morriscroy

Time to build that time machine.

PhantomStranger

Netflix's deal with EPIX was announced today as over. Netflix keeps losing content providers as Hollywood jacks the rates up for licensing their product. I hope people really like House of Cards, because that will be the only thing remaining in a year or two. People will soon have to start renting Blu-rays again if they want to see the latest movies.

The big one in EPIX's streaming catalog was Hunger Games.

http://www.epixhd.com/all-movies/#!s...=0&ratingMax=5

morriscroy

Why bluray specifically? (Besides "preaching to the choir" on here, or personal preference + hope).

If those zillions of people who want to see Hunger Games don't have a bluray player, will they get the dvd or some other option?

Bluray/dvd isn't the only option anymore.

On various cable services, one can order recent movies on vod type services. (Dunno about satellite services).

mndtrp

I assume he's saying that because people are dropping cable left and right. Those same people would probably balk at reentering an agreement to pay $120/month (or whatever it costs these days) to get new movies again. They would probably go back to renting discs to get new movies.

I am one of those people. I haven't had cable in almost 20 years, have been streaming-only for the past 8 years, and I certainly wouldn't get cable/satellite for the ability to get newer movies as VOD. If anything, I'll go back to renting discs from Netflix, or maybe trying out Amazon's VOD. At the moment, I don't have enough time to get through what Netflix still has available, so I'm not overly concerned.

People had to have seen this coming, though. Instead of having one cable bill, which includes all of their channels, now there will be 10 different bills to get the same content. Picking and choosing content providers has finally arrived, it remains to be seen if it's actually better than before.

morriscroy

For my purposes at the present time, cable turns out to be the least expensive. Most of my cable use, is actually keeping CNN and CNBC on for 12+ hours almost every day. (On two different screens).

I did the cord cutting thing years ago. Even with a flat rate broadband connection, it was still unreliable for watching two different live tv channels for 12+ hours every day.


If I wasn't watching CNBC+CNN for 12+ hours every day, I would certainly cut the chord again.

dvdshonna

```

morriscroy

I doubt you can produce realtime ticker data for $50/month.

CNN isn't the main priority, other than catching breaking news.

In the case of CNBC, it actually isn't primarily for the "news". I watch it primarily for the ticker data at the bottom and sides of the screen.

dvdshonna

```

Sub-Zero

August 22:

Why So Blu?

Mad Max will do some damage for next week's numbers - on both formats.

bruceames

We should start to see a lot more green arrows because this year is so top heavy in fall blockbuster releases compared to last year, which was relatively very weak. And of course, with a lot more revenue behind it, a green arrow in Q4 can easily offset 4 or 5 red arrows in Q2 or Q3.

I believe this week is where the Blu-ray YoY bottoms out for the year (I think it's down around 16 percent or so).

PhantomStranger

Most of Netflix's current subscribers are there because they can see a lot of movies for very little each month. I'm not even sure HBO could survive without cable companies. It's a suicidal business move dictated by Hollywood finally cutting Netflix off from premium content.

Netflix has a small advantage as first-mover in the streaming market but faces significant challenges becoming a "network" like the cable channels.

I heard something very interesting from a showrunner for one of Netflix's shows. Netflix is so secretive about ratings and viewers for their shows, the showrunner didn't even know how many were watching his own Netflix show. Netflix won't tell him.

dvdshonna

```

morriscroy

If Netflix isn't getting any revenue from advertising on their own shows, then they don't have to say anything about ratings, viewer numbers, etc ...

IIRC, ratings are highly relevant when it comes to convincing advertisers to buy commercial time.

milo bloom

We rarely watch movies on Netflix or Hulu, it's almost all TV shows.

I wouldn't want them to go to all original content, I like having a place where I can find a variety of old and current TV shows (and some movies).

I'm reminded of when Cartoon Network first started, the majority of their programming was classic stuff, like Looney Tunes and all the old Hanna Barbera stuff, and that was exactly what we wanted. They started adding their original stuff and some of it was okay, but then all the classics disappeared.

I'd hate for Netflix to follow that path.

orangerunner

I think, by law, any broadcaster who accepts advertising must have a third-party reveal their viewing numbers, such as Nielson, to give the advertisers a fair sense of what a 30 second commercial might be really worth.

In a sense, network TV really only exists for the purposes of attracting viewers to the commercials.

rw2516

This. TV shows came about as a way to keep people watching between commercials. The sponsors purchased time blocks from the networks and the sponsors decided what shows aired at what times. If you had a pilot you shopped it to the sponsors, not the networks. If Ford owned Sunday night from 7-8pm on CBS, Ford told CBS to air a show they were sponsoring. A show got cancelled when a sponsor dropped it. Another sponsor could pick it up and the show would move to a time slot owned by that sponsor. This is why in a lot of old shows products are incorporated into the credits or are sold in the shows themselves.

dvdshonna

```

rw2516

This is why discs are more important than streaming. POWER. I am more powerful than any streaming service. Unlike streaming services, with discs I have created an ironclad monopoly. I offer myself, at any given time, anything and everything I could ever wish.

Alan Smithee

AMC started out as American Movie Classics- and it was great then. HBO has always shown more than just movies but they were still the channel's main draw- I never subscribed because they were pan and scan though, and now they crop scope movies to 16x9. I watch mainly movies on Netflix, but with their intrusive interface on newer Roku models, I wouldn't mind if they started focusing on original shows and let another company with more respect for viewers take over the movies.

dvdshonna

```

Matthew Chmiel

You're confusing streaming services.

Amazon Prime, Hulu, and Netflix are one in the same. Think of them like a television station like HBO. Sure, they make their own content, both television and film, but they also have distribution deals that last for a specific amount of time. It took years and years for HBO to be noted for their exclusive content more than their licensed content. Sure, the licensed content holds weight, but you need original content to keep people subscribing.

Yes, physical media has that to compete with. However, physical media's main competitors are services like iTunes and Vudu where if I want to rent and/or purchase a specific title while having instant gratification. Yes, those options do stream... but you can also download the content for offline viewing too.

PhantomStranger

Amazon announced today they will allow the downloading of some Instant Video shows/movies. Apparently only to mobile devices, computers will not be able to download anything.

As the streaming market shakes out, I don't think people realize how much of a quagmire it will soon become. Consumers will have to go à la carte with all of their entertainment consumption. The days of subscribing to one or two services will soon be over.

Netflix's monthly cost will almost certainly go up in the near future. It wouldn't shock me for them to settle around $20 per month.

davidh777

IMO, Netflix has a long way to go if they want people subscribe primarily for original content.

It's a risky strategy because they've already "won" the first stage of the streaming world. If people want subscription streaming, they know they want Netflix, even if they don't exactly know what's available on there. Will they be able to retain and expand their subscriber base if their content takes a big hit? On the other hand, I can see why they want to try. Their current pricing was based on contracts signed before people really knew what streaming was. Now studios want more money for their content, and you also risk losing subscribers if you have to raise your prices significantly. It will be interesting to watch.

big e

I was in Best Buy today to pick up Mad Max and was shocked to find they were sold out of the standard and steelbook BDs. I saw two 3D copies and a handful of DVD editions and that was it. The blue shirt I talked to copies were flying off the shelves. This bodes well for physical media, if you ask me. I think we're going to start seeing some positive sales numbers.