as the subscribers will pick up that tab. It will happen, but will it mean everythibng for a coup,e of $15 subs? Not by a long shot

in my opinion.

tdgeek

29590 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1532969 14-Apr-2016 12:07

dclegg:

tdgeek:

Im not talking about your economics. I'm talking about the economics of the businesses, the creatirs who need revenue to make the contact, the businesses that support and ubnderwrite that, the ones that take the raw contact and put it into the finished product, the media distributors who sell it to their customers, the advertisers that can charge more due to it being new and premium, the whole nine yards. Netflix, Sky, Neon, LB, HUlu, and many many others want exclusivity. When a model arrives that retains those revenues, there will be no reason to be exclusive, at leats geologucally, there will still be exclusivity between providers in the same geo region, which some here dont want

There's still room to move there, I reckon. I'd be happy to pay a little for for my SVOD services if it meant being able to provide a global catalogue. I also wouldn't be adverse to having ad supported content.

Thats my point. Would you expect the global cataloguie to be everything, or just more stuiff, such as NF US vs NF NZ?

dclegg

2806 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1532975 14-Apr-2016 12:16

tdgeek:

Who is "they"? What they do know is currently they each recieve revenues that they are happy with, all those sectors I outlined. Thats the archaic model. Its working well. If you wish to change it to a new non geo model, I doubt they really care as long as they all get the same revenues. Changing that isnt easy as contracts are already in place. Advertsisers will need to be told to go away as the subscribers will pick up that tab. It will happen, but will it mean everythibng for a coup,e of $15 subs? Not by a long shot

in my opinion.

They == the content creators & distributors, as both parties have agreed to the current contracts.

The archaic model is only working well for these people. It's not working well for consumers, who are discovering a wealth of content they would love to watch. And consumers are also not prepared to wait months until they get to see this content, as it often means steering well clear of the Internet unless you want plot lines spoiled well before they get to experience them.

I also don't agree that advertisers necessarily need to go away. In fact, I envision them playing an important part in allowing content distributers to offer global catalogues without needing to increase their fees by too much (although I expect there will need to be some increase).

I see them having cheaper ad supported models, and more expensive ad-free ones. With these sources of income, they should be able to nut out a contract with content providers that gives them similar revenue. And because they have ad supported content, they'll be able to charge advertisers more for ad spots within premium shows such as Game of Thrones.

dclegg

2806 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1532983 14-Apr-2016 12:21

tdgeek:

Thats my point. Would you expect the global cataloguie to be everything, or just more stuiff, such as NF US vs NF NZ?

Ideally I'd like to have one service for all my viewing needs, but I'm not sure that will happen. But at the very least, a particular service should not have geo-blocked content. So if Netflix negotiates rights to a show, these rights should be for all markets they operate in.

tdgeek

29590 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1532985 14-Apr-2016 12:24

dclegg:

tdgeek:

Who is "they"? What they do know is currently they each recieve revenues that they are happy with, all those sectors I outlined. Thats the archaic model. Its working well. If you wish to change it to a new non geo model, I doubt they really care as long as they all get the same revenues. Changing that isnt easy as contracts are already in place. Advertsisers will need to be told to go away as the subscribers will pick up that tab. It will happen, but will it mean everythibng for a coup,e of $15 subs? Not by a long shot

in my opinion.

They == the content creators & distributors, as both parties have agreed to the current contracts.

The archaic model is only working well for these people. It's not working well for consumers, who are discovering a wealth of content they would love to watch. And consumers are also not prepared to wait months until they get to see this content, as it often means steering well clear of the Internet unless you want plot lines spoiled well before they get to experience them.

I also don't agree that advertisers necessarily need to go away. In fact, I envision them playing an important part in allowing content distributers to offer global catalogues without needing to increase their fees by too much (although I expect there will need to be some increase).

I see them having cheaper ad supported models, and more expensive ad-free ones. With these sources of income, they should be able to nut out a contract with content providers that gives them similar revenue. And because they have ad supported content, they'll be able to charge advertisers more for ad spots within premium shows such as Game of Thrones.

The model is their business, its working, as you say. Thats it. Id like many more brands available for sneakers, or fridges but Im stuck with what there is. Im a consumer

Advertisers already pump cash into this business, so charging them for prime spots won't make a difference as they already do. Most here dont want advertising too

I dont see an issue long term, its just re distrbuting the sources of revenue. But it will take time to let the current contracts expire and add new ones.

tdgeek

29590 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1532986 14-Apr-2016 12:26

dclegg:

tdgeek:

Thats my point. Would you expect the global cataloguie to be everything, or just more stuiff, such as NF US vs NF NZ?

Ideally I'd like to have one service for all my viewing needs, but I'm not sure that will happen. But at the very least, a particular service should not have geo-blocked content. So if Netflix negotiates rights to a show, these rights should be for all markets they operate in.

Agree. We will end up with multiple services, but we do now, so thats ok. Higher costs per each is what I envision, thats ok too as they are dirt cheap

dclegg

2806 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1532991 14-Apr-2016 12:36

tdgeek:

The model is their business, its working, as you say. Thats it. Id like many more brands available for sneakers, or fridges but Im stuck with what there is. Im a consumer

Advertisers already pump cash into this business, so charging them for prime spots won't make a difference as they already do. Most here dont want advertising too

I dont see an issue long term, its just re distrbuting the sources of revenue. But it will take time to let the current contracts expire and add new ones.

The model isn't working as well as it used to, though. Global consumers are realising there is a wealth of content out there that they are missing out on, or are getting with quite a lengthy delay. They're even happy to pay someone for it.

You say that most don't want advertising, and this is partially true, because they're used to their SVOD services being ad free. But if they knew that advertising would allow them to officially gain access to a global library for services that currently geo-restrict, they may be more amenable to it. Especially if the service provided a way to opt out of the advertising by paying an increased subscription fee.

ockel

2031 posts

Uber Geek

#1532992 14-Apr-2016 12:41

dclegg:

tdgeek:

Thats my point. Would you expect the global cataloguie to be everything, or just more stuiff, such as NF US vs NF NZ?

Ideally I'd like to have one service for all my viewing needs, but I'm not sure that will happen. But at the very least, a particular service should not have geo-blocked content. So if Netflix negotiates rights to a show, these rights should be for all markets they operate in.

And Netflix has the ability to pay for those rights, in all those regions, either collectively at the time of negotiation or by acquiring from the existing rights holder. Why dont they? Maybe its not economic - still good for Netflix as a company but not good for the consumer.

Does the recent announcement for Top Gear mean that the Beeb should have sold all the rights to Netflix? Why did the Beeb decide to retain the rights in regions where it has syndication? Maybe its better for the BBC as a company? Sorry consumer but we run our business for our shareholders not for the customer.

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

1 | ... | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | ... | 70