Netflix May Be Losing $192 Million Per Month From Piracy, Study Claims (techcrunch.com) 252
An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: As many as 1 in 5 people today are mooching off of someone else's account when streaming video from Netflix, Hulu or Amazon Video, according to a new study from CordCutting.com. Of these, Netflix tends to be pirated for the longest period -- 26 months, compared with 16 months for Amazon Prime Video or 11 months for Hulu. That could be because Netflix freeloaders often mooch off their family instead of a friend -- 48 percent use their parents' login, while another 14 percent use their sister or brother's credentials, the firm found. At a base price of $7.99 per month (the study was performed before Netflix's January 2019 price increase), freeloading users could save $207.74 over a 26-month period. At scale, these losses can add up, the study claims.
The report estimates Netflix could be losing $192 million in monthly revenue from piracy -- more than either Amazon or Hulu, at $45 million per month and $40 million per month, respectively. Millennials, not surprisingly, account for much of the freeloading. They're the largest demographic pirating Netflix (18 percent) and Hulu's service (20 percent). But oddly, it was Baby Boomers who were more likely to borrow someone else's account to access Amazon Prime Video. According to the study, 59.3 percent said they would pay for Netflix (or around 14 million people), contributing at least $112 million in monthly revenue, if they lost access. And 37.8 percent, or 2 million, said they'd pay for Hulu; 27.6 percent, or 1 million people, said they'd pay for Prime Video.
The report estimates Netflix could be losing $192 million in monthly revenue from piracy -- more than either Amazon or Hulu, at $45 million per month and $40 million per month, respectively. Millennials, not surprisingly, account for much of the freeloading. They're the largest demographic pirating Netflix (18 percent) and Hulu's service (20 percent). But oddly, it was Baby Boomers who were more likely to borrow someone else's account to access Amazon Prime Video. According to the study, 59.3 percent said they would pay for Netflix (or around 14 million people), contributing at least $112 million in monthly revenue, if they lost access. And 37.8 percent, or 2 million, said they'd pay for Hulu; 27.6 percent, or 1 million people, said they'd pay for Prime Video.
Again this rubish? (Score:5, Insightful)
Again this bulshit-study where it is assumed that every pirated-material would be purchased if piracy wouldn't be on the table?
That's so 90's...
Re: Again this rubish? (Score:5, Insightful)
In addition to that, by what bullshit definition is watching something owned by a friend or family member considered piracy?
I agree, this study is utter rubbish.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Again this rubish? (Score:4, Informative)
1-4 number of screens at the same time, depending on how much you pay (you also get higher res the more you pay).
At least in Sweden.
They are supposed to be used in the same household though, which is the thing which is generally seen as mooching when families whom have moved apart still use only one login.
Re: (Score:2)
1-4 number of screens at the same time, depending on how much you pay (you also get higher res the more you pay). At least in Sweden.
They are supposed to be used in the same household though, which is the thing which is generally seen as mooching when families whom have moved apart still use only one login.
Fair enough. The choice for the consumer is to lower their costs by dropping to fewer screens and letting the family member get their own subscription. Philosophically, I see no differences between buying access to multiple streams and viewing them at home, my beach house, private jet and or in my mom's basement. You have paid for x quantity to use as you say fit; although the T&C's may disagree. They could limit them based on IP address but that will cause other issues, such as I may stream on from my
iTunes Approach (Score:2)
This approach seems to work will for iTunes: five registered devices.
That covers my laptop, phone, desktop, tablet and one for extra.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Again this rubish? (Score:3, Interesting)
What about people with multiple homes? I pay for my childrenâ(TM)s education. As far as I am concerned I have a house, a dorm room, and an apartment.
Re: Again this rubish? (Score:4, Interesting)
The friend doesn't own the content, he merely has a subscription to stream it. And I bet the terms & conditions have something to say about when and where sharing that stream is allowed; generally that only includes members of one household, or a limited number of devices. That's not an unreasonable limitation.
I can see both sides of this.
