criterionforum.org

jwd5275 wrote:...compared to the $0.00 I spend at the public library for a week.

Compared to my Blockbuster plan, which will now be offering me the same service as Netflix (1 DVD at a time by mail with Blu-ray access) for $1 less a month. And they actually stock Blu-rays of classic titles.

swo17 wrote:Compared to my Blockbuster plan, which will now be offering me the same service as Netflix (1 DVD at a time by mail with Blu-ray access) for $1 less a month. And they actually stock Blu-rays of classic titles.

Does Blockbuster stream? Because I would consider it.

Yes, but it costs per movie and is available on far fewer systems (not available on my roku)...

The blockbuster 3-disc rental with blu is $3 cheaper than netflix without streaming, plus they have far more blu rays of older titles, aren't at odds with Criterion (therefore more likely to carry the discs) and don't have that stupid 500 title queue limit...

I've never used their "On Demand" service. It looks like some titles can be streamed for free though.

I mean, yeah, BB isn't perfect, but I feel like between my library and my two 1-at-a-time plans with Netflix and Blockbuster, I have most of my bases covered.

34,000 people and counting have commented about this price hike on Netflix's Facebook page. (And that's apparently with Netflix deleting some of the comments.) It's even making the news.

Roger Ryan wrote:

Perkins Cobb wrote:Am I wrong, or is this actually going to save me money? It looks like the 8-film plan (with Blu-ray) will drop from $65 to $61 (not counting tax), and I'll have the option to drop streaming and cut that even further to $53.

I'm sure if I try a little harder I'll find something to complain about, though.

I'm not trying to be a jerk here, but where do you find the time to watch 8 or more films within a three-to-four day window consistently? I have the two-film plan plus streaming and can easily watch a film every night (or more) if I choose. It helps to live in a part of the U.S. that has a decent mailing turnaround (the new discs arrive two days after I mail the previous ones). Do you have a large family, perhaps?

No, I don't have any family -- that's how I'm able to watch a lot of movies! Eight films in a weekend is probably about my average, although I can go more (if I'm watching new Hollywood product) or less (if it's something heavy, like Bergman or Fassbinder). At times I'll supplement the Netflix 8 with a Blockbuster subscription, so I can keep some TV episodes coming in for weeknights, or reel in some discs I need to create screen grabs for my blog.

(The screen grab thing, incidentally, was one unexpected way in which NF streaming came in handy.)

I guess I just don't understand the outrage equaling:

some dude on facebook wrote:Way to ALIENATE your long time customers. We pay $9 a currently, and now it's $16 to enjoy what we currently have??

Minimum wage itself is barely $8/hr in this country. A 2 hour film in the theater is up to $12-13. Cable is $100 a month. Pay-per-view is....well, you get the picture. Everything Netflix shows or sends out costs millions to produce.

I pay $18 a month now. I was paying $12.

If they had raised it to $40/month or $80/month, then yes, I would pick up my pitchfork as well. I would then see the outrage. Is everyone really still that upset about the Casey Anthony trial and it is simply spilling over?

swo17 wrote:34,000 people and counting have commented about this price hike on Netflix's Facebook page. (And that's apparently with Netflix deleting some of the comments.) It's even making the news.

A lot of media outlets are drinking the Netflix Kool-Aid, like the New York Times, which buys into the spin that this represents a re-commitment to DVDs. Actually I think it will have the reverse effect: people will make a choice between streaming or DVD and sacrifice the latter. If you look at the polls on sites like Hacking Netflix, people are saying they'll keep streaming vs. DVD at a 3-to-1 ratio. So in the long run, Netflix has its excuse to dump DVD, and the studios correspondingly get the message that people prefer streaming to physical media (at which point they'll choke off Netflix and keep that revenue to themselves, which is why I don't understand NF's logic here).

See, I told you I'd find something to complain about.

Perkins Cobb wrote:

Roger Ryan wrote:

Perkins Cobb wrote:Am I wrong, or is this actually going to save me money? It looks like the 8-film plan (with Blu-ray) will drop from $65 to $61 (not counting tax), and I'll have the option to drop streaming and cut that even further to $53.

I'm sure if I try a little harder I'll find something to complain about, though.

