web
counter
 

Netflix Downward Spiral Continues: No Qwik Solution Anticipated

By Steven Lloyd Wilson | Posted Under Think Pieces | Comments (42)



netflix_eaten.jpg

It’s almost as if over the summer someone at Netflix decided that things were just going too well. The company stood astride the entertainment industry, one triumphant foot atop the corpses of brick and mortar video rental stores. Studios hated them, users loved them, investors respected them. The stock price peaked in July at $299 per share. Then Netflix took a baseball bat to their own success. They substantially raised prices and announced that they would be splitting the company in two, breaking apart the DVDs by mail business and the streaming video business into separate companies. Five months after that peak, Netflix’s stock is selling for only $75 per share.

The company clearly didn’t do their homework before the announcements, facing not only direct business consequences but an outrage from a customer base that had previously been one of the happiest in the economy. People liked Netflix, which is a far more difficult standard to reach than mere profitability. Customers will like products, but move on when something newer comes out. In the rare cases in which customers actually like the companies themselves though, they develop a loyalty, giving a company second chances when they would otherwise move on to something else. That’s a difficult situation to create, it can’t be bought and it can’t be sold, but it can be shattered astonishingly quickly.

In the weeks that followed, Netflix lost over 800,000 subscribers, representing at least $50 million in annual revenue. There are a lot of excuses that make it out to not be that big of a deal. They still have another 23 million subscribers, all of whom are paying more than they were six months ago. And of course those 800,000 were probably the non-users anyway for the most part, the people on the one-disc plan with a red enveloped disc of When Harry Met Sally, which had been sitting on top of the DVD player for ten months. They get an email that the price of that dust gathering disc was going up and it’s easy to just click the link in the email and cancel the service.

“Qwikster” quickly became a cultural joke, easy slang for a terrible business decision. They didn’t even bother making sure they controlled the Twitter handle before the announcement, leading to a few blips of fame for the guy who actually did.

The root of the problem is that Netflix made its name on those little red envelopes that come in the mail. Take those away, take away the distribution centers in sixty cities that ensure the envelopes keep flowing at just a couple of days between discs for most subscribers, and all you’re left with is the website. It’s a good website, but so is Hulu.

Netflix’s initial success was built on doing exactly what video rental stores did, only doing it better and cheaper. No late fees, one charge per month on a credit card. No going to a store and standing in line. Not having a storefront meant being able to have an inventory of 35,000 movies instead of what could be crammed into a strip mall. I don’t have to sell you on it, their record and the fact that most people reading this have a Netflix subscription do that.

But perhaps most powerfully, the business model was built on an existing one. Want to start a website that streams movies? You can’t. You won’t be given the licenses for less than millions of dollars. Want to rent out physical discs though and there is already a mechanism for acquiring the product that has been tested and defended. Just buy the discs the exact way that every other video store does. It’s a business that legally cannot simply be unplugged by the content creators.

It’s a silly model from a certain point of view. Streaming video obsoletes the little red envelopes. Physically carting around optical discs to millions of households that have broadband connections is absurdly inefficient. But as absurd as it is, and as correct as the Netflix board is in arguing that from a strictly business perspective, the business of red envelopes and the business of streaming digits have nothing to do with each other, those envelopes are what ensure that they still are allowed to stream those digits in the first place.

The deeper problem is that if the envelopes stop flowing, then Netflix also has very little economic reason for existence. Their business existence depends on the content creators, but benefits from being separate from them. Renting physical DVDs from fifty different networks or studios is a nightmare if you have a different store or service for each of them. But getting bits streamed from a bunch of different ones is not the same problem. That changes the company from being a service to being an aggregator, and that’s not worth a monthly service charge.

This explains why Netflix has made such a press in the last year to start developing original content and to provide venues for independent productions. It’s trying to add value so that it’s not just replaced by a handshake between networks and a few lines of PHP on the backend. But in order to make that work requires customer loyalty and trust. Six months ago Netflix had that. Six months from now? They’ve got some work to do.

Steven Lloyd Wilson is a hopeless romantic and the last scion of Norse warriors and the forbidden elder gods. His novel, ramblings, and assorted fictions coalesce at www.burningviolin.com. You can email him here.









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance



5 Shows After Dark 10/26/11 | My 10 Favorite Halloween-Themed TV Episodes









Comments

I wouldn't say that the rest of the subscribers are paying more. We for one went to streaming only, which is $8 a month...a dollar less than we were paying for 1 Disc and Streaming. All my friends said they did the same. Netflix does have a lot of movies and TV shows that I cannot currently get (legally) online. However, if I learned that Hulu Plus was able to adequately compete with Netflix for a more affordable price...I would totally switch.

