NEWS: Netflix considering ad supported tier?

Discussion in 'Film & TV On Demand Streaming Services' started by Phil Hinton, Jul 12, 2019.


    1. Andy Bassett

      Andy Bassett
      Standard Member Staff Member

      Joined:
      Aug 7, 2017
      Messages:
      299
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      46
      Location:
      Sheffield, UK
      Ratings:
      +116
    2. Rockets

      Rockets
      Active Member

      Joined:
      Dec 16, 2016
      Messages:
      227
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      43
      Location:
      UK
      Ratings:
      +121
      It is a mystery to most people how tech giants can be in so much debt but the market still has confidence in them. If Netflix's predictions of growth or the market suddenly changes things could go wrong very fast with the spend to make money strategy.
       
      • Agree Agree x 1
      • Wow Wow x 1
      • List
    3. Evinger

      Evinger
      Well-known Member

      Joined:
      Jan 28, 2017
      Messages:
      701
      Products Owned:
      18
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      96
      Location:
      Eving, Germany
      Ratings:
      +583
      Yes, all sounds very pie-in-the-sky.
      And it seems right now, that if you want to go Public & join the Stock Market & have a strong start, the key is to be massively in debt with no prospect of beginning to make a profit in the foreseeable future. (Airbnb, Lyft, WeWork).
       
    4. golden phoenix

      golden phoenix
      Distinguished Member

      Joined:
      Aug 29, 2005
      Messages:
      12,699
      Products Owned:
      7
      Products Wanted:
      2
      Trophy Points:
      166
      Location:
      cheshire
      Ratings:
      +5,020
      ads are fine if it is a choice and the price drops in the subscription. but most people wouldn't want ads..if they introduced ads and the sub didn't drop..it would be suicide for netflix
       
    5. MagnumXL

      MagnumXL
      Active Member

      Joined:
      Jul 16, 2017
      Messages:
      97
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      21
      Location:
      Ohio
      Ratings:
      +63
      I have zero interest in any ad based service and refuse to even try Hulu after I read its "ad free" version STILL has ads in some of the shows (WTF?!?!?).

      I ditched cable (and save $123 US a month) when I could no longer tolerate obnoxious loud ads and DVRs on slow cable box GUIs that literally burned out every 9 months due to excessive heat in the box (how my 2012 Mac Mini Quad i7 server on 24/7 went 7 years with RAID 0 using two internal spinners and zero errors and never got more than warm seems like a mystery compared to those crappy cable boxes.....

      I sure as hell don't want to go from a lovely ad free Netflix and Prime experience to six new streaming services all with their own new buggy as hell interfaces and monthly fees that add up to a cable subscription again AND have ads you cannot skip that are super loud and play the exact same ad five times in a row because they're the only advertiser on some new crap service, all born out of greed and envy of Netflix....

      The Internet was vastly faster and more efficient in the 1990s and 2000s overall. All more bandwidth and computer power and HTML 5 have brought are more ways to detect your ad blockers and more ways to shove hovering and popup ads in your face you either cannot block or the site refuses to function with your ad blocker on and with Google (an ad based company) leading the browser charge, does anyone seriously expect things to improve??? We need a new network to replace the Internet. It's been ruined by corporate garbage and ninnies that think they are important because they have 50 followers on Facebook.
       
    6. Clem_Dye

      Clem_Dye
      Well-known Member

      Joined:
      May 8, 2006
      Messages:
      3,758
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      136
      Ratings:
      +628
      A two-tier service is fine, providing that ads. don't then 'bleed' into the subscription service. For providers, I can see the logic, to a degree, but I wonder how much money they'll earn relying on ad. revenues compared to the existing subscription model. Ads. in a subscription service would kill it stone dead for many, me included. As I've said before, I'm still surprised by how much money people pay for their Sky TV service, which is littered with ads. Sky is certainly having its cake and eating it. Odd that by comparison, those same shows that then appear on NowTV are ad-free, although sometimes you see the cut/return where the ads. were. The average US TV show is 40 minutes long. On Sky, and other services, those shows are billed for 1 hour. That's 20 minutes of ads. How many ad-breaks would have to appear in say an ad-based version of Netflix for the company to make any money? Just what will the viewing experience be like?

      Shudder.