I'm not trying to be a jerk here, but where do you find the time to watch 8 or more films within a three-to-four day window consistently? I have the two-film plan plus streaming and can easily watch a film every night (or more) if I choose. It helps to live in a part of the U.S. that has a decent mailing turnaround (the new discs arrive two days after I mail the previous ones). Do you have a large family, perhaps?

No, I don't have any family -- that's how I'm able to watch a lot of movies! Eight films in a weekend is probably about my average, although I can go more (if I'm watching new Hollywood product) or less (if it's something heavy, like Bergman or Fassbinder). At times I'll supplement the Netflix 8 with a Blockbuster subscription, so I can keep some TV episodes coming in for weeknights, or reel in some discs I need to create screen grabs for my blog.

(The screen grab thing, incidentally, was one unexpected way in which NF streaming came in handy.)

More power to you then! With my son off to college, I have more time to watch as well which I'm enjoying.

I consider streaming to be a pleasant "add-on", too, but knew I'd have to pay more for it eventually. If I choose to pull the plug, I will miss the opportunity to watch an unplanned title spur-of-the-moment, but I won't miss the poor picture quality, the distorted aspect ratios or the frequent stops-and-starts.

In my opinion it's more about the slippery slope this sets for how Netflix treats its customers. According to everything I've read the fee was increased largely to keep (not expand) the library they already have. Between this and agreeing on waiting to rent new movies to appease the studios, it's sets a bad precedent for how they do business. As of right now, it comes off as a price increase for less service.

Robert de la Cheyniest wrote:In my opinion it's more about the slippery slope this sets for how Netflix treats its customers. According to everything I've read the fee was increased largely to keep (not expand) the library they already have. Between this and agreeing on waiting to rent new movies to appease the studios, it's sets a bad precedent for how they do business. As of right now, it comes off as a price increase for less service.

Sure. I am actually still more outraged that they got rid of the buddy/friend system three years ago. I found that immensely helpful.

aox wrote:I guess I just don't understand the outrage equaling:

some dude on facebook wrote:Way to ALIENATE your long time customers. We pay $9 a currently, and now it's $16 to enjoy what we currently have??

The outrage is partly exacerbated by Netflix's campaign over the past six months to eat through all of the goodwill with customers that it had accumulated over the past decade. If this price hike had happened a year ago, I would be right with you, saying c'mon guys, it's still great value for our money. But Netflix has been deliberately depleting that value and now they want to dilute it even further.

Perkins Cobb wrote:A lot of media outlets are drinking the Netflix Kool-Aid, like the New York Times, which buys into the spin that this represents a re-commitment to DVDs. Actually I think it will have the reverse effect: people will make a choice between streaming or DVD and sacrifice the latter. If you look at the polls on sites like Hacking Netflix, people are saying they'll keep streaming vs. DVD at a 3-to-1 ratio. So in the long run, Netflix has its excuse to dump DVD, and the studios correspondingly get the message that people prefer streaming to physical media (at which point they'll choke off Netflix and keep that revenue to themselves, which is why I don't understand NF's logic here). See, I told you I'd find something to complain about.

Yeah, even that msnbc article I linked to has a live poll with one of the options being "YES. I've been thinking about [canceling Netflix] for awhile now, but this puts me over the fence. No plans to go anywhere else to sub in for DVDs. Streaming is the way to go." but nothing for those in the pro-DVD camp. ](*,) Enjoy only being able to watch 20% of what's available on DVD, world.

I've been a 4 dvd+ streaming customer for a couple years. Since I've been going through the criterions on hulu I busted it down to just one dvd at a time today. I hope that doesn't come through as a mixed message to netflix. I think we should all go to dvd only plans for a little while just to reinforce the demand.

edit: let me just emphasize that this isn't about price increase. I was doing 4 at a time. It's just transparent they're trying to push out their dvd business.

Yeah, for me I was already annoyed that they were not picking up new Criterion blus (or Eclipse sets) ... my local library provides me with more of what I want ... so this price hike is just pushing me over the edge ... its not that bad in itself, but it further demonstrates that they now have a business model that I don't want to support. So I won't.

(I understand that it likely makes business sense for them to move away from physical media ... but I imagine (perhaps incorrectly) that they could ease out of it a bit more gracefully and still keep their shareholders happy.)

I thought that their goal was to stop mailing stuff.

Today was the first day that Netflix stock crossed above $300 a share.
Just 3 years ago I was buying it when it dipped under $20 and would resell in the low $20's.
Sure missed the long-term play on it ...

