
Netflix to Raise Price from $11 to $13 a Month - fomopop
https://thestreamable.com/guides/live-tv-streaming/news/breaking-news-netflix-raising-prices-to-13-a-month
======
jrs235
Previous discussion:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18911296](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18911296)

------
rdtsc
> We change pricing from time to time as we continue investing in great
> entertainment and improving the overall Netflix experience.”

Is it improving though? It used to be better, had more quality content, easier
to navigate, user ratings, reviews etc.

I feel it is one of those cases where to get the real meaning behind the
corporate PR message you have to invert it. Then it would be something like:
"We change pricing from time to time as we continue investing in subpar
entertainment and worsening the overall Netflix experience."

I had canceled it a few years back as I ended up spending more time looking
for something to watch than actually watching anything. To be fair their
original shows were not too bad. I enjoyed Stranger Things, House of Cards and
a few others. But it just wasn't worth the price overall.

~~~
herogreen
When you say "had more quality content", do you mean that some content was
removed ? Or that the rate over which great content is produced has decreased
?

~~~
dragonwriter
> When you say "had more quality content", do you mean that some content was
> removed ?

Yes, once Netflix proved that streaming was commercially viable, they rapidly
got competition bidding for exclusive streaming licenses and then content
owners pulling content for their own exclusive streaming services.

So, yes, a lot of content was lost and more is being lost. OTOH, they've
ramped up exclusive acquisitions and content development.

~~~
jhanschoo
Personally, I think that if you have cosmopolitan tastes, Netflix is actually
continuing to produce a lot of interesting content. In India, Sacred Games is
a fresh breath, as is Devilman Crybaby to anime.

------
BossingAround
Honestly, if it means more quality content, I'm for paying even $15+.

Netflix has a ton of content, but I feel like at least 70% (and I'm being
generous here) is very much 'meh'. There are some people who are happy to
watch 'meh', and that's awesome, but I find myself re-watching old (but good)
TV series, because the good TV show I watched has ended and I haven't found
anything good yet.

So, Friends it is, I guess...

~~~
konschubert
Since they have tons of mediocre content, I think having more money will just
lead to more of that.

If they had the ability to create good content but were lacking the finances,
they could take it from the mediocre content.

~~~
freehunter
Everyone's take on "mediocre content" is different. My wife loves a lot of the
low-rated Netflix shows. In the same way our dishes might not get washed as
quick if I didn't have my favorite podcasts, I don't know if our laundry would
get done as quick if she didn't have Fuller House or that mermaid show.

------
oflannabhra
From a previous thread:

I've been wondering if the last Great Unbundling will be followed by another
Great Rebundling. I'm no expert in any of this, but it seems unlikely that the
new "channels" of Netflix et al. will prevent their programming and delivery
methods from be bundled until it becomes disadvantageous to their growth (ie
monthly subscriptions can't generate enough revenue).

It seems to me there is an explosion of content that will be able to be
monetized far beyond just subscription lock-in. I wonder what the method of
monetization will be after the gold-rush of building subscriber bases?
Netflix's original proposition and value was one of convenience (and price),
but I wonder how long that will last. Will households juggle 4+ subscriptions
of $15/mo? I'm not sure that is why cord-cutters originally cancelled their
cable subscriptions.

My off-the-top-of-my-head list of current and coming soon subscription
services (that also produce content) is: Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hulu, HBO,
YouTube, CBS, Disney/Fox, NBC, Apple. Technologically, it seems like there are
some serious hurdles to "bundling" these together.

I wonder if the future "bundle" will actually be a service that manages
subscriptions for you, with things like highlighting newly available shows
since the last time you subscribed.

~~~
tracker1
I'm still irked that CBS, Warner, CW and the DC subscriptions aren't a single
service. Talk about milking it. I did a year of DC and didn't look at it
before the preview was up... I mean, Titans was meh, and I'm happy Young
Justice is back, but totally not worth the price of admission for how many DC
things are missing...