      Clem
       
    7. MagnumXL

      MagnumXL
      Active Member

      Joined:
      Jul 16, 2017
      Messages:
      97
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      21
      Location:
      Ohio
      Ratings:
      +63
      Just think how much of ones life and youth is wasted watching 20 minutes of worthless rubbish every hour when you watch television. I had enough. I will not watch ad based TV anymore unless I'm desperate to see something or it's a live sporting event or the like.

      I cannot stand radio ads and they play the radio all day at work. One jingle car dealership ad in particular drive us all mad, but we are not allowed to shut the radio off or change the channel. It's like Chinese water torture. I make mental notes if annoying ads and make a point to NEVER frequent those businesses it buy those products if there's any alternative at all.

      There just seems to be no way to communicate to businesses that bad are are worse than no ad at all, but they must work or they'd be it of business. I just can't even imagine who would click on browser ad (could be malware even) let alone buy something that way.

      Nevermind all the unwanted telemarketing calls that no laws here in the US seem to be able to stop. I mean who would buy anything over the phone like that? It could be anyone trying to get your credit card number or ID data from you. Yet companies pay millions to push that garbage anyway so SOMEONE must do it. Lemmings.
       
    8. JabbaNut

      JabbaNut
      Well-known Member

      Joined:
      Sep 9, 2016
      Messages:
      1,921
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      86
      Location:
      Earth, uk
      Ratings:
      +284
      The point missed is the original article is not by Netflix. So is it really the advertisers are scared Netflix only needs product placement?
      In America subscription and advert hell go hand in hand, does Netflix scare the SVOD as Netflix breaks that greedy model of profit?
       
    9. Clem_Dye

      Clem_Dye
      Well-known Member

      Joined:
      May 8, 2006
      Messages:
      3,758
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      136
      Ratings:
      +628
      I think that Netflix was just cited as an example. Amazon are actively considering the idea, as I recall reading recently. Advertisers do seem to have strange ideas about getting their message across. I’ve lost count of the number of times that I’ve heard or seen the same ad. at every break. If you weren’t interested the first time you heard/saw something, ramming the message down people’s throats several times during the course of a single programme achieves (for me) exactly the opposite that was intended.

      I get that companies have to get their products into the marketplace but I can’t recall the last time that I heard or saw an ad. that prompted me to seek that product out.

      Perhaps this is just a ploy to encourage more viewers to subscribe in order to negate the ads. Time will tell, I suspect.

      Clem
       
    10. Garrett

      Garrett
      Moderator

      Joined:
      Apr 21, 2001
      Messages:
      45,464
      Products Owned:
      2
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      167
      Location:
      The best thief you'll never see.
      Ratings:
      +9,539
      It was on the news this morning that Netflix is losing customers for the first time? which has just happened since the price increase.
       
    11. Clem_Dye

      Clem_Dye
      Well-known Member

      Joined:
      May 8, 2006
      Messages:
      3,758
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      136
      Ratings:
      +628
      Well, most things have their 'day'. Perhaps Netflix has had its. It was, after all, the service that kick-started streaming for the masses. I think though there's a bigger message here: streaming services are very price-sensitive. Any existing or new provider must be aware that not only do they need the content to attract subscribers, they need to pitch their prices correctly. Netflix's old prices were about right in the perceived value-for-money stakes. Their price hike pushed that for a percentage of their customer base, hence, I suppose, their interest in an ad-based service. Time will tell, I suppose.

      Clem
       
    12. Rockets

      Rockets
      Active Member

      Joined:
      Dec 16, 2016
      Messages:
      227
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      43
      Location:
      UK
      Ratings:
      +121
      I think the biggest problem with streaming services now is the platform only content is wearing the customer down needing to subscribe to several services. This is inconvenient and cumbersome.

      Let's face it the original premise of the streaming services is that you could see any content when ever you liked. BUT more and more are doing original content that they will not let other services use and if they do it tends to be quite sometime after release.

      If you like it could be compared to the games console industry in reverse :rotfl:
      Years ago it was all about original content you couldn't get on other games consoles, over the years that has changed.
       
