Re: Netflix/Streaming Services
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1
(Post 36052146)
Maybe to ensure Netflix comes out on top?
It should be compared to Now TV's entertainment pack if we're comparing it to a Sky product.
|
No, it was a quick check of the main pay-tv general entertainment channels. You can do exactly the same with the full range of channels available within Sky Basics. I agree that the premium channels - Sky Cinema and Sky Sports - are in a different league. Of course, Netflix does not show sport, so it did not make sense to compare that.
Fair enough to compare Sky Cinema, but add that to all the TV shows and then compare prices.
---------- Post added at 19:48 ---------- Previous post was at 19:42 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
(Post 36052147)
Netflix has done remarkably well at allowing established Hollywood figures to use their platform to produce vanity projects - actors getting producer credits, that sort of thing. That’s less charitable than I mean it to be; Enola Holmes names Millie Bobby Brown as a producer and by all accounts she was fairly hands-on. But no matter how talented she is, she’s only 16 and her reputation stems entirely from one ensemble show (Stranger Things). Again, that sounds less charitable than I mean it to; all I’m really saying is she wouldn’t have got such a massive opportunity anywhere else. Netflix is happy to chuck money at projects like that and see if it sticks. Given the names they’ve been able to attract to what, in old money, would have been disparagingly called a “tv movie” or “straight to video”, it’s a strategy that’s working for them - especially if Enola Holmes is anything to go by. It managed to draw in Henry Cavill *and* Helena B.C., and has been in the U.K. top 10 since it dropped. The commissioning of a sequel is all but a formality.
Massive companies like Amazon and Apple, which are increasingly looking like conglomerates with their only tangentially connected business divisions, may well have the deep pockets needed to cross-subsidise their TV operations and out bid Netflix for big name productions like Star Trek or Borat, but I believe Netflix already learned a hard lesson in that regard when Marvel went to Disney, Disney started making streaming noises, and Netflix’s well-developed and well-received corner of the MCU came to a sudden halt, long before it ran out of stories to tell.
In short, I don’t think Netflix’s business model is threatened by Amazon or Apple throwing big money at bids for third party content, and I don’t think Netflix is going to reduce spend on its own commissions and retreat to being a video library. It has found a commissioning model that works for it, and also works for the rather big names who are clearly willing to work for somewhat less than the Hollywood A rate in exchange for the creative freedom Netflix is willing to give them.
|
I don’t disagree. Incidentally, I didn’t mean to imply that Netflix would stop making originals and become merely a video library. But I do think that they will reduce the amount of new material coming on stream each week once they get to a certain critical mass. |
