I'm just the opposite. The Netflix envelope sits around for a month, and I can't even remember what's in it. Most of what I watch is streamed, so I dropped the mail service. Yes, if you're looking for specific titles, the streaming category is lacking, but if you approach it with the mindset of seeing "what's on", then there is always something interesting to watch. If both of us are representative customer types, they may have gotten this right from a user standpoint, but I think they might end up with LESS net revenue, since few may stick with both services.
(Almost) everyone's business model seems to be predicated on sucking $15/month (or more) out of my bank account. What the NYT, the Daily, credit card companies, Verizon, and nearly everyone else doesn't realize is that when viewed from the consumer side, it looks like a screaming torrent of hands reaching for my pocket. My reaction is tune ALL of it out, and simply refuse to pay, a recurring monthly fee for ANYTHING, unless it's an absolute necessity. NYT's problem is not those that bypass the wall, it's everyone (and I mean everyone) who won't bother and also won't pay.
I need a way to cash in on situations where I know something is a dud, but the public spin doesn't. Shorting News Corp stock wouldn't work in this case because the iPad app is a drop in the bucket for them, so a flop won't really hurt them. Is there Las Vegas book on this stuff?
No surprise when you consider that the executives at record and movie companies are really not at all interested in the future of their organizations. They are working only to preserve their bonuses and departure packages for the next 3 to 5 years. When you realize that, the "barbed wire" schemes make a lot of sense. Of course the shareholders of these companies should be mad a hell, but they ignorantly believe what managements tells them.
My advice to Netflix is to do whatever it takes to increase the catalog. The delays are irrelevant. All that matters is the catalog. The only date that registers in peoples' heads is the original screen release, DVD dates are lost in the noise. People may chomp at the bit to a see a new movie in the theater, but who's in that much of a hurry to watch a DVD?
a simple $10 per GB. No trying to figure your usage in advance. No free ride for movie downloads. Nice and simple, but of course too complex for the great minds at the wireless carriers. The electric company doesn't make me figure my power usage in advance. I don't understand why AT&T can't see how much people hate having to predict the future.
How can a company that sells to consumers think they are helping themselves with these charges? How much fine print parsing is a cell-phone customer supposed to do? I prefer to deal with companies that don't require me to constantly watch my back. If you get a $27,0000 bill, the real cost to Verizon is probably a few percent of that.
Just think how attractive a carrier would be if they said, "Go ahead and do whatever you want, and we will automatically put you on the best price package for that billing month". Then I wouldn't have to worry about getting ripped off. I'd still be discouraged from hogging data because I'd still have to pay, but I wouldn't then be forced to guess about what I'm going to need next month, and they'd sell MORE that way because customer like me wouldn't just turn OFF data when traveling for fear of a $10,000 bill.
The current system of making people predict their future needs is idiotic, makes consumers constantly worry about getting screwed, and puts the carriers in an unnecessarily adversarial relationship with their customers. You'd think somebody would break ranks and bill sensibly.
Won't most of the complaints in this thread be rendered moot when (not if) the iPad gets jail broken? Without a required AT&T contract, it would seem that there would not much risk to this. Those that like the walled garden can stay there, and those that want to climb over the wall will. A greater truth than the ills of a closed system is that closing a system that wants to be open is futile.
All of these rants against things that will not go away are so pointless. Who cares if Google, Twitter, file sharing, Wikipedia, etc. etc. etc. don't live up to someone's view of how the world should be. They might as well be ranting about air and water. This is the world as it is. Deal with it.
I don't know if Bloom will succeed, but you have to give them credit for not shooting their mouths off and showing nothing, or some questionable lab experiment, like most new-energy companies. Usually the best products these businesses generate are press releases. Here you have a company that has built a REAL BOX, and even better, has several installed in REAL COMPANIES that care about cost effectiveness. To me that puts them in a FAR better position on the BS scale than the majority of EV and energy stories. It may still fall short, but it sure ain't Steorn.
The "end of sports as we know it!"??? You're kidding, right? It doesn't matter what happens in this case. The more people blogging, tweeting, texting, whatevering about the NFL means more money in their pocket. The NFL is being stupid here for sure. The only way they lose is if people stop paying attention to football. In spite of their claims, they NEVER lose if people "steal" their content. No one bends over to get fleeced like a football fan.