    13. MagnumXL

      MagnumXL
      Active Member

      Joined:
      Jul 16, 2017
      Messages:
      97
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      21
      Location:
      Ohio
      Ratings:
      +63
      Compared to cable, Netflix is still a bargain. Rooting for its demise is counterproductive, IMO. It is all these others I want to see fail like Disney as they are leaving Netflix due to greed and nothing else. I'm not going to subscribe to a dozen streamers so my bill is right back up at cable prices again. I don't watch enough to warrant the $123 a month I was paying for cable and that was without any premium channels and loads of advertisements that I hate.

      What most of us want is ala carte. We want to pay for what we watch, not subsidize the religious networks, alternative lifestyle channels and loads of crap we don't watch ever. Stop making me pay for Lifetime, QVC, BET and ESPN. I never watch any of those yet they are in almost every streaming cable basic package and then we wonder why it goes up and up to cover Fox or Disney's demands from a reasonable $25 a month to $50 or $60 for a lousy 60 stations, 45 of which we have zero interest in. Then fan out the ones we do want in separate packages until we're right back up to $123+ a month and without the DVR to skip ads to boot. Screw it. I'll do without.
       
    14. Over by there

      Over by there
      Well-known Member

      Joined:
      Mar 21, 2016
      Messages:
      2,608
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      133
      Location:
      Wales
      Ratings:
      +1,252
      Netflix got in first and seem to be trying scary borrowing to survive which makes me wonder what they are afraid of in other peoples content, in that they are in for some grief (not a great deal of their content has me interested). Ads on Netflix, well, I am probably leaving them anyway but I would not take up an ad support tier should I stay.

      I have been waiting for something to crop up to see what else I can get I might prefer. I have no issues with multiple subscriptions, I do basically the same all the time with the household stuff and cars. Looking forward to the few new ones that are coming along.

      This was always going to happen, perhaps we will get to see some interesting subscription packages that may well be a better deal.

      I imagine the ad agencies are hammering on their doors all the time and have been for some time. Must be tempting when future is not so certain.
       
    15. Rockets

      Rockets
      Active Member

      Joined:
      Dec 16, 2016
      Messages:
      227
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      43
      Location:
      UK
      Ratings:
      +121
      I don't think you understand how it works, much of the 'crap' you describe is either free or at worst they have to pay to be on the platform. So the reality is in some cases the 'crap' you describe actually helps to reduce the cost of the package/subs you pay. You are not subsidising it.

      Unfortunately a vendor like SKY has made a incredible easy and user friendly platform which is great to navigate - this is why they can get away with such high package costs and people are not shying away from them. Sky is slowly going towards a full streaming service and may well act as a 'hub' eventually to bring many streaming services together. While sure streaming services are making huge gains in the market SKY continues to be a very big player in Europe with no signs of it going away. Also importantly it isn't based on the spend money to make money which means it debt sheet doesn't look so bad.
       
    16. JabbaNut

      JabbaNut
      Well-known Member

      Joined:
      Sep 9, 2016
      Messages:
      1,921
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      86
      Location:
      Earth, uk
      Ratings:
      +284
    17. Rockets

      Rockets
      Active Member

      Joined:
      Dec 16, 2016
      Messages:
      227
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      43
      Location:
      UK
      Ratings:
      +121
      Always interesting when someone takes a little snippets to make the overall situation sound good.

      I suggest reading up on what has been happening over the last few days and perhaps even look at what has been happening over the last year.

      When a large company doesn't hit a new subs target by 50% it suggests something is changing in the market. When said company then has big drops in share price and has massive debt a few eyebrows start getting raised.
       
    18. MagnumXL

      MagnumXL
      Active Member

      Joined:
      Jul 16, 2017
      Messages:
      97
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      21
      Location:
      Ohio
      Ratings:
      +63
      So they're giving me those stations I don't want or care about for free? I call BS. I wouldn't have to pay a dime if they were giving them away. Besides, one man's crap is another's treasure. Just because I don't like ESPN doesn't mean someone else doesn't. In fact, Disney charges quite a lot for it and it's not optional. They sell a package and yes, what you don't watch pays for that which others do. That's called a subsidy.

