That analysis has the wrong pricing for Netflix, in my opinion. The $9.99 price is for the basic plan which isn't HD and only allows one screen. I'd expect lots of subs are for the standard ($15.49) or premium ($19.99) plans that allow higher resolutions and more streams at one time. It also misses that many streamers have ad-supported plans for lower cost, including Hulu, Peacock, and Paramount+. When I last heard numbers from Hulu, about 70% of their subs were ad-supported (https://variety.com/2019/digital/news/hulu-ad-supported-subscribers-70-percent-1203227954/). I bet a lot of users now are on the D+/Hulu/ESPN+ bundle too which has the ad-supported Hulu as default.
On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 12:43 PM Tom Wolper <[email protected]> wrote: > > The Variety article is a recap of a Fandom press release with no critical eye > or assessment of if the Fandom numbers mean anything. The survey is self > selecting and the data gathered respond to one small group who are already > committed to streaming TV and not the general population. Asking people for > an opinion of a fair price can be meaningless. There is a true metric for > finding out what people will pay for a streaming platform which is how many > quit when the price goes up. Using the survey to give solid advice to > streamers is like going to financial traders after closing time and asking > why the market went up or down 20 points and what investors should do. > > Netflix is having trouble because they were first out of the gate and they > had a huge library of old movies and TV shows. They added prestige movies and > series. Now competitors have sprung up who took the rights to the libraries > and turn out their own prestige series and series. Netflix has to find a > different way to keep growing. > > On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 9:45 AM PGage <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> So I did a bit of a deep dive into this (though may have hit my head on a >> few rocks). I don’t think the main take-a-way from the survey is that >> streaming is overpriced (in fact, of the 8 premium streamers considered, >> three are viewed as actually underpriced). >> >> >> One thing to keep in mind is the survey is done by Fandom, and the >> population is their members, not the US at large. I am not that familiar >> with Fandom, but from what I gather it caters to kind of super and online >> fans of consumer entertainment. I suspect they skew younger than the US >> population as a whole >> >> >> Fandom seems to think the main take away is that the most important >> characteristic for streamers is “genre” – that consumers sign up for >> specific programs initially, but stay because they will find additional and >> consistent content in the genre that first attracted them. They argue that >> churn is most likely when new subscribers don’t know what to watch next on >> the service, and rather than search for new content, they unsubscribe and >> maybe go elsewhere. >> >> >> This seems unlikely to me, mostly because it runs counter to what we know >> happened with cable TV, where narrowcasting, genre based programming >> inevitably gave way to more broadbanded, less predictable programming. The >> Fandom analysis will inevitably favor Disney+, which offers clear genre >> based programming; if you signed up to watch Black Widow, or Encanto, or >> Solo, you are very likely to find other programming on the service that you >> will also be interested in. But, if you are not a child, adolescent or young >> adult, this may not be very important to you. I find so far I have probably >> saved money with my Disney+ subscription compared to the cost of going to a >> theater to see current and archival Marvel and Star Wars films just to be >> able to discuss with my young adult children. >> >> >> I find the survey most helpful as an indicator of which streamers are seen >> as most desirable or worthy. The average US home has about 4.5 streaming >> services, but the fastest growing services are the “Free Ad-supported >> Streaming TV (FAST) services (like TUBI or IMDTV, or whatever that is called >> now). I could not find a good source on the average number of premium >> services a US household subscribes to (and there are more than just the big >> 8 discussed in this survey), but lets say that households that subscribe to >> any premium service at all average 3. Kevin reports his 3 are Paramount, >> Disney and Apple+. In the survey, the top three ranked streamers clearly >> are: Netflix, HBO-M and Disney+. If I had to limit myself to 3 it would >> probably be Netflix, HBO-M and Apple+ (I would miss Amazon the most of the >> rest, but could pay a la carte for most of what I wanted). The list below is >> in order of how much Fandom members thought each service was worth, and also >> includes the actual cost, and the percent above or below the estimated worth >> each service is. Note that the actual cost is complicated by the offering of >> multiple tiers – in each case I intended to use the cheapest ad-free option. >> In most cases, the with ad option is significantly below what the survey >> valued the service at, which makes me think they were not targeting FAST >> versions. >> >> >> Worth >> >> Worth Cost % >> >> Netflix: 10.60 9.99 -06 >> >> HBO-M 9.30 14.99 +61 >> >> Disney+ 9.20 7.99 -13 >> >> Hulu 8.60 12.99 +51 >> >> Amazon 6.90 