I mean, in the old days of VHS, if I leant my friend my VHS cassette, you would be hard pressed to say that he was "stealing the content."
On the other hand, some people stream Netflix for free because they can; some would probably pay for subscription, others probably wouldn't. My wife lets her mother watch Netflix on our account, her mother is well off and probably wouldn't think twice about paying for her own subscription if she couldn't use ours for free.
It is a grey area, and anyone who says it is "definitely piracy" or "definitely not piracy" is over simplifying. No one would say that a parent couldn't let their child use their account. What about when they're at a friend's house; or off to college... where do you draw the line.
Overall, I see this as not an issue for the courts but an issue for Netflix themselves. They already limit lines. We get two, so, if we're watching and the mother in law is watching no one else can. Netflix makes you pay for lines, so they can restrict you from going crazy and sharing with everyone you know. They might in the future use a technical solution to fix this.
"2 lines at a time" - but only if being channeled through the same router. They can cut off the grey area by policing it better themselves... but will customers be OK with that?
Re: (Score:2)
It's really not much of a grey area. You can lend Steam games to people similar to how you would lend a VHS. But for example Steam will not allow 8 people in 8 different countries to log into the same account at the same time. The people who are "borrowing a friends" Netflix account are using it concurrently.
Re: (Score:2)
As an O.G. Pirate I welcome this redefinition of piracy :-)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't lie: you've never even been on a boat.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually I have been on a boat, with rum, in the Caribbean, but I'll admit that I was only thinking of "piracy" in the computing context :-P
Re: Again this rubish? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Again this rubish? (Score:5, Insightful)
This is the same bullshit when people say New York lost 25,000 jobs because they didn't want to subsidize Amazon. The jobs were never created so nothing was lost.
Just like these people would never have paid for the content so nothing is lost, right?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
No! You don't understand! Netflix is a victim. A VICTIM!
See, they used the word "Piracy". That means people are STEALING.
Don't you understand? This is a CRIME!
It's a CRIME. These people, who are basically watching a show over someone's shoulder, are CRIMINALS.
Prosecute them! Take away their money! Make them pay!
Or, you know, just scare them so about 20% will stop doing it out of some sort of latent fear of repercussion from some vague authority.
Re: (Score:2)
Netflix made 16 billion in profit last year. I wish that I could be "victimized" like that.
Re:Again this rubish? (Score:5, Interesting)
Netflix made 16 billion in profit last year. I wish that I could be "victimized" like that.
Playing devil's advocate; this is the feast before the famine.
There are a lot of Netflix wannabes. Disney, CBS, BBC, etc, are all pulling a lot of content off of Netflix. Netflix is a veritable wasteland of well-known content compared to what it was even three years ago, and it's only going to get worse. They're having to make their own stuff to maintain content.
I highly doubt Netflix are going to go under- but Netflix execs are probably looking at their cheques with concern- are their end of year bonuses going to be so well padded in 5 years from now? How are they ever going to be able to afford the bigger yacht if they lose half their marketshare in the upcoming years.
Netflix is bathing in money right now, but, it is potentially facing a less rosy future. They're not going to become the next blockbusters and disappear, but they may not dominate the landscape in the near future either. They're looking for ways to scrape the barrel.
Re: (Score:2)
There are a lot of Netflix wannabes. Disney, CBS, BBC, etc, are all pulling a lot of content off of Netflix. Netflix is a veritable wasteland of well-known content compared to what it was even three years ago, and it's only going to get worse.
This concerns me a lot. This was Netflix's biggest selling point: one stop shopping. Netflix and the other studios are going to poison the well by balkanizing video streaming. If I were Netflix, I'd focus on how to get content back before I worried about account sharing,
Editorial node: I mostly blame the studios for this, not Netflix. Not being in the room though it's hard to say. It takes two to make a deal but either side can put a kabosh on it.
Re: (Score:2)
Revenue != profit (Score:3)
Netflix made 16 billion in profit last year.
Netflix made $16B in revenue in 2018.