Perkins Cobb wrote:A lot of media outlets are drinking the Netflix Kool-Aid, like the New York Times, which buys into the spin that this represents a re-commitment to DVDs.

Then there is the take in the Detroit Free Press:

Free Press wrote:Netflix, growing increasingly tired of being in the "red envelope" business,
....
Now, it's clear that Netflix sees itself as a streaming firm, saddled by an expensive legacy business in the form of postmarked red envelopes.

What these reporters are clueless about (or choosing to ignore) is that licensing streaming content will cost Netflix exponentially more than buying DVDs and stamps. Some stock analyst (so take that for what it's worth, but he's got the right idea) claims $180 million last year, $1.98 billion next year.

Lemmy Caution wrote:I thought that their goal was to stop mailing stuff.

It is. Note that only plans that include DVDs have increased, in some cases by an enormous percentage, while the streaming-only plan remains $7.99. If the anticipated rise in streaming costs is the justification for the price hikes, why is the streaming-only service spared from a rate increase?

Donald Brown wrote:If the anticipated rise in streaming costs is the justification for the price hikes, why is the streaming-only service spared from a rate increase?

Good question. I assume it's because they view (short-sightedly) their DVD customers as expendable and their streaming customers as more valuable. Of course, the next thing to go will be "unlimited" streaming: in a couple of years, once they've pushed more of their subscribers away from discs, they'll introduce a metered pricing structure for streaming.

Perkins Cobb wrote:

Donald Brown wrote:If the anticipated rise in streaming costs is the justification for the price hikes, why is the streaming-only service spared from a rate increase?

Good question. I assume it's because they view (short-sightedly) their DVD customers as expendable and their streaming customers as more valuable. Of course, the next thing to go will be "unlimited" streaming: in a couple of years, once they've pushed more of their subscribers away from discs, they'll introduce a metered pricing structure for streaming.

It almost doesn't matter for me.....I'm stuck with crappo ATT DSL which just started to charge extra for going over 150GB of data per month. Being a mlb.tv subscriber following an out of town team means I shoot most of my 5GB per day watching a game. As crappy as Netflix dvd selection has gotten, compared to the old days of them getting everything, I just don't see their streaming catalog heading in the right direction. Most of the new additions are worthless, IMHO. With the Criterions over at HuluPlus, I'd rather spend my precious bandwidth there, as well as my $8. Bye bye, NF streaming!

I'm not hesitant at all to cancel the streaming side. Most of the time when I sit down to find something I'd like to stream on my PS3 I come up with nothing anyway - the selection is horrible. The DVD/Blu side is why I subscribe.

Their friendly-as-shards-of-glass email letting me know that my cost was going up 60% for the exact same service really turned me off, though. It felt like something written by a politician, trying to hide the obvious with rhetoric suggesting that I should be happy Big Brother is letting me carry on at all. I'd quit but at $10 a month (or so) it's still a vastly better deal than going down to the local rental shop.

One of the things that infuriates me the most are that they're paying for increased streaming costs by discriminating against their older DVD customers in favor of the newer or potential streaming-only customers.

The other is this is the second consumer-engineering price restructuring they've introduced in the last 7-9 months. It's like they're making the DVD customers pay for their shortsightedness in not anticipating rising streaming costs earlier. Considering how soon this rate hike falls after the last one, they really should've done this more incrementally.

And, oh yeah, by automatically shifting people who don't bother to switch into substantially more expansive plans, they'll pick off the heedless folk who don't stay on top of stuff like this, in the way that free trials that require a credit card do.

I will watch any streaming movies unavailable for rental I want to see in the next 2 months, then switch to a DVD only plan.

Don't worry guys, Netflix found a way to bring you all back to their loving arms:

I understand everyone being mad but in all fairness, I was a netflix subscriber for many many years before there was a streaming option, it was nice being able to do both DVD and streaming but that caused me to drop back to 1 DVD a month from 3 (where as if I keep both I'm back to my old 3 DVD a time subscription prices anyways).

So now they want to increase the price, but for all of the DVD complainers, the DVD only subscription is getting cheaper..... I just look at it as they're finally starting to charge for the previously free streaming service, which you can drop at any time.

I do hope they start an unlimited streaming / 2 DVD a month only limited subscription.