[scJohn]

NetFlix has now officially launched a streaming only plan for $7.99 per month.


At the same time NetFlix has increased the the prices of their DVD plans as follows:


1 DVD $8.99 to $9.99

2 DVD $13.99 to $14.99

3 DVD $16.99 to $19.99

4 DVD $23.99 to 27.99

5 DVD $29.99 to $34.99

6 DVD $35.99 to $41.99

7 DVD $41.99 to $48.00

8 DVD $47.99 to $55.99


The limited 1 dvd plan (2 DVD's a month) remains at $4.99.


Complete blog entry can read at http://blog.netflix.com/2010/11/new-...ntly-plus.html .

No DVD only option for those of you who do not use the streaming feature.


Existing customers will roll over to the new pricing on 01/01/2011. I'll assume that this will be based upon your billing cycle. You can go ahead and change your plan now but you can not return to that plan. The new plans are in effect immediately (11/22/2010) for all new customers.


Blue Ray pricing remains the same


If you go to your membership page and click on Change Plan. At the top of the new page you will see:


"Your plan is no longer offered"


"You are currently on the 3 DVDs out at-a-time (Unlimited) for $16.99 plan which is no longer offered. If you select a new plan, you will no longer be able to return to this plan."


Notice that the DVD unlimited plans show the new prices.

 

[moviegeek]

How do you think they are paying for the $1 billion Epix fiasco?

 

[Charles R]

Quote:

Originally Posted by moviegeek How do you think they are paying for the $1 billion Epix fiasco?

Not sure I'd call $1 a fiasco in today's world. If you want streaming only it has actually dropped in price to $7.99 (from $8.99 your only previous option). Looks to me they are raising the prices for DVDs rather than streaming... notice the large increases as the number of DVDs go up. It's going up $1 per DVD.


According to the chart I posted in another thread DVD usage has plateaued so perhaps they need to generate more income per DVD to maintain the same revenues per DVD (customers are subscribing to lesser plans as their disc usage goes down).

 

[Cygnus2112]

I'd call it a fiasco because netflix paid too much for epix content. Now they expectedly pass the cost the subscribers. Glad I am on the 1 disc plan.

 

[Brian Conrad]

$1 increase, gee I'm going to have to consider my options now.

No, I'll stick with my disc and streaming with BD when available. Too many movies that don't get streaming and I sometimes I even see a film streaming and want to see the extras and commentary available on the disc.

 

[Charles R]

I called and the Rep stated existing customers will be converted to the new pricing on 1/2/11 and there will still be an additional charge for Blu-ray.

 

[Charles R]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cygnus2112 I'd call it a fiasco because netflix paid too much for epix content.

Can you provide a link that proves they paid too much? Perhaps the deal allowed to to keep the price lower... via signing up x number of new subscribers. Not opinions are there any facts to show they overpaid? Such as cost versus related increased revenues? I love to see them!

 

[jagouar]

When you add in bluray costs to the plans I am debating dropping discs from my plan and going streaming only (and using the zune 1080p service for new releases). I am already on the 1 disc at a time plan now so I don't get that many discs anyways (and have been using zune more because of the 30 day window on most netflix new releases of movies I really want to watch when they are out). I am probably going to keep bluray for now however but its getting really close to me just dropping bluray and selling my player (just because zune rentals are still very expensive).

 

[Cygnus2112]

I was speaking my opinion on the Epix deal. From the day it was announced I felt that netflix should have waited because time was on their side. Cable and sat companies were not signing up with epix and epix needed to make a deal badly. Because netflix paid so much for epix now starz will demand more $$.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles R /forum/post/19528625


Can you provide a link that proves they paid too much? Perhaps the deal allowed to to keep the price lower... via signing up x number of new subscribers. Not opinions are there any facts to show they overpaid? Such as cost versus related increased revenues? I love to see them!

 

[Charles R]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Cygnus2112 /forum/post/19528734


I was speaking my opinion on the Epix deal. From the day it was announced I felt that netflix should have waited because time was on their side. Cable and sat companies were not signing up with epix and epix needed to make a deal badly.

Dish Network has had several Epix Channels for quite a while (knowing Dish they got them cheap). Personally I'd like them to break streaming into Movies and everything else. At least take the pressure out of including newer movies in the lesser price plans. Going forward I don't think they can keep the everything package in place... assuming the growth rate continues (for a while). Hulu Plus is charging the same $7.95 and offering a lot less content although a much nicer image.