Net income was $1.2B.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Again this rubish? (Score:4, Insightful)
This is true and should be recognized.
Of course self-reporting is likely to be incorrect:
-When it's purely academic, you assume yes, but then you actually look at your budget or perhaps notice that Hulu is cheaper, maybe you don't get netfilx
-A policy change to clamp down on moochers creates negative PR, souring people's opinion of netflix
-There are probably some people that don't care about Netflix that much, but still pay for it because they have a friend/family member mooching and it's worth the small amount of money to not inconvenience that friend/family member. So there may be some losses of those not surveyed.
Re: (Score:2)
If they aren't making that money, they are losing it. False premise that will never convince anyone but a half wit.
Not even Piracy: Netflix Supports It! (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Also assuming that the account they are using is using more than the allowed concurrent streams.
If a family is paying for a 2 or more concurrent streams, and the account isn't exceeding that in actual use, then there is no "loss". It's the customer getting what they pay for.
Re: (Score:2)
If you pay for two concurrent streams, and don't use both of them all the time, then Netflix is ripping you off, right? Which is essentially the same logic as whoever did this idiot study used....
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, the calculation is retarded.
Analogies:
* Earth is losing giga-gigawatts of energy from lack of solar panels in the Sahara Desert
* Humans are losing billions of children per second due to masturbation
Re: (Score:2)
People were doing it anyway. They just made it no longer a violation of ToS.
I don't know how they internally rent shows and amortize the costs -- per view, or just rented for x months for a fixed cost. Even pay per account, unlimited views for that account after the one time internal charge.
It would be completely wrong to think they don't have internal business models on how to pay for things that take sharing into account.
Re: (Score:2)
I 100% agree with this argument when it comes to piracy in general. If I copy your fire, you still have fire. But, in netflix's case, they have a more legitimate claim than others in that they have to pay for bandwidth. I think this is a special case where "piracy" could be shown to cause actual damages. Of course, the figure they released is unlikely to reflect bandwidth costs alone.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair, the study is way better then I expect it to be.
They could of just measured the number of times people downloaded Netflix owned episodes off of pirate sites and then multiplied that number by a years subscription to Netflix.
Re: (Score:2)
they DO love to do that.
The headline makes it look like money is being taken from them. What they really mean is they lost the opportunity to make money. It's like the difference between robbing a cabbie for $200 and letting the air our of his tires. One directly costs him money, the other prevents him from making it. Of course the cabbie can then argue any practical (or impractical I suppose?) amount "lost" for the day he was unable to work. Maybe he would have made $50. Maybe $200. Maybe $10,000?!
Re: (Score:2)
Again this bullshit-study where it is assumed that every pirated-material would be purchased if piracy wouldn't be on the table?
Exactly. Furthermore, I don't have Netflix, but do have Amazon Prime, so...
News Flash: Netflix losing $12/month to Amazon from Rick.
Re: (Score:2)
If you are using a legitimate account that is being paid for, with the permission of the account's owner, it can in no way be called piracy.
So if I and my son are watching Netflix through my account on my TV. Is it piracy?
How about if I and my son are watching Netflix through my account on his TV. Is it piracy?
How about if I am watching Netflix through my account on my son's tablet. Is it piracy?
If he is watching Netflix through my account on my TV is it piracy?
So if I and my son are watching Netflix on his
Netflix still benefits (Score:2)
"According to the study, 59.3 percent said they would pay for Netflix (or around 14 million people), contributing at least $112 million in monthly revenue, if they lost access.
Those people still tell other people about shows, they still add to viewing metrics of what is popular. This may be a more direct figure of subscription money Netflix is leaving on the table but there is a hard to calculate offset but cementing Netflix in the zeitgeist.
It seems like a more direct loss but even then the situation is n
Re: (Score:2)
59.3% of respondents saying that they would pay for Netflix does not mean that 59.3% would actually pay for Netflix if they couldn't use someone else's account. The actual losses is zero because you can't lose something you never had. It would be fair to say that they may see $112mil in revenue by stopping shared accounts but that is also just a guesstimate.