Basically Netflix completely eradicated the DVD rental store, single handedly. Red Box, and Blockbuster Express are just cheap little imitations that pose no threat to anyone. But, I refuse to pay another $8 a month for 1 DVD every 4 or 5 days. It makes no sense. Netflix should have increased its prices less dramatically over a longer period of time. If it say, increased $2 every year and a half...I would've kept the DVD/Streaming option. But to increase its cost by 60% like that...nah. Netflix deserves to falter for its greed.

Posted by: Littlejon2001 at October 26, 2011 3:19 PM

streaming seems less affordable if you pay for your bandwidth, most companies meter it now. Also, with these streaming videos, are they the same quality as a dvd and do they come with the features/commentaries?

if it is compressed quality and no features, then they seem to be offering the same service that pirate torrent sites offer, except for a fee.

Posted by: idleprimate at October 26, 2011 3:24 PM

We are saving money as well with no streaming, DVD only. We do not have access to network television via any means of transmission. Netflix is all we got. We can't stream much of anything, ever. So, I hope they stick around.

Posted by: Agogagogo at October 26, 2011 3:32 PM

I've subscribed to Netflix for 5+ years, and actually liked getting that red envelope in the mail. When Netflix did this @##$% boneheaded move, I opted to keep the DVD and gave up the live streaming. I did it because the live streaming choices are _very_ limited if you want to watch old/foreign movies/TV shows. And livestreamed movies lack the extra stuff available on the DVD (i.e. director's comments, deleted scenes, alternate ending, etc). But I am not liking Netflix as much as I used to.

Posted by: True_Blue at October 26, 2011 3:34 PM

The whole Qwikster thing was stupid and not really well thought out. It should have been much more carefully researched and, in any event, they should have waited a bit for the heat to die down on their pricing structure change.

The pricing change really didn't bother me. I just went streaming only and saved a buck, which was fine, since I was like many and had those red envelopes sitting around un-opened for months on end.

I still think for everything you get and the convenience of it, $8 a month is very cheap. I saw some estimates somewhere that showed that Netflix's costs are going to go through the roof once some of their current streaming deals end with the studios, so I would except another price hike.

The streaming catalogue is lacking in some regards, but I have a lengthy que that includes a number of TV shows I haven't watched - so I have hundred of hours worth of programming waiting for me.

Posted by: Forbiddendonut at October 26, 2011 3:37 PM

I for one went the other way - DVDs only. There's not enough choice on streaming yet, and I am a little concerned about bandwidth issues. And those people who had the copy of When Harry Met Sally on their shelf for six months were the most profitable customers of all Netflix's customers - they were just sending Netflix $7 a month.

I found a non-profit DVD service in Chicago (Facets, if you're interested - thanks if the comment that sent me there was on this site) that is comparable in price to Netflix, but doesn't have a lot of TV shows - they specialize in hard to find movies. If Hulu Plus or Amazon Prime (or studio websites, or something else) gets me all the TV shows I want, then I'll eventually go with a combination of services. I'm willing to pay a little more for better service, plus I like the idea of supporting a non-profit with some of my consumer dollars.

Posted by: Three-nineteen at October 26, 2011 3:38 PM

I’m sticking with Netflix. I think I pay around $20 a month for DVDs and streaming. And to me this is an acceptable cost. In fact, I’d be willing to pay much more than that. Then again, I do not pay for cable, so a monthly subscription to Netflix isn’t a strain on my budget. I do hope they get a new marketing team. I think the last letter I received mentioned the “successful” business models of AOL and Borders. I love Netflix, but I don’t want to keep defending their stupidity.

Posted by: Scully at October 26, 2011 3:41 PM

It’s a good website, but so is Hulu.

Pretty much the reason I quit. I can rent any brand-new movies via iTunes without any wait at all, watch most shows via Hulu and buy what I really love and want to keep around.

Posted by: twig at October 26, 2011 3:43 PM

I went to streaming only and like it. I like indie flicks and foreign stuff and have a soft spot for really crappy horror flicks, so it really meets my needs. Streaming is obviously the way things are going, so their collection will expand, although, yeah, the price for the service will probably increase, as well. I watch it through my PS3 so I feel like I’m getting value in ease of use.

