Iron Sky
- Thread starter OMNI
- Start date
Gatefan1976
Well Known GateFan
Series is one thing, HBO, Starz, Netflix, they have all shown that they can do TV series, but TV series are playing in the same yard as broadcasters, not the same yard as Movie studio's.
You can filter them now!
Bad thing is that you find that the free videos/movies are really not all that great...stuff you would not watch on Netflix. Like I said, Prime is really good for the shipping perks. Netflix could EASILY add a paid tier above what there is now like a Netflix Premium version which could add newer movies to the mix. I dont like the idea of paying $2.00 to see a movie on Amazon when the price at the few video stores left is about the same. Amazon seems to think of its video service as more like a traditional video store rather than a content provider/broker like Netflix seems to be doing. Still like the Netflix model much better.
--- merged: May 2, 2013 at 8:07 PM ---
I think that the studios will be taught a lesson by consumers and that very very few takers are going to sign up with individual studio streaming services like "Warner Archive Instant", especially at $10.00 a month. Imagine, a $10/month streaming service from JUST Warner and it's affiliates. Cheesy and repetitive previews for upcoming movies in the theaters, but only those owned by Warner.
No doubt this was cooked up in some conference room somewhere at Warner and they only invited the Marketing and Accounting department. MGM tried to drive people to their website during SGU with those stupid kinosodes...how did that work out for them? 
. I think of Netflix as The People's Streaming Service, whilst individual studio controlled services I see as no more than an extension of their already greedy share of the entertainment industry.
Gatefan1976
Well Known GateFan
You can filter them now!
Bad thing is that you find that the free videos/movies are really not all that great...stuff you would not watch on Netflix. Like I said, Prime is really good for the shipping perks. Netflix could EASILY add a paid tier above what there is now like a Netflix Premium version which could add newer movies to the mix. I dont like the idea of paying $2.00 to see a movie on Amazon when the price at the few video stores left is about the same. Amazon seems to think of its video service as more like a traditional video store rather than a content provider/broker like Netflix seems to be doing. Still like the Netflix model much better.
--- merged: May 2, 2013 at 8:07 PM ---
I think that the studios will be taught a lesson by consumers and that very very few takers are going to sign up with individual studio streaming services like "Warner Archive Instant", especially at $10.00 a month. Imagine, a $10/month streaming service from JUST Warner and it's affiliates. Cheesy and repetitive previews for upcoming movies in the theaters, but only those owned by Warner.
And if the studio's "price them out" of being competition?
Quite honestly, besides House of Cards (now being shown on cable out here mind you), if the Studio's don't want to play ball with Netflix, they are rooted. All I see *constantly* about Netflix is them loosing access to XYZ's catalogue, or taking a hit in the market because of someone else having more.
Bluce Ree
Tech Admin / Council Member
If the studios all pull their content from Netflix without reason, Netflix would have a conspiracy case similar to price-fixing and it will not go well for the studios.
None of the studio conglomerates are a "one stop shop" for anyone. Netflix is, as is Amazon Prime and Hulu+ and a growing number of content brokers are. Their independence from any one studio is an advantage in the same fashion that cable providers enjoy, except that the cable companies can force "bundles" to be sold which include them in the package. Studio run streaming services will fail because each studio conglomerate will want their own service. Consumers will not pay more for less, no matter what the studios do. If they manage to somehow sink Netflix, then piracy will become so rampant it will become the mainstream norm "cool" thing to be doing.
--- merged: May 2, 2013 at 10:24 PM ---
The wrath of disgruntled Netflix fans will be extreme. Piracy will become socially acceptable and nothing is large enough to prevent it.
GEEK SNARK: Just how hard would it be to create a shared anonymous media stream using peers and trackers like the torrent system uses? Not at all, and you know it.
Right now the limitation is speed, and that can easily be overcome. The stream is fragmented at the user level, then peers reassemble the stream at the client end from hundreds of different sources and voila. 
Will they force geekdom to crush them...again?
Gatefan1976
Well Known GateFan
Not for "no reason" Bluce, you just raise the price enough for them not to be able to afford it. Is Pierre Cardin in a "conspiracy" against "poor people"? I mean, that's just a random example, but stuff like that does happen.
--- merged: May 3, 2013 at 12:03 AM ---
None of the studio conglomerates are a "one stop shop" for anyone. Netflix is, as is Amazon Prime and Hulu+ and a growing number of content brokers are. Their independence from any one studio is an advantage in the same fashion that cable providers enjoy, except that the cable companies can force "bundles" to be sold which include them in the package. Studio run streaming services will fail because each studio conglomerate will want their own service. Consumers will not pay more for less, no matter what the studios do. If they manage to somehow sink Netflix, then piracy will become so rampant it will become the mainstream norm "cool" thing to be doing.