Re:Again this rubish? (Score:5, Insightful)
Netflix doesn't just charge by account but also each tear of service has a different number of max streams 2 for the standard account and 4 for the premium. It's not really piracy if someone is paying extra for more streams?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
If as they admit most of those are kid still mooching off of their parents then they probably already upgraded to a premium account so pay $7.99 for 2 basic plans with 2 streams or pay $15.99 for a premium account with 4 streams either way the kid is still a mooch and the parents are paying for it.
Re: (Score:2)
I could only see it as piracy if one of those streams was not authorized by the subscriber, but instead was actual cracking of NetFlix infrastructure. Sure, call that piracy. Otherwise, people are just using what they pay for.
Does anyone know if you can stream NetFlix in HD to the browser yet? Last time I tried, you couldn't ...
Re: (Score:2)
"I could only see it as piracy if one of those streams was not authorized by the subscriber, but instead was actual cracking of NetFlix infrastructure. Sure, call that piracy."
Without the brig and the skull and crossbones flag? without peglegs and Arrrs! ? No sir, you shouldn't dare call that "piracy".
But even then, how exactly they lose that money? Which increased costs to Netflix result from that "piracy"?
So, in the end, it's neither piracy nor loses, as it's usually the case.
Re: (Score:2)
Or even if they don't they probably weren't going to pay for it anyway. My daughter lives in another city and is going to college there. If she didn't use my Netflix account, she wouldn't buy one herself as money's tight and she has other things to pay for.
Also, Netflix charges based on the number of concurrent screens using the service. More screens, more money. Half the reason I keep paying my current level is because of my aforementioned daughter's usage This isn't piracy. Would Netflix be happier i
Re: (Score:2)
> Now, my guess is that Netflix doesn't really care about college jkids using their parents account (again, get them hooked as customers and they'll get their own eventually). A bigger concern is likely young people who band together and share the cose of a single login, even though they don't live together. Saves a few bucks, but is very clearly not in line with the user agreement.
You are correct that use breaches the terms, but also correct that Netflix doesn't actually care. They know it's good for b
That's nothing (Score:4, Funny)
That's nothing compared to the housing market losing $7.2 TRILLION per year from pirates living more than one person per house.
Faulty assumption (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Faulty assumption (Score:5, Interesting)
This assumes that 100% of the moochers would have paid for an account if they didn't mooch. I don't know what proportion of people would actually have paid for an account, but I'm guessing more than 10% and less than 50%? Still a lot, but the presence of that glaring error in the conclusions makes me wonder how much the study authors are biasing their assumptions to make the most headline-grabbing number possible, rather than engaging in a good-faith effort to find out how much money these companies are really losing.
Also assumes they someone didn't pay for the extra seats in the account. The way Netflix works is that you have to buy multiple seats, so ofcourse when you legally buy them, and then actually use them.. That shouldn't count as piracy, but now apparently does..
Watching things that are paid for, is now piracy....
Re:Faulty assumption (Score:5, Insightful)
The way Netflix works is that you have to buy multiple seats, so ofcourse when you legally buy them, and then actually use them.. That shouldn't count as piracy, but now apparently does..
And it doesn't factor in all those people who bought the extra seats and then didn't use them either. Pure profit for Netflix! If you're going to count "piracy" losses, you need to count the "bought but didn't use" gains against that, since the two are very much related.
If there was only one login available at one time, you wouldn't have much "piracy", but you wouldn't have all that bought-but-didn't-use revenue either.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So your kids have moved out. And I am sure loads of people are doing it like you are to save money. And I can guarantee you that many of them charge their kids to pay for these extra seats. What is wrong with that, just splitting the costs equitably? but maybe you only have 1 kid, so in an attempt to be frugal you find 2 other relatives to save even more money.
This gives you an idea, and you start selling Netflix account shares to anybody and everybody. You are now making $1 a month per person you sign up.