Posted by: scott at October 26, 2011 3:55 PM

We dropped the DVD and kept the streaming option. I watch tv and movies on Netflix probably more than I'm watching actual tv or DVDs. It's absolutely worth it for us. Even if Netflix hadn't been so greedy and had gradually increased the price, like Littlejon2001 suggested, I don't know if we would have kept the DVD option. I figure, if I want to see a movie so badly that I can't wait for it to hit Netflix streaming, I can go to my library and rent it for 25 cents. Or check out Redbox for a buck (although every time I've looked, they always seem to have a crappy selection). Or if I'm really desperate, I'll shell out the money to watch it On Demand from Direct TV. So far, I haven't been dying to watch anything badly enough to do any of those options.

Posted by: MelBivDevoe at October 26, 2011 4:00 PM

If you live or work on a military base with a US mailing address but foreign IP address, those little red envelopes are pretty handy.

Posted by: Inaras at October 26, 2011 4:03 PM

Well written as always.

Posted by: DarthCorleone at October 26, 2011 4:04 PM

I've been using the Netflix DVD service for a year or so now, and I've seen a lot of films I either haven't felt the need to spend money for at the theater, or haven't been able to see. In fact, based on the monthly subscription cost as balanced against the high cost of actually going to a theater, it's paying for itself.

Posted by: The Wanderer at October 26, 2011 4:17 PM

Good work Wilson, I always wanted to say that. Someone once said that “Greed is Good,” and I agree with that, that is if you know what the fuck you are doing. Netflix was the undisputed heavyweight champion of the world and they lost it all because someone at the corporate office got greedy. How else to explain trying to charge your loyal customers twice for the same product? Netflix had it all because they thought that they were the smartest guys in the room and their customers would put up with being gouged. Just wait until U.S. web-speeds catch up with other Asian countries in terms of streaming, you’ll be able to stream content from any and everywhere. In college I had an economics professor that loved saying “everything under the sun loses value, except pussy.” Netflix is going to learn that lesson first hand.

Posted by: Pookie at October 26, 2011 4:18 PM

Netflix streaming is good for one thing: TV shows. The streaming movie option suck a duck. When they announced their change in pricing I said to my wife, "We're going with DVDs. So catch up on Weeds while you still can." And she didn't care because...well she's a sexy, apathetic little minx and she doesn't care about much of what dribbles out of my face. And I gotta tell you, even though we were too lazy to actually get onto the website and change our plan and as a result still receive 3 disks in the mail and all the streaming our little minds can handle (and thank God that we do because I just tore through Parks and Recreation and now understand what it means to be a man thanks to Duke Silver), that doesn't mean that another price hike or some other form of ugly mismanagement won't drive me to rage-cancel their service forever. I have a fickle, ugly soul and I hate change.

Posted by: superasente at October 26, 2011 4:18 PM

I am wondering - along with the 800,000 lost subscribers - how many more downgraded as lots of commenters have already mentioned. We also ditched our streaming for DVD only. I don't understand why anyone would go the other way, actually - such a smaller selection...and we don't have broadband out in the boonies.

In the rare cases in which customers actually like the companies themselves though, they develop a loyalty, giving a company second chances when they would otherwise move on to something else. That’s a difficult situation to create, it can’t be bought and it can’t be sold, but it can be shattered astonishingly quickly.

It was as if Netflix copied exactly what Sirius did a few years ago. Crap on your loyal folks for the chance of getting new customers and have it all blow up. I take pleasure in Netflix's struggles. They broke my heart. My relationship with Netflix has been longer than my marriage - and we're celebrating our 10th anniversary next week.

Posted by: Sbrown at October 26, 2011 4:34 PM

You hit the nail on the head. Without those discs why would I need them? I can stream directly from the content producers.

Posted by: John W at October 26, 2011 4:43 PM

We're another household that went to DVD-only, partially because the streaming catalogue is limited and partially because it's just fun to get a happy little red envelope in the mail that you've forgotten was coming.

This month it's Jane Eyre, which I hope will be as Fassbenderful as it was in my dreams. I hope.

Posted by: Salieri2 at October 26, 2011 4:44 PM

Netflix's first mistake wasn't raising their prices. It was not explaining WHY they had to raise prices. If they'd said that the movie studios were raising the prices Netflix had to pay and netflix had to raise their own prices accordingly to stay in business, I think there might be been sympathy instead of backlash.

I suppose maybe they didn't want to piss of the movie studio overlords by making the overlords look bad. :/

Posted by: Foxeye at October 26, 2011 4:52 PM

Being in Canada actual DVD's have never been available ... and the pricing has stayed put. Granted, our selection isn't as great as south of the border, but for $8/mth it beats the selection of basic cable and the "hassle" of the video store any day.