EXACTLY. People who need to create art will do it anyway. 95% of all musicians barely make a living now! The DMCA is not helping them one iota. John Phillips Sousa wrote an article against music recordings when the Victrolla appeared. NOT because he was afraid of losing income, but because he was afraid people would stop learning how to PLAY music. He was right. Imagine that nobody makes money selling recordings anymore and the only thing people will pay for are live performances, and if you want to hear music, you have to PLAY music. That doesn't sound too bad to me.
The mistake many businesses make, that Sitepoint apparently has not, is that you don't need *that* many complaints in your inbox to warrant action. The complaints are from the people who give a sh1t. Most people don't bother to complain, they just walk away. You may only get one complaint, but if it makes sense, you should act on it.
Why do they do this? Wouldn't it be better to come up up with a rate that is painful enough, but not outrageous? Then people wouldn't live in terror of using their phones out of the country, AT&T would get more business, and MAKE MORE MONEY!
AT&T has to kill these plans where you have to to think in advance, based on info you don't have, to pick the best rate. How about AUTOMATICALLY switching you to the best bulk rate when you cross each data threshold. The frugal people will still watch their Mbytes and not tax the system, and those that need data will know they will pay more, but not get ripped off. This would increase roaming revenue. Come on tellco's, get a brain!
I have no cable, and get most of what I watch over the internet or Netflix. Mr. Masnick seems to get all the points right, but blows the conclusion. The content creators are not screwing themselves by jacking costs to cable companies. If I was the Discovery Channel, that's exactly what I would do. I wouldn't care what happens to Comcast Cable (I might even WANT them gone) because I'll then be able to cut out the middleman and sell directly to consumers, or at least get a bigger share of the ad dollars.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by lens42.
Re: Netflix did me a favor
I'm just the opposite. The Netflix envelope sits around for a month, and I can't even remember what's in it. Most of what I watch is streamed, so I dropped the mail service. Yes, if you're looking for specific titles, the streaming category is lacking, but if you approach it with the mindset of seeing "what's on", then there is always something interesting to watch. If both of us are representative customer types, they may have gotten this right from a user standpoint, but I think they might end up with LESS net revenue, since few may stick with both services.
It all ads up
(Almost) everyone's business model seems to be predicated on sucking $15/month (or more) out of my bank account. What the NYT, the Daily, credit card companies, Verizon, and nearly everyone else doesn't realize is that when viewed from the consumer side, it looks like a screaming torrent of hands reaching for my pocket. My reaction is tune ALL of it out, and simply refuse to pay, a recurring monthly fee for ANYTHING, unless it's an absolute necessity. NYT's problem is not those that bypass the wall, it's everyone (and I mean everyone) who won't bother and also won't pay.
How do you make money of these failure?
I need a way to cash in on situations where I know something is a dud, but the public spin doesn't. Shorting News Corp stock wouldn't work in this case because the iPad app is a drop in the bucket for them, so a flop won't really hurt them. Is there Las Vegas book on this stuff?
No surprise when you consider that the executives at record and movie companies are really not at all interested in the future of their organizations. They are working only to preserve their bonuses and departure packages for the next 3 to 5 years. When you realize that, the "barbed wire" schemes make a lot of sense. Of course the shareholders of these companies should be mad a hell, but they ignorantly believe what managements tells them.
Re:
Yup. People played music long before there were record companies, and they'll be playing long after as well.
My advice to Netflix is to do whatever it takes to increase the catalog. The delays are irrelevant. All that matters is the catalog. The only date that registers in peoples' heads is the original screen release, DVD dates are lost in the noise. People may chomp at the bit to a see a new movie in the theater, but who's in that much of a hurry to watch a DVD?
A truly fair plan would be...
a simple $10 per GB. No trying to figure your usage in advance. No free ride for movie downloads. Nice and simple, but of course too complex for the great minds at the wireless carriers. The electric company doesn't make me figure my power usage in advance. I don't understand why AT&T can't see how much people hate having to predict the future.