A
Re: (Score:2)
Your question is interesting. Even if you were not making money on the deal, can I sell shares of my account, and create some time share mechanism to share 4 streaming seats with 50 people? Clearly Netflix doesn't seem to care (yet) that you let your kids use your account, or you left it logged in at your friend's house. This is similar to sharing your internet connection, sure you pay for the subscription, and a few extra people doing it doesn't really hurt, but then people are shocked when the company
Re:Faulty assumption (Score:5, Informative)
This assumes that 100% of the moochers would have paid for an account if they didn't mooch.
Actually TFA quite clearly states that it assumes 59.3% moochers would have paid for an account if they didn't mooch, based on a survey where 59.3% of the respondents who answered that they were currently sharing someone else's single-user-only Netflix account ALSO answered that if they lost access to that account they'd go and pay for an account of their own.
Re: (Score:2)
The Basic plan has 2 streams and is $7.99 the Premium plan has 4 streams and is $15.99 if a family has kids that live away from home that are still using the account they have probably already upgraded to the premium plan. By their own admission the freeloaders are mostly family If the kids moved out and didn't use the account then chances are mom and dad would downgrade their account, this would actually cost them more than allowing the parents to pay double + 1 cent for the kids to use it.
Re: (Score:2)
This assumes that 100% of the moochers would have paid for an account if they didn't mooch.
Furthermore, that 100% of the moochers would have bought a Netflix subscription if they couldn't mooch.
Piracy? (Score:2, Interesting)
How is that piracy?
Netflix is DESIGNED with that in mind.
One Account, allows 1-4 "screens" to watch.
Netflix supports tablets, tablets are mobile.
Netflix supports phones, phones are mobile.
Children can't get their "own" netflix account, so they need to "share" their parents.
Some more examples of Piracy:
-Some people share a newspaper, that's piracy!
-Some people invite other people over to watch Netflix, that's piracy!
-Some people watch over the shoulders of people watching Netflix, that's piracy!
Re: (Score:2)
Put the 1-4 "screens" to watch behind the same ISP service.
3 people could be on holiday for decades? 1 screen stays on with the main account?
Re: (Score:3)
It gets complex AC
Only if you over-complicate it.
Put the 1-4 "screens" to watch behind the same ISP service.
Why? Netflix doesn't require that. You're making up terms of service that don't actually exist. If I pay for up to 4 screens, I don't care one bit if each screen is using a different ISP, and neither does Netflix, as it doesn't change a thing. Each device has to login to Netflix separately regardless of location, so requiring the same ISP is nonsensical. Netflix still know how many devices are logged in to the account, and is fully capable of limiting usage to what is bei
Re: (Score:2)
"Put 1-4 screens to watch behind the same ISP service"
So when I take my phone/table to Starbucks, to a hotel, to a friend's place, I would be locked out from using Netflix that I pay for simply because those places are probably on different ISPs? Heck, assuming that my cellphone service is with another provider other than my ISP, this would also lock me out from streaming over a cellular network. Your reasoning makes 0 sense.
Re: (Score:2)
What makes it more intriguing is that, just a few years ago, their terms of service permitted much of the behavior that is now being labeled as "piracy".
I signed up for the service sometime around or about 2007 when I was in grad school, and my younger brother working on his undergrad asked if I would share my account with him. Since I'm one of those oddballs who actually checks the terms to see if such things are allowed, I read through Netflix's terms to see what their stance was on such behavior, and I r
Watching together (Score:5, Insightful)
I wonder how much money they are losing because family members watch a movie together, instead of each streaming to their own account ?
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder how much money they are losing because family members watch a movie together, instead of each streaming to their own account ?
That will be fixed once cameras in TVs can determine the number of viewers and auto charge your account for additional eyeballs.
This is a non-story (Score:5, Interesting)
In the first place, the CEO of Netflix has stated that he considers account sharing to be an overall positive, not a negative.
Second, if Netflix wants to fix this "problem", it is completely within their power. Institute a single-stream HD plan (instead of the current single-stream SD plan), and many households will switch to it, instead of the double-stream HD plan. Or, Netflix could simply charge a fixed price per additional stream, in which case the owner of the account becomes moot.