8.99 +30 >> >> Apple+ 6.80 4.99 -27 >> >> Paramount+ 6.80 9.99 +47 >> >> Peacock 5.50 9.99 +81 >> >> >> This list can also be sorted by the best and worst bargains; below I list >> the three best and three worst values, defined as the percent below or above >> the price the survey judged each service to be worth the actual cost was: >> >> >> Best Value >> >> Apple+ 6.80 4.99 -27 >> >> Disney+ 9.20 7.99 -13 >> >> Netflix: 10.60 9.99 -06 >> >> >> Worst Value >> >> Peacock 5.50 9.99 +81 >> >> HBO-M 9.30 14.99 +61 >> >> Hulu 8.60 12.99 +51 >> >> >> Two associated points, not included in the survey or Variety’s article about >> it. >> >> >> Netflix’s stock price took a huge dive yesterday after the market closed (at >> one point at least 25%), this on the heels of reporting that not only did >> they fail to meet even the low end of their estimated new subscribers, but >> they actually lost subscribers for the first time in years (though the loss >> was due to cutting services in Russia). See: >> https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/20/investing/premarket-stocks-trading/index.html >> >> >> Netflix spun this in part as being due to password sharing, which kind of >> pissed me off, as it seems unlikely that practice suddenly and dramatically >> spiked in the first quarter of this year; this seems more like their way of >> justifying coming practices to curtail password sharing. Clearly the real >> reason for the dip (and Netflix is preparing investors to expect a lost of 2 >> million subscribers in the second quarter) is mostly due to the increased >> streaming competition. Netflix may be viewed as the most important and best >> valued streaming service, but it is no longer a necessary service for many, >> and is now subject to the same Churn forces as everyone else. It does seem >> obvious that there are more streaming services than the market can really >> bare (here include what I think of as Ad-ons like Acorn, Epix, AMC+, Brit >> Box, PBS, Masterpiece, etc.). I don’t expect Netflix to go bankrupt, but I >> do expect over the next 2-3 years to see some significant reduction in >> premium streaming services, either by merging, or the acquisition of content >> libraries. >> >> >> As noted above, FAST services seem to be the wave of the future. In his >> explanatory note to investors, Hastings announced that he has begun to >> re-think his famous, long standing opposition to ads on Netflix. He did not >> exactly announce an ad-supported tier, but made clear that we can expect one >> over the next year or two. Peacock, justifiably rated as the least valuable >> of the big 8, still reports big growth in its ad-supported tier. I did not >> search for relative growth in ad-supported tiers at other providers, but >> suspect the same is true there. Ad support on premium services is not >> exactly a FAST service, more of a hybrid, but for a service with an elastic >> demand curve, ad-supported tiers is a way to keep the cost in a tolerable >> range. I am in the group that Hastings referred to as being advertising >> intolerant. I despise being made to watch commercials on a service I am >> already paying a monthly subscription fee to watch. I much prefer watching >> TUBI or IMDTV with ads (which I do on occasion) than watching ads on >> Peacock. They would have to make Netflix or HBO almost free for me to pay >> them and sit through commercials. But I am older, with a little more income, >> and no young children at home. I expect not only more ad-supported tiers on >> premium services, but being asked to pay a higher premium to avoid ads in >> the near future. On Netflix it may not be so much that the ad tier is a >> discount, but a way to avoid paying future price increases. >> >> >> On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 at 7:44 PM Kevin M. <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> I’ve said before, I feel I’m getting my money’s worth with Paramount, >>> Disney, and Apple, but there’s not much of a draw to me for Netflix, >>> Amazon, HBO, or Showtime. >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 1:47 PM 'Bob Jersey' via TVorNotTV >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> The Fandom official in charge of it told V that once people plunk down the >>>> funds, they "really feel that they don’t know what’s coming. They feel >>>> overwhelmed. They don’t feel that the platforms do a great job of telling >>>> them.” >>>> >>>> https://variety.com/2022/tv/news/netflix-disney-plus-hbo-max-prices-streaming-study-1235226885/ >>>> (link) >>>> >>>> >>>> B >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>>> "TVorNotTV" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >>>> email to [email protected]. >>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/06154ea3-cce7-43de-919e-9a103c9b0861n%40googlegroups.com. >>> >>> -- >>> Kevin M. (RPCV) >>> >>> >> -- >> Sent from Gmail Mobile >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "TVorNotTV" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKGtkY%2BCTgrJMjPUdkTjpd3GT1CFDY8f6RcVC-RTUuq5P3nKmw%40mail.gmail.com. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "TVorNotTV" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAJE-FiFXjES9tBpZK-F-A64oYmfregDt0GLbL2H6OTW24SdZyA%40mail.gmail.com. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAPG%2BkUMYGqh-UyHiLYD432sVSiAeXx%3DfuQy7%2BzxdpeBor5CtUg%40mail.gmail.com.