Posted by: layla at October 26, 2011 5:18 PM

I guess I'm the only one who actually still buys DVDs. Some of them are amazingly cheap. I got "Dog Day Afternoon," (which I've never seen; still haven't watched the DVD) for something like $5 a couple weeks ago. I like to own stuff.

And I was kind of amused by the rage when Netflix increased their prices so "outrageously." My cable bill each month is $66. For basic cable (they call it Expanded Basic, but it's basic cable, motherfuckers). That means no AMC. No premium channels. Shitloads of commercials on every channel. Paying for ESPN even though I never watch it. $66 a month. Yeah, I feel like a sucker for paying it, but I can't quit cable TV yet. Rat bastards.

So Netflix subscribers need to unbunch their underpants a bit. Netflix ain't got nothing on Time Warner or AT&T when it comes to unadulterated greed.

Posted by: Slash at October 26, 2011 5:19 PM

"I have a fickle, ugly soul and I hate change."

...and that was the moment I realized I was in love with superasente and began plotting against his marriage.

Posted by: Craig at October 26, 2011 5:21 PM

Netflix doesn't want to send people DVDs anymore. It costs more to them than streaming (at least for now). It was deliberately trying to "push" people into streaming by making DVD by mail seem less attractive by comparison (pricewise).

I assume the attempt to split the two "functions" into separate companies was to make it easier to just jettison the DVD part once it went below a certain threshold of profitability (whatever that might be).

Posted by: Slash at October 26, 2011 5:25 PM

Ibid.

When I went DVD only, I was actually able to add another disk at-a-time and still pay less than I was paying before the split.

I agree that Netflix was tone-deaf and ham-handed about the whole thing, and as much as I hate to say it (because I hate market researchers and marketing professionals in general), perhaps feeling out the customer base a bit before making major changes to the business plan might have been in order.

Posted by: Jerry at October 26, 2011 5:36 PM

I pretty much bought my husband a PS3 specifically so we could enjoy netflix streaming on our deliciously large TV set. I have been a Netflix subscriber forever and I still have feel a certain amount of loyalty towards them in my heart. I switched to streaming only when they changed the prices because I was sick of starring at the red envelopes that mocked me for months at a time while I couldn't find a few hours to push the disk in and hit play. I use Netflix now mostly to supplement our fairly basic DirecTV subscription. Between that and the Blockbuster and Red boxes at the grocery around the corner we've got everything we need. My only complaint is that Netflix hits these walls of "loading" delays that kiiiiilllllll me. Like, I get it, it's not a perfect technology but I cannot explain that to my 1 year old when his episode of The Backyardigans wont play.

Posted by: JenVegas at October 26, 2011 6:22 PM

I have the 4-disc and streaming plan. My fees dropped $2 per month. It did not piss me off to pay $2 less per month. The Qwikster bullshit did piss me off, and I'm glad they reversed that call. What really bugs me are the things no one seems to be talking about. Getting rid of "friends" meant getting rid of people's lists, and those lists were an excellent means to find films I actually WANT to see, and not just the latest Kevin James comedy. I don't want to see that. Netflix has also fallen off the face of the earth when it comes to offering new low-budget indie stuff. As for streaming? Get back to me when they start streaming special features.

Posted by: Laredo at October 26, 2011 7:09 PM

I'm with Scully. It was absurdly cheap at the old price, and now it's just been raised to a sensible price.

I don't have cable($40-$80/per month), so I can afford for my Netflix to go up. Also, it's really easy to copy all those DVD's that come in the mail and build a gigantic private collection for only $20 per month.

Posted by: John G. at October 26, 2011 7:17 PM

Excellent article, as always, SLW!

I've been with Netflix since 2003 or 2004 and I remain loyal to them, because I really don't see them as being greedy. Netflix didn't charge more back when they started offering the online content, but I don't think anyone was complaining that they were suddenly getting something for free. (Or did they and I just never noticed a price hike? If so, please feel free to tell me I'm wrong.)

I think they handled it as poorly as it could have been handled, but I don't blame them for wanting to get out of the dvd business and for needing to charge more so they could continue to make a profit. That's what their function is - to make a profit. If the studios are strangling them on licensing fees and delaying their new releases, so Red Box and cable get them first, Netflix has to remain competitive and in doing so, is going to need more money to pay for the content. It's just math.