Regardless, if I'm paying for a stream, why does it matter who I allow to use it? If that person hogs the stream and locks me out, that is no one's problem but mine. Either I change the password, or I buy another stream.
Re: (Score:2)
There you answered your own question. The assumption is that if you do not allow anyone else to use it, those other persons would have to buy another or their own stream.
As far as my knowledge of economics go, all of this thinking is based on the concept of Opportunity Cost. This concept
Re: (Score:2)
Netflix could force the matter very easily by providing a single-stream HD plan, which is not the case in the U.S.
I would bet that a large number of households would happily drop to one stream to save a little money. And in that case, you won't share your account, because otherwise you wouldn't be able to rely on Netflix being available wh
Re: (Score:2)
A prime example would be online games, where only one login at a time is possible per account. So you can't have more than one person using the service at the same time. But still, virtually all of these contracts include a standard clause where the provider specifies that the customer is not allowed to share access to their services with any other person. And this does appear to be enforceable at le
Re: (Score:2)
Regardless, if I'm paying for a stream, why does it matter who I allow to use it? If that person hogs the stream and locks me out, that is no one's problem but mine. Either I change the password, or I buy another stream.
There you answered your own question. The assumption is that if you do not allow anyone else to use it, those other persons would have to buy another or their own stream.
No, that doesn't answer the question. Only one person is using the stream at a time. It shouldn't matter to Netflix who is paying for it. Apart from the two-stream minimum bundling, which is Neflix's own choice, they get paid the same whether the current subscriber pays for another stream or the other person buys their own. More importantly, Netflix's costs are exactly the same regardless of whether or not the people viewing the streams are related or live at the same address.
I suspect that if Netflix were
Enjoy it while it lasts (Score:2)
Agree with your statements. Netflix is currently in the friendly 'acquire users at all cost' phase of its business cycle. This means you get lots of content for cheap with few annoying restrictions and rules. Make no mistake though, once user acquisition tops out, they will rapidly transition to the 'milk the suckers' phase. I would expect streams to be linked to IP, adverts unless you pay more, shows being moved to premium pay per view content. In the later phases you'll basically have a regular cable chan
Greed (Score:3)
This post tells me more about greed than about piracy. If a family subscribes to a plan that allows 5 members then it's not piracy. Is it then considered theft that my wife purchased her pain ticket with my Visa? Is it theft that my family uses my wife's Amazon account instead of each our individual accounts? Or could it be considered shoplifting when a family goes out and shops together and one person pays the invoice?
Re:Greed (Score:4, Funny)
"my wife purchased her pain ticket with my Visa"
Kinky.
Re: (Score:2)
How many times can we redefine piracy? First it's murdering sailors and plundering ships, then it's copyright infringement, and now it's using someone else's Netflix account.
Isn't that be fraud? I thought piracy was copyright infringement now.
Meh. Who gives a fuck anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
Meh. You wouldn't download a car.
I totally would.
https://www.thingiverse.com/th... [thingiverse.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Is it then considered theft that my wife purchased her pain ticket with my Visa?
You're lucky. Mine buys my pain ticket with my card...
Gasp! The monsters! (Score:2)
Just like they did when they used their parents' cable subscription with the TV in their own room!
Account Sharing, not piracy. (Score:5, Interesting)
Personally, I'm disappointed that Slashdot actually posted this.
So it seems that this isn't about piracy at all. Just account sharing, which is defined as "anyone who used a streaming service but did not pay for it". This would include ones parents, common law spouse, girlfriend/boyfriend, or sibling - collectively totaling over 60% of the Netflix account sharers. It doesn't really clarify how they determined if this was inside or outside the policy for the given service based on the definition I'd wager they simply didn't care.
How accurate this is depends significantly how the questions were posed. i.e. Saying "Do you pay for your own Netflix account or do you use someone else's?" could easily mean to someone who isn't violating the TOS
Also to those who are saying the implied claim is that 100% of the people who use someone else's credentials would buy their own. Apparently they asked the question "If you lost access to this credential would you get your own." For Netflix aboutt 60% said "yes" and this was used to determine the overall "cost" of account sharing.
