[infinitekidM2C]

I didn't get too pissed at the price change but the separation is pointless and annoying.

[Freakazoid]

Originally Posted by infinitekid2002

I didn't get too pissed at the price change but the separation is pointless and annoying.

That is one point I didn't think of, because I don't use two services.

I don't think the CEO even thought of this (and he really, really, really should have). I see this annoyance being something that really ends up hurting them. I'm hoping they figure out a way to integrate...

[persian54]

I've had them for a while, and without them, i wouldn't have been able to catch up on the movies i missed out

so i'll stay and see what happens

in all honesty, if it gets annoying, there is a $1 redbox 1.5 miles away. maybe I'll walk there and back, 3 miles, good exercise .

plus, it's cheaper than going to the movies

I almost stopped going to the theater cause I'd be like "I'll wait until it's on netflix" lol

[Freakazoid]

Originally Posted by persian54

I've had them for a while, and without them, i wouldn't have been able to catch up on the movies i missed out

so i'll stay and see what happens

in all honesty, if it gets annoying, there is a $1 redbox 1.5 miles away. maybe I'll walk there and back, 3 miles, good exercise .

plus, it's cheaper than going to the movies

I almost stopped going to the theater cause I'd be like "I'll wait until it's on netflix" lol

couple things to keep in mind with redbox. #1 redbox is actually going to be closer to a $1.28 or so anymore. (for the record I saw no outrage when redbox went up 20% in a very short span....). #2 redbox is going to have a very limited selection. No older movies, and hoping for the best with the newer ones.

I'm in no way an advocate of netflix, currently not even using it. Just playing devil's advocate

[infinitekidM2C]

do they have blueray in those redbox things?

[Freakazoid]

Originally Posted by infinitekid2002

do they have blueray in those redbox things?

some/most do, you pay more, but surprisingly not that much more... 30 cents more here, I need to switch to bluray!

[persian54]

Originally Posted by Freakazoid

couple things to keep in mind with redbox. #1 redbox is actually going to be closer to a $1.28 or so anymore. (for the record I saw no outrage when redbox went up 20% in a very short span....). #2 redbox is going to have a very limited selection. No older movies, and hoping for the best with the newer ones.

I'm in no way an advocate of netflix, currently not even using it. Just playing devil's advocate

I know they're mainly new ones (i still won't need to waste $20 at the movie theater)

But the thing is, if I ever really need to watch an older movie, i could do it for free.... as can many of us

[Maestro]

Originally Posted by Freakazoid

That is one point I didn't think of, because I don't use two services.

I don't think the CEO even thought of this (and he really, really, really should have). I see this annoyance being something that really ends up hurting them. I'm hoping they figure out a way to integrate...

Here is why I think he separated the business, from a Pricing Model and Marketing stand point people have pricing thresholds, they go something like this $.99 $1.99 $9.99 $19.99 $49.99 $99.99 and $149.99 and $199.99 and so on.

These are all psychological price points, depending on the product and service people will not think twice about spending the money if you do not go over those prices. For Netflix it was the $9.99 a large percent of their customer did not think twice about spending that, but when they pushed to $16 it stuck in no man land on pricing, people are began thinking is it worth it.

Well what Netflix have done by dividing the business is putting both decisions below the threshold so it may make it easy for people to sign up for one service and maybe the other with out thinking about the costs again. Lots of people are stupid so they may treat the two companies as two separate transactions and decisions. In this case they are sweetening the deal with adding games, which maybe less of a cost issue for them than fees they pay to the video content owners.

BTW, I just saw that Netflix lost 600,000 customers after the recent pricing announcement out the almost 25M they have, that is pretty significant, and they are not sure if the bleeding has stopped.

[jpsum]

Originally Posted by Maestro

Okay this belongs in this thread

This makes no sense. No one ever complain about Red Box not streaming shit.

[Freakazoid]

Originally Posted by Maestro

Here is why I think he separated the business, from a Pricing Model and Marketing stand point people have pricing thresholds, they go something like this $.99 $1.99 $9.99 $19.99 $49.99 $99.99 and $149.99 and $199.99 and so on.