--- merged: May 2, 2013 at 10:24 PM ---
The wrath of disgruntled Netflix fans will be extreme. Piracy will become socially acceptable and nothing is large enough to prevent it.
GEEK SNARK: Just how hard would it be to create a shared anonymous media stream using peers and trackers like the torrent system uses? Not at all, and you know it.
Piracy already is dude, and you know it.
Yes it is, but the technology providing those illegal files continues to exist because the files essentially do not exist until the thousands (or milllions) of tiny bits being shared from just as many sources are reassembled into a file. This makes it impossible to go after the makers of the software. Only those who have completed downloads in their folders. Streaming comes from an rtsp source or other encrypted media stream, from a single provider. Torrents are not streams...not yet. An attack on Netflix for greedy reasons will anger geeks and they can and will make it possible for streaming video and audio to function in the same fashion as torrents. Right now, there is no need to invest in such projects, but geeks are very emotional...very clever people. We are the ones who the studios will turn to for creating their services as well.
Gatefan1976
Well Known GateFan
All true, but none of these things change the fact that piracy is socially accepted.
Gatefan1976
Well Known GateFan
I am the 1%Do you accept it? I got the distinct impression that you disdain it.
I am the 1%
Actually, I know quite a few like you who look down upon the "theft" of media.
Gatefan1976
Well Known GateFan
Actually, I know quite a few like you who look down upon the "theft" of media.
One in 10?
I don't actually look down on it, I just call it what it is, it's up to people to do what they want
One in 10?
TBH, those who I know who feel that way are shareholders in the studios or their affiliates. I can understand their angst. But to disdain it for ethical reasons? I think of myself as a very ethical person yet I have absolutely NO qualms about getting my media via torrents if it is made a gauntlet to get it any other way.
Gatefan1976
Well Known GateFan
How hard is this:http://www.walmart.com/search/searc...gate&ic=16_0&Find=Find&search_constraint=4096
They probably even deliver
How hard is this:http://www.walmart.com/search/searc...gate&ic=16_0&Find=Find&search_constraint=4096
They probably even deliver
This is why:
At $9.95, we are talking more than an entire month of everything in Netflix's library plus change left over. Not to mention having to drive to Walmart or another store. Make it more like $2.50 and there would be more takers. Plus, who wants to collect DVDs?
Gatefan1976
Well Known GateFan
2.50 wouldn't cover the cost to produce and ship to store dude, you know that. Again though dude, Netflix; Amazon; ITunes, ALL these are legal options, and I don't have a problem with them, If you can get what you want for 8 bucks a month from online vendors, go for it
.................
................
YJ02
Well Known GateFan
seems to be mostly Warner Bro's titles and the ones Warner archives now own (the other popular streamers are losing them as well).
a new streamer by WARNER ARCHIVES came on line last month--thats where they are now--probably pop on ROKU soon
http://instant.warnerarchive.com/
Meh...not worth $10.00/month...sorry Warner!
Bluce Ree
Tech Admin / Council Member
The wrath of disgruntled Netflix fans will be extreme. Piracy will become socially acceptable and nothing is large enough to prevent it.
GEEK SNARK: Just how hard would it be to create a shared anonymous media stream using peers and trackers like the torrent system uses? Not at all, and you know it.
It's actually quite simple to create a peer-to-peer sharing system with encrypted streams and even going as far as distributing a public key to decrypt downloaded content. Going anonymous would involve bouncing the streams through relay peers that only act as relays without any logging, hosting no content and not directly assembling the content themselves. This is layman but you get the idea of how elaborately elegant this sort of system can be and would confuse the shit out of anyone trying to follow such a labyrinth. Even if they intercept the content stream and happen to decrypt the stream, the content itself is further encrypted using public key encryption and partially intercepted content would be useless.
--- merged: May 3, 2013 at 9:20 AM ---
If the prices go up unfairly compared to the rest of the market and is shown to be a concerted effort by the studios to squeeze out Netflix, then it's conspiracy and clear-cut price fixing. The studios can sell for whatever to whomever, there's no standard. However, if you suddenly double the cost to Netflix, a distributor with whom you've been doing business for nearly a decade, and practically give content away to Amazon, the new kid on the block, it does not look favorable. Do this in concert with several studios and you're really hanging your balls out on the chopping board.
--- merged: May 3, 2013 at 9:21 AM ---
I would pay for individual studio stream services if they were more like a buck or two. But $10 for a single studio's content? Just LOL!