Re: (Score:2)
Didn't finish my thought there. "could easily mean to someone who isn't violating the TOS" should be followed by: "Are you using your parent's account in your own home?"
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, and with Netflix you are specifically buying a certain number of screens to watch on. It encourages people to share. I am usually the sort of guy who would not use someone else's service, but I let my parents use my Netflix login because I cannot watch two screens at the same time! Plus, on the rare occurrences when my wife's watching one thing and I'm watching something else, Netflix will tell my parents that both screens are in use.
Long story short, this is a dumb article.
Ookaay.... About those subscription options. (Score:2)
Netflix offers 2 or 4 concurrent streams. People are paying for these sub options, and probably most subs fall under these categories (because they also provide higher quality streaming). So this is not only totally legitimate but also paid for.
Netflix CEO Says Account Sharing Is OK (Score:2)
Geoblocking makes Netflix worthless to me (Score:2)
Nothing on trading (Score:4, Interesting)
My parents have Netfix, I have Prime, brother has HBOGo.
We all share.
Re: (Score:2)
You can't lose something you never had. (Score:3)
Netflix isn't losing much money (Score:2)
They couldn't charge as much for the 4 and 2 streams plans if people were not able to use them with different IP addresses at the same time.
Just like with cable, most of the money doesn't go towards content, but distribution.
Did anyone mention (Score:4, Interesting)
that it's assumed people not paying for it would actually pay for it? I see that's covered. How about this - maybe this study was done for some other reason, like to prop up stock prices? Or maybe drive them down a bit so someone can buy at a lower cost? nah, that would be wrong, they're good guys.... Oh look a squirrel.
Account sharing is piracy now? (Score:2, Insightful)
Bullshit. I have the Netflix sub that allows for 2 screens and HD. I use one, and my son at college uses the other.
If they don't want account sharing then charge for each screen. Probably not a good idea, as that would very likely piss off customers.
The study is fucking stupid for implying piracy.
Old school (Score:2)
Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics (Score:2)
Yet another hypothetical and baseless study. The account limits the number of simultaneous streams based on a monthly price. If three people in my house want to stream 3 different shows 24/7 my account allows for this. They arent ‘losing’ money if by me doing this still results in a peofit. They just arent making as much money as theyd preferr. There is a difference. It seems like no group anymore that conduct statistical analysis is capable of doing so without adding political spin. I don
false assumptions (Score:2)
I once lost 10 billion (Score:5, Funny)
"Using your account to its fullest" != "piracy" (Score:2)
It's studies like this that make me think that tech has a vocabulary problem.
Follow the money, that's all (Score:2)
The study's a joke. The question we should be asking: why is Netflix wanting to portray itself as a victim? Studies like this propaganda don't come from nowhere, we have to look at who benefits (assuming people believe this crap)*. What I'd guess is that if Netflix can seem to be a victim it's going to get: ...I'm sure there are others.
- less legislative scruitiny
- some leverage perhaps against tiered internet traffic charges that lean against them
*I mean, I guess it's possible that someone comes out wit
Make it possible to migrate Netflix profile (Score:2)
I still share because all the data on what episodes of TV shows I'm up to, what movies I've seen, watch list, ratings, etc are on someone else's account. If I were to get my own, I'd have to write all that crap down. A simple "migrate profile to new account" feature would go along way to getting people to move to their own account.
Just PR in advance of pricing announcement (Score:3)
And here it is now.. See slashdot article: Netflix is Testing Even More Expensive Subscription Prices.
I borrowed my brother's car (Score:2)
Think twice before you cut off that long tail.... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No it assumes, as the survey results this story is based on indicate, that a little under 60% of people using another paid subscribers account would get their own if they were somehow cut off.
You can argue the validity of counting that as piracy or the wording or procedural process used for the study but their numbers are based on the responses they got.