These are all psychological price points, depending on the product and service people will not think twice about spending the money if you do not go over those prices. For Netflix it was the $9.99 a large percent of their customer did not think twice about spending that, but when they pushed to $16 it stuck in no man land on pricing, people are began thinking is it worth it.

Well what Netflix have done by dividing the business is putting both decisions below the threshold so it may make it easy for people to sign up for one service and maybe the other with out thinking about the costs again. Lots of people of stupid so they may treat the two companies as two separate transactions and decisions. In this case the are sweetening the deal with adding games, which maybe less of a cost issue for them than fees they pay to the video content owners.

BTW, I just saw that Netflix lost 600,000 customers after the recent pricing announcement out the almost 25M they have, that is pretty significant, and they are not sure if the bleeding has stopped.

I bet they lose 10% of their audience. However I bet they get that back once they have a decent game selection. I see gamefly starting to really hurt.

[just4kickz]

i think they're moving in the right direction, but i don't think they're moving it in the right fashion. sure streaming has to be the future, but look at their streaming content right now... it's not that bad... but it sure as hell isn't great. why dilute their brand until they've set up legit streaming content? i'm probably going to keep netflix for a few months to see what changes, but to be honest, i doubt they're moving fast enough to get quality streaming selections. the video game service is probably going to be a hit, but i dont play video games.

[persian54]

Originally Posted by just4kickz

the video game service is probably going to be a hit, but i dont play video games.

[ChaneRZ]

Everyone plays!

[infinitekidM2C]

EVERYONE!

[Bobble]

I've had Netflix since it started many years ago. Several things really bother me about the changes and the notice.
First the anouncement was force feed no input no alternative but to leave; Second the anouncement was a sort of chicken shit response to the lost business, if they would have had a little input or market research from their customers this possibly would not have happened;
Third this was premeditated and deliberate and as such why the pussified response email, prior to anouncing and changing the price structure and features they removed almost half of their online content and then restructured and raised prices. Currently their online catalog sucks. most things on there I can find elsewhere for free or near that. The DVD postion is fine but if I only use it to rent recently released to DVD movies RedBox is cheaper for the 4 or 5 a month I do(no time for TV Mon-Fri work consumes that time). Personally as soon as I roll out some projects and have some free time I'm going to look into this further(cost per viewing) but my gut says bye bye after many years. I used to have a client that is the biggest player in the video business period and know how they negotiate and force price roll outs; thats the cost of doing business for Netflix and that has not changed. Video catalogs price structure almost yearly and have for quite some time nothing changed there. It's pure greed and an attempt to throttle the competition and create a void in the market only they can fill IMO.

[persian54]

wait why is netflix taxed??

it's a $15.98 service but i got charged $17+

why the hell is a service being taxed? and is netflix located in CA??

I knew i was paying more than the $9.99 cause of tax but i never thought about it until now

[Maestro]

Originally Posted by persian54

wait why is netflix taxed??

it's a $15.98 service but i got charged $17+

why the hell is a service being taxed? and is netflix located in CA??

I knew i was paying more than the $9.99 cause of tax but i never thought about it until now

because NetFlix has distribution center in most every state, and if they have a physical present in a state they are required to charge tax even it you do get DVD. If they just stream content, they they could get away without charging tax but that cat is out of the bag, I would not expect Netflix who only does streaming starting next month to stop charging tax. States will be all over their asses if they tried that move.

[Maestro]

Well, looks like Netflix CEO has gotten another ear full from its customer, he has now decide not to split the company. People said they did not want to deal with two different website to manage their DVD and Streaming content. But he said pricing will stay the same.

Gee he could not figure that out on his own, I think Netflex is going to die a slow death, it saw it peak and now it is down hill from here, the content owners are getting their way.

[carve]

I can't believe anyone at Netflix thought Qwickster was a good idea. All it would've done is make it harder to see if a DVD was available streaming, and force people who want DVD's and streaming to maintain separate accounts. Where's the value added for anybody? What a bunch of idiots. Very surprising for such an innovative company.