------
bedhead
Number of subscribers who won't renew because of this? Zero. Netflix delivers
the most hours-of-entertainment-per-dollar of anything in the world that isn't
free, it's not even close.

~~~
daeken
Yeah, this will almost certainly have a negligible effect on their subscriber
base. I won't say it's zero, but damn close. $2 monthly increase means $24 a
year, or ... less than a single meal for a family of four at Wendy's or KFC.

~~~
beefalo
Wendy's can get you 4 four for four meals at only $16. I say that is a marvel
of the modern world

~~~
tracker1
I'd say it's a marvel of soy and starch filled "chicken" patties and nuggets
loaded with extra sugar to boot. I'm just guessing that in one of those meals
(not including the soda) you get a over full day's worth of sugar (100g,
medical standard max recommended) which is way higher than what people should
probably limit sugar intake to (20g).

------
perfmode
I don’t mind. Netflix is a steal of a deal IMHO. Their media is so satisfying
to consume. I’ll take it over a nice entree at a restaurant any day.

~~~
idontpost
Where do you live that you can get a "nice" entrée for $13? That's what
McDonalds costs here...

~~~
jjeaff
Do you live in Europe? I don't know of anywhere that McDonald's costs that
much in the US. Maybe the Times Square one if you get a full combo.

$13 gets you a nice entree in most any US city. Not white table cloth service
of course, but you can find good and healthy food. Especially if we are
talking just about the entree.

~~~
tracker1
A lot of California, NYC, and other areas would be that much for a meal plus
taxes. Also airports large college towns and some downtown areas for larger
cities.

I usually don't spend less than $15-20 at fast food. But often it's multiple
burgers without a bun, and a couple of side salads.

~~~
jjeaff
ok, multiple burgers and multiple side salads is not a normal meal at a fast
food restaurant.

------
dammitcoetzee
Are they being greedy or is this just inflation? $7.99 was the original DVD
rental fee in 1997 → which is $12.51 in 2019 dollars. I wish I had a better
mental tool for working with inflation in my "get-mad-o-meter", haha.

~~~
titusjohnson
Wasn't $7.99 for the one-at-a-time plan? I also recall it being more like $10
or $12, but I wasn't paying for it at the time so I'm not an authority.

I felt like my family was lucky to get through 7 DVDs a month with one-at-a-
time. We had a pretty good 3-4 day turnaround, but no matter how hard you
tried to watch every movie the day you received it, we always managed to end
up holding onto a disc for a few days. We eventually switched to 2-at-a-time
so we could have one in-flight and one at home, that helped smooth out the
gaps.

But even counting 2 or 3 at a time subscriptions, with unlimited streaming I
am able to consume more content in a week and a half then I could in an entire
month with DVDs, so in terms of content viewed per dollar I still think I'm
getting a good deal. Streaming is especially a boon to anyone binging on a TV
show. DVDs would have 3, maybe 4 episodes per DVD, so going through a show
could monopolize your subscription for weeks at a time. Today I pop the show I
want on and it just goes and goes.

~~~
oflannabhra
The big advantage of the DVD plan is selection. That is inherent in the media,
and the license structure of it.

Another big change is BluRay, which I've found has _far and away_ higher
quality than streaming of any type.

~~~
dragonwriter
> Another big change is BluRay, which I've found has far and away higher
> quality than streaming of any type.

Standard Blu-ray (As opposed to UHD Blu-ray) doesn't have, to me, subjectively
better (or even as good) quality than either 4K and/or HDR content available
from YouTube, with the particular data connection I have at home, and with the
screen I use. (I'm not currently paying for the 4K service from Netflix.)

I haven't actually compared UHD BluRay to 4K/HDR streaming. But a lot of this
is going to vary by streaming provider, codec, data connection, and display
hardware.

------
AlexB138
What are you all actually using Netflix for anymore?

I keep a subscription for my kids, and will watch a documentary maybe once a
month, but their in-house content seems to be the primary offering now and my
impression has been that it's mostly terrible.