Seriously, BAD way of rolling out the price increase and the news, but overall, I really can't fault them for jacking up the prices.

Posted by: Lainey at October 26, 2011 7:47 PM

This is all just a microcosm of the entire economic problem we're in now.

The people at the top making the decisions that affect us have no clue at all what it's like to be us.

They think that as long as we're getting the red pellet, why should we care how many times we have to push the little pedal?

They take a successful model, charging $10 a month. Love it. Then they raise the fees. Still kinda loving it. Then they split the company in two, essentially doubling their take. Now not only do I not love it, I hate it and you. Good job.

And apparently they think we're dumb enough to sit and suck it up. They're shocked as to why it didn't work like they thought. Entertainment and business wonks are writing articles about why it didn't work. They're all too smart to know how fucking stupid they are.

It didn't work because, no matter how you spin your intentions, it's a transparent money-grab at the expense of the ever-increasingly poorer masses and we're not as dumb as you think we are.

Even the media covering this shitstorm don't friggin get it. One Yahoo article said that the reason it failed is because 'we like to get those cute little red envelopes in the mail, even if we never watch them'.

So, we're dumb and gullible and all we want are the pretty shinies that come out of our magic mailboxes.

No, sorry, we're not all dumb and we are kinda pressed for cash, bud. Hope your mansion gets foreclosed.

Posted by: Protoguy at October 26, 2011 8:03 PM

I had no problem with the price raise. It prompted me to drop the streaming since I don't actually like to stream very much, but I understand that it's a business and they like to make money. It's kinda their thing. The Quikster change, though? THAT, I had a problem with. It was just plain stupid.

Posted by: Gabs at October 26, 2011 8:43 PM

We went to DVD only. I would have been too lazy to do it if they hadn't made it so easy with all their explanation emails. The streaming content is a joke since we can find it online or via OnDemand. We have young kids and don't get out to the movies often, so we want new release DVDs.

Posted by: maydays at October 26, 2011 10:10 PM

Protoguy, well said, as usual.

I canceled my subscription after waking up to the CEO's ridiculous email, and felt similar to what you described. SLW, great dissection of the issue.

Netflix no longer seems reliable and friendly and fun. They seem like money grubbers for suckers. I already have about ten auto bill payments set up. I don't need one of them charging me more money for a more confusing and convoluted service.

We're always paying out the ass for stuff we don't use. "When Harry Met Sally" sitting on the DVD player, or a Showtime subscription I didn't even know I had. The 99% has to do everything they can to avoid allowing giant corporations to nickel and dime them to death. Or in this case, to raise that dime to a quarter. You have your people who don't give a shit and say it's worth it. Then you have the rest who are disgusted and just fucking quit and say "I'll find another place" (even if there is none).

I'm, ah, one of those.

Posted by: Moviefraud at October 26, 2011 10:15 PM

Like others have mentioned, I don't have cable or satellite so Netflix is pretty much it for me. I'm on the 2-DVD/month + streaming plan and the price only went up a couple of bucks, so I didn't see what all the big whoop was about. Plus, I had just started watching The Sopranos, which is available by DVD only, so I wasn't about to give up DVD's at that point. Yes, the whole Qwikster thing aggravated me mightily, but I still wasn't about to drop either service, because as I said, it's all I've got.

Posted by: Elsie at October 26, 2011 10:26 PM

I read on CNN that the cost to license their streaming content is going way the fuck up.

" One analyst predicts that Netflix's streaming content licensing costs will rise from $180 million in 2010 to a whopping $1.98 billion in 2012."

http://money.cnn.com/2011/09/01/technology/netflix_starz/?iid=EL

Posted by: Ken Hart at October 26, 2011 10:34 PM

We haven't heard from many Canadianists, so I'll give you a real sob story: with Netflix Canada (i.e., Moose & Beaver Edition), you get streaming only. There is no option to receive DVDs, which sucks. What really sucks, though, is the (lack of) selection here: Netflix Canada's new releases include, for example, the Star Trek movie (AKA "Lens Flare in Space"). That movie was released on video in 2009. In fact, there is nothing newer than 2010 in the so-called New Releases (unless you like The Biebs: his "movie" is in there.) Even at$8/month, I find that unacceptable.

To make matters worse, we had some Blockbuster stores here until a few months ago which always had the real new release DVDs (and Blu-rays!), and they were doing well... until Blockbuster US went bankrupt and dumped all their debt on their redheaded Canadianuck stepchild. Now those stores have been forced to close.

In summary, I hate Mooseland right now.