How can a company that sells to consumers think they are helping themselves with these charges? How much fine print parsing is a cell-phone customer supposed to do? I prefer to deal with companies that don't require me to constantly watch my back. If you get a $27,0000 bill, the real cost to Verizon is probably a few percent of that.
Just think how attractive a carrier would be if they said, "Go ahead and do whatever you want, and we will automatically put you on the best price package for that billing month". Then I wouldn't have to worry about getting ripped off. I'd still be discouraged from hogging data because I'd still have to pay, but I wouldn't then be forced to guess about what I'm going to need next month, and they'd sell MORE that way because customer like me wouldn't just turn OFF data when traveling for fear of a $10,000 bill.
The current system of making people predict their future needs is idiotic, makes consumers constantly worry about getting screwed, and puts the carriers in an unnecessarily adversarial relationship with their customers. You'd think somebody would break ranks and bill sensibly.
Jailbreak?
Won't most of the complaints in this thread be rendered moot when (not if) the iPad gets jail broken? Without a required AT&T contract, it would seem that there would not much risk to this. Those that like the walled garden can stay there, and those that want to climb over the wall will. A greater truth than the ills of a closed system is that closing a system that wants to be open is futile.
So pointless
All of these rants against things that will not go away are so pointless. Who cares if Google, Twitter, file sharing, Wikipedia, etc. etc. etc. don't live up to someone's view of how the world should be. They might as well be ranting about air and water. This is the world as it is. Deal with it.
Less flakey than most engergy announcements
I don't know if Bloom will succeed, but you have to give them credit for not shooting their mouths off and showing nothing, or some questionable lab experiment, like most new-energy companies. Usually the best products these businesses generate are press releases. Here you have a company that has built a REAL BOX, and even better, has several installed in REAL COMPANIES that care about cost effectiveness. To me that puts them in a FAR better position on the BS scale than the majority of EV and energy stories. It may still fall short, but it sure ain't Steorn.
Re: Ooh! Google Wave
The "end of sports as we know it!"??? You're kidding, right? It doesn't matter what happens in this case. The more people blogging, tweeting, texting, whatevering about the NFL means more money in their pocket. The NFL is being stupid here for sure. The only way they lose is if people stop paying attention to football. In spite of their claims, they NEVER lose if people "steal" their content. No one bends over to get fleeced like a football fan.
"profesionally"
EXACTLY. People who need to create art will do it anyway. 95% of all musicians barely make a living now! The DMCA is not helping them one iota. John Phillips Sousa wrote an article against music recordings when the Victrolla appeared. NOT because he was afraid of losing income, but because he was afraid people would stop learning how to PLAY music. He was right. Imagine that nobody makes money selling recordings anymore and the only thing people will pay for are live performances, and if you want to hear music, you have to PLAY music. That doesn't sound too bad to me.
Re: requests "pouring in"
The mistake many businesses make, that Sitepoint apparently has not, is that you don't need *that* many complaints in your inbox to warrant action. The complaints are from the people who give a sh1t. Most people don't bother to complain, they just walk away. You may only get one complaint, but if it makes sense, you should act on it.
Nobody is asking "Why do they do this?"
Why do they do this? Wouldn't it be better to come up up with a rate that is painful enough, but not outrageous? Then people wouldn't live in terror of using their phones out of the country, AT&T would get more business, and MAKE MORE MONEY!
AT&T has to kill these plans where you have to to think in advance, based on info you don't have, to pick the best rate. How about AUTOMATICALLY switching you to the best bulk rate when you cross each data threshold. The frugal people will still watch their Mbytes and not tax the system, and those that need data will know they will pay more, but not get ripped off. This would increase roaming revenue. Come on tellco's, get a brain!
I agree, but the conclusion is all wrong
I have no cable, and get most of what I watch over the internet or Netflix. Mr. Masnick seems to get all the points right, but blows the conclusion. The content creators are not screwing themselves by jacking costs to cable companies. If I was the Discovery Channel, that's exactly what I would do. I wouldn't care what happens to Comcast Cable (I might even WANT them gone) because I'll then be able to cut out the middleman and sell directly to consumers, or at least get a bigger share of the ad dollars.