$13 isn't a deal breaker, but it's definitely creeping toward breaking point
for me. I think I would probably drop it somewhere between $15 and $20.

~~~
endorphone
I do not get the bizarre cynicism that appears in every discussion regarding
Netflix.

The service has loads of _fantastic_ content covering every gamut.

~~~
AlexB138
That's what I was trying to get at with the question about what people are
using the service for. I guess better phrase would be "what are people
watching". Once or twice a month I'll open Netflix, browse around, try to
watch something and turn it off. It seems like most of what it suggests is
their in-house content, which I've had very little luck with. I don't remember
the last time I found something I enjoyed by browsing Netflix, as opposed to
knowing exactly what I was looking for ahead of time.

Are they just really bad at suggesting content? How do you go about
discovering the fantastic content?

~~~
endorphone
Traditionally it was by browsing around "More Like This" on something you
liked, delving down the rabbit hole. For instance I watched a few European
captioned shows, and each of those led to more that I have loved (Dark,
Borderliner, Bordertown, Hotel Beau Sejour, River, among many others).

Unfortunately many of their interfaces don't support More Like This.

Netflix has very poor discoverability, and it has gotten worse, but they have
an enormous trove of extraordinary content.

------
Faaak
Frankly, I find so much netflix-shows on netflix, but rarely good movies not
produced by them.

I wanted to show my GF Star Wars... but it wasn't on it. Same for James Bond,
Die hard 4, Oblivion, MI1, etc. It's a shame, really. I would gladly pay
20$/month, but in this case, I want ALL available movies, not just some
cherry-picked ones.

~~~
baron816
Netflix still has its classic DVDs by mail business, which is still a great
deal when you think about what it used to be like renting movies. Or you could
rent movies via streaming. Netflix isn’t trying to kill Blockbuster anymore.
It’s trying to kill cable/network TV, where they have their own content, but
also air reruns and a few movies.

~~~
Faaak
I could rent, on go on other service, but you have to agree that it's way
simpler to go on a pirate site and download a movie.

------
shoulderfake
The main problem with it is that its hard to navigate. Why isn't the show I
watched last right there visible for me to click when I revisit the page ?
Instead its buried two page lengths down.

------
IloveHN84
Thank God there's Kodi

~~~
14
you will probably get down voted on HN for that comment but I think you bring
in a good point. How are they going to compete with the likes of kodi which is
something even my parents can manage to use. They keep adding cost while
lowering quality in my opinion. Yes they may have added a few things but the
user end experience is just bad and I can't see how they can win me back.

~~~
tracker1
I'm not sure about the ability for your parents to manage to use it... Either
you're configuring a media app and a paid service for better streaming options
and a vpn on top of that if you're careful. Alternatively you want to go
through a handful of torrent options, download to a seedbox, then download to
a local file share then watch on TV.

I mean, I'm willing to do this for some thing (often because a new release on
a streaming service breaks 3 episodes in because of capacity issues), but not
everyone is willing to do so.

I'd be willing to pay $25/month if they got all the content that is no longer
available back and included the disc at a time service back. Right now, you
can't even watch most of the entire line of movies they do have (like all the
MCU movies, or all the die hards, etc). Most of their original content I don't
care for, a lot of the rest isn't great. And the dropped the handful of shows
I really fired up the netflix app for.

------
bluetidepro
Off topic, but I really wish Netflix had an open API again. Or heck, even one
I could pay for, for a small fee. There is so many cool things I'd love to do
with my user data on there, but it's all so closed off. Unless that changed of
course, and there is something available again?

------
stunt
I hope they improve the content. Most of it is useless. Ah, I was expecting
they reduce the price for HD content!

------
turdnagel
I bet the price elasticity on Netflix is pretty high. They should try changing
it to $19.99 and see what happens.

------
tracker1
After the Marvel implosion, I already cancelled. Not the only reason but
enough for me to finally walk out.

------
emilfihlman
If only it didn't suck outside of Murica.

------
the_70x
and still not have an option to hide things that I don't want to see