Posted by: Uriah Creep at October 26, 2011 10:56 PM

I can't remember the last time I watched something good on Instant Netflix. I weathered the price change, but when the company split, I ditched Instant like hotcakes.

I want freedom of choice, and I'm willing to wait a whopping day or two for the DVD to arrive to get it.

I've noticed that their DVD selection seems to be weakening though... getting concerned.

Posted by: Leaf at October 27, 2011 1:15 AM

There are many reasons why the red envelope sits for so long. I'm not always in the mood to watch that particular movie. Sure I made sure to put it at the top of my queue a few days ago before it mailed but now I feel like watching something else. I'll just make sure to watch it next, I'll tell myself.

There's also pressure to make sure you watch it under the best circumstances. Once I watch it, I need to mail it back as soon as possible so I'm getting an optimal number of DVDs for my buck. So I need to make sure everyone's at home and not busy so we can all watch it before we send it back.

And of course, there's the guilt. I've had that damn disc for two weeks without watching. If I send it back without watching then all that was wasted.

So, I still get one disc at a time and streaming. There's too little selection to go only instant and instant is too convenient to get rid of. I have Amazon Prime so if I really want to watch an instant movie that Netflix doesn't have, I can sometimes go there, though it's a few more bucks. I watched Troll Hunter before it was in theaters for $7. Sounds spendy but My GF, our kids and I all watching it for $7 is a steal compared to $8/piece and snacks at a theater.

Posted by: Paultera at October 27, 2011 10:20 AM

Can someone look at that $1.98B in streaming license fees please? I read that article too and have some issues with it. Because an estimated 23M subscribers at, say an average of $20 per user, that comes nowhere near $1.98B. It comes to $460M. Am I missing something here? How in the hell is $1.98B an attainable fee?

Laredo nailed it too when they said they miss the Friends list. Interesting that when everything is going more social, Netflix (who actually was one of the early ones) got rid of theirs. The board of Netflix needs sacked. This summerhas been one horrible idea after another. From a business perspective they look shaky and really unsure of how to proceed.

I dropped the DVD and went streaming only. I use it quite a bit through my PS3, it's in HD, and I don't have much problem finding something to watch. I think my streaming que is up to 400 titles right now, so for me it's a good plan. But I found I was using the disc program for recent movies, and I can get those at Redbox much easier since there is at least 10 boxes within 2 miles of my house.

Posted by: TylerDFC at October 27, 2011 12:17 PM

Blockbuster, in spite of its bankruptcy woes and being purchased by DirecTV to use as a free add-on, is still sending us DVDs and still cheaper than Netflix.

We almost switched to Netflix once, a few years ago, when Blockbuster tried to raise fees on us. Within less than an hour of sending our cancellation notice, though, Blockbuster sent an email offering a "special" that put us right back at the original price (sans the take-it-to-the-store option, which we never used anyway).

Maybe if Netflix had been that responsive to its customers, it could have kept a lot of them. Of course, they're still a company while Blockbuster went bankrupt, so they seem to be better at most things than Blockbuster is.

Posted by: Squirrel at October 27, 2011 1:40 PM

I refuse to believe that Netflix woke up one morning and decided to go all bat shit crazy. Netflix had the goose that laid the golden egg, the only thing they had to do was stagger out of bed, walk down to the mail box and collect checks. They had the perfect business model, dvds and streaming. I’m holding out hope that one day it will be revealed that the CEO had a drug problem and it caused him to make these stupid decisions, that’s the only explanation that I think will answer all the questions about Netflix.

Posted by: Pookie at October 27, 2011 3:05 PM

I cancelled and I didn't stream. I was on the 3 disc plan. They have a serious problem with security. I didn't realize it until months later but to make along story short I was being charged twice a month for different services. I changed my cc info with them and I can't honestly say why and how it happened because they won't tell me. I din't notice right away because it was a small amount. They are no good

Posted by: Candy at October 27, 2011 4:37 PM

We went with strictly streaming when the changes came. We mainly watch BBC shows because we only have super basic cable - Netflix is still cheaper than upgrading to a cable plan that gives us BBC.

We watch Netflix streaming video every day. I really am ticked at how they handled all this, but there isn't any comparable service out there for us. Hulu doesn't have half the shows we love to watch: Merlin, Dr. Who, Robin Hood, Monarch of the Glenn, Inspector Lewis and many Masterpiece productions. I personally am hoping they pull it together or we are going to have to spend a lot of family time playing board games.

Posted by: Ruby at December 2, 2011 11:03 PM