 

[EscapeVelocity]

Going from 3 at a time to 2 or maybe 1.


Looks like they will be losing revenue to me.

 

[Charles R]



Quote:
Originally Posted by EscapeVelocity /forum/post/19529251


Looks like they will be losing revenue to me.

It does look like they are trying to get people to drop to the lower plans... by increasing the upper tier plans the largest percentage. I wonder if the lower plans are the most profitable?

 

[Cygnus2112]

I think Reed wants ppl to switch to 2 or 1 at a time since the postage/disk costs are greatly reduced. Thus I doubt they will lose much revenue if ppl lower their disk at a time subscription. I am happy with 1 at a time as I can get about 8 disks per month.

 

[JN99]

Is it just me or is anyone else disappointed with the shift to more and more online streaming when it is (to me at least) clearly inferior in both audio and video quality?


For all the money we invest in home theater systems, it's a shame to see it wasted by throwing inferior source material at it, not to mention the current lack of selection. I have this sinking feeling that it won't be long before there simply is no option for disc rental and that will be a real shame.

 

[Charles R]



Quote:
Originally Posted by JN99 /forum/post/19530012


Is it just me or is anyone else disappointed with the shift to more and more online streaming when it is (to me at least) clearly inferior in both audio and video quality?

You aren't the only one.

Although I find it exactly the opposite. Up to a few months ago I had a 1080p projector/119 inch screen/killer speakers/etc and I had a hard time finding several Blu-ray movies a month worth firing everything up for. So much so I haven't missed it much and I have been taking my time in selecting my third edition theater.


I do most of my viewing in my den with a 61 inch set and now that I'm streaming at 6Mbps the quality isn't painful. Streaming is about choices. I have over 100 items in my Instant Queue which is probably closer to 500 items if you count individual shows (within series). My DVD/Blu-ray queue has less than twenty and a lot of them are filler I'll never get to.


I see it very similar to Pandora (which I have been listening to for the last several hours). I would never go out and purchase or wait for all the music I have been listening to show up. I'm sure the quality isn't the same as my lossless rips (of my own albums) but I rather listen to thousands of other songs I enjoy that I wouldn't listen to any other way.

 

[michaeltscott]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Conrad /forum/post/19528503


$1 increase, gee I'm going to have to consider my options now.

No, I'll stick with my disc and streaming with BD when available. Too many movies that don't get streaming and I sometimes I even see a film streaming and want to see the extras and commentary available on the disc.

That $11.99 plus 8.75% CA sales tax comes to $13.04. The difference between that and the $7.99/month streaming-only plan ($8.69 with tax) is $4.35/month. It'd be nice to have access to rent BDs if I want them, but I'm not watching them--I held one disc for nearly a year without watching it. That's definitely not worth $52.20/year--I could buy a couple of new release BDs for that. I'm switching to streaming-only.


I wonder how many other people switched today with that announcement? Doesn't seem to have hurt their stock--they're up $7.80 in today's trading (to $188.81/share).

 

[EscapeVelocity]

If Netflix had there full DVD selection available to download, I would ditch the discs.


That isnt the case.


If Hulu Plus had their full Hulu content available, I would sign up, but they dont.

 

[Blacklac]

Don't forget how many increases we have seen already.

 

[Taperwood]

I see a real battle shaping up between Netflix's desire to stream everything and those who control the wire into our homes. The cable and phone companies, who provide the vast majority of broadband access and most of our video content, are not going to give this up to Netflix without a fight. Comcast already limits internet downloads to 250 gigs a month and my DSL gets 5 megs on a good day and oftentimes half that in the evenings. What is to stop them from continuing these limitations? I wonder how Netflix is planning on dealing with that?

 

[Charles R]



Quote:
Originally Posted by Taperwood /forum/post/19531814


Comcast already limits internet downloads to 250 gigs a month and my DSL gets 5 megs on a good day and oftentimes half that in the evenings.

When I signed up for DSL (ATT - 6Mbps) I was getting as low as 1Mbps during prime time and close to six off hours. Anyway after a week or two of travelling through various support tiers I ran across someone who finally changed my circuit. Since then I get at least 5.2Mbps any time of the day. If you want a contact send me an PM and I'll forward the info.