      Low viewed programming, particularly "diverse" programming that keeps the networks out of trouble with various #whine'n'protest groups have to be paid for by someone and that means you and me whether we ever watch them or not. Otherwise, you could just order History and SyFy and call it day if you like. No, they have to keep the Rainbow channels on the air and someone has to pay for them and the 2000 viewers that actually watch each of them aren't enough to cover the costs. It would go out of business and you'd have a protest parade that the networks discriminate against rainbows.... So make all those History channel viewers pay for it by lumping it together in a package and just raise the price to cover it. That's your streaming packages from Sony, DirecTV and others. It's not what consumers want. They want ala carte to only pay for the channels and/or programming they actually watch and they will never get it as long as people keep playing their game.

      I quit that game. I buy the shows from iTunes I actually watch enough to keep and wait for the rest on Prime and Netflix. If they never show up, I'll just do without. I save $1000+ a year that way. And I watch nearly zero advertising.
       
    19. Evinger

      Evinger
      Well-known Member

      Joined:
      Jan 28, 2017
      Messages:
      701
      Products Owned:
      18
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      96
      Location:
      Eving, Germany
      Ratings:
      +583
      similar to our approach. But no Netflix; Just Amazon Prime & iTunes. I travel a lot, & we listen to talking books as much as watch Movies & Series, so this covers our needs.
       
    20. Rockets

      Rockets
      Active Member

      Joined:
      Dec 16, 2016
      Messages:
      227
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      43
      Location:
      UK
      Ratings:
      +121
      It wasn't that long ago that the BBC had to pay SKY and that goes for all the ITV channels to. Agreements were reached in the end so that SKY broadcast them for free now.
      General free view channels I believe are all on this free agreement now to.

      I suppose the idea was that you don't ever need to turn the sky box off to watch something that is on freeview no matter how lame it is.

      Only channels that are deemed worth paying for by SKY that are not on freeview (=potential viewers) they would pay for. So yes they see Discovery, Disney etc worth paying for.
       
    21. MagnumXL

      MagnumXL
      Active Member

      Joined:
      Jul 16, 2017
      Messages:
      97
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      21
      Location:
      Ohio
      Ratings:
      +63
      1> I don't live in the UK. The only time I ever watched Sky was when I was in London three years ago. It did seem to have more channels than I ever had here and certainly I couldn't turn on a cable channel here and find a show on latex and adult toys with nudity like I ran into switching past Hunger Games East/West feeds. Perhaps I'd have kept cable longer if we had better programming like that. ;)

      2> I was talking about "cable/sat" channels, not local ones (or in your case the BBC ones). I can get local channels over the air. In fact, many streaming services don't have agreements to carry over the air channels (e.g. When I tried DirecTV Now last year, they carried no local stations in my area). Heck, I wish I could get BBC live here. BBC America SUCKS. They show 2/3 American shows. I heard they even dropped Doctor Who (well that I can understand since they destroyed the show this past season the same way James Bond is about to be ruined by political correctness and "diversity". I don't know why they can't create new characters, but these types insist on giving us all female Ghostbusters just to push an agenda an no other reason.

      3> I think it's bad enough these stations waste my time showing ads I couldn't care less about, but then they want me to pay to watch the stations as well (cable isn't cheap here; I was paying $123 a month for two HD boxes and perhaps 250 channels, of which I watched perhaps 10 of them. I had no option packages other than to not get HBO, etc. and choose not to get HD or a DVR. Yet we have people saying $11-14 a month is too much for Netflix, which gives like six simultaneous channels that can be shared between family members (they don't even check to see if the family members are in the same house, unlike DirecTV and others).

      Netflix is generally one or two seasons behind networks on their shows, but to me it's easily worth it to not have to watch commercials. I'm in no hurry to watch another episode of Supergirl anyway (another preachy PC show). Frankly, I don't watch many Netflix productions. I preferred the cheaper version that just showed old TV shows I could binge watch. But it's getting to the point that Prime has more TV Shows and movies than Netflix and I was already getting it for the two day (now one day for many things) delivery anyway.
       
    22. Clem_Dye

      Clem_Dye
      Well-known Member

      Joined:
      May 8, 2006
      Messages:
      3,758
      Products Owned:
      0
      Products Wanted:
      0
      Trophy Points:
      136
      Ratings:
      +628
      I don’t think that anyone wants Netflix to fold, but I suppose the focus is on the company as it’s still the market leader.

      Clem
       

    Share This Page

    Loading...