Hacker News Reader

Comment by TomOfTTB | Hacker News Reader

I'm sorry but I don't see how this is a fantastic idea at all.

First, this is next to useless from a consumer perspective. Because anyone whose actually tested a single provider can tell you speeds vary by geography. Time Warner might be middle of the pack overall but the fastest in your particular area.

Second, they're really p#ss#ng off the ISPs here. If you want faster bandwidth out of the ISPs its better to privately talk to them than publicly embarrass them.

Finally this reinforces the reputation Netflix is already getting among content producers which is the company doesn't play well with others. There's a reason why the head of HBO and Time Warner are taking hard lines against Netflix.

Bottom line: Netflix is part of a content delivering ecosystem. If they offend every other part of that ecosystem it will be much harder for them to survive in the future

View on HN

I respectfully disagree. This is a fantastic move by NetFlix.

NetFlix knows that the ISPs are already pissed at them and are moving to throttle them, so they fire back by showing consumers which of the ISPs are a better fit for their NetFlix viewing habits. NetFlix is flexing its muscle a bit here to show it can redirect customers to choose different ISPs and affect their bottom line.

> NetFlix is flexing its muscle a bit here to show it can redirect customers to choose different ISPs and affect their bottom line.

I, too, like that Netflix is giving out this kind of information, but let's remember that in the USA many people have two or even just one choice. I have my choice of Comcast cable or AT&T DSL for broadband. That's it. And I'm not 100% sure that AT&T DSL would actually work in my building, and it's top speed is 6Mb/s compared to Comcast's 12Mb/s (or maybe 15Mb/s, I forget). Plus, AT&T: the only company I can think of with worse customer service than Comcast.

So while I like that they're giving out this information I'm not sure it's going to be a good idea to piss off ISPs with this near monopoly situation in many parts of the USA.

A BIG fight is brewing, and NetFlix is summoning allies to its cause. If they don't, the ISPs will eventually have their way anyway. So, while I agree, I think NetFlix has almost no choice but to go down this path.

I, too, like that Netflix is giving out this kind of information, but let's remember that in the USA many people have two or even just one choice.

It's even worse: I live in Tucson, and I have two "choices:" Qwest DSL, with a max download speed of 1.5 mb/sec, or Comcast cable, which offers 1.5, 7, or 12. In other words, I have one real choice.

But see they have no muscle. I'll happily eat my words if this leads to some kind of mass exodus but I don't see it happening. Because in my admittedly anecdotal experience most people already don't like their ISP but are forced into the relationship because of various circumstances.

So while this information would have been worth its weight in gold as a threat to the ISPs its now released where it can do all the damage its going to do. If the impact is found to be negligible than Netflix has lost what little leverage it has over the ISPs.

Their leverage doesn't come from an increased threat of defections, which is obviously meaningless to monopoly operators. It comes from the promise of painful regulatory intervention in a monopolists operations, backed by the kind of massive and incontrovertible evidence no individual screwee could ever amass, let alone get in front of a court or the FCC.

Oh god how I wish there would be some regulatory action to stop all this horse trading that forms these local monopolies. I was stunned when I learned that cable operators actually trade customers and regions rather than competing.

Verizon FIOS looks like the best chance at breaking the monopolies' backs, but it seems to be slow going - I haven't had it available in any of the last four places I've lived in in very dense NYC and Bay Area, yet my parents in rural Maryland who live next to cows have had it for at least four years.

@TomOfTTB - How do you know Netflix hasn't already tried the private route? And if you think your "go along to get along" outlook had any merit in this arena, why do you think major entertainment companies spent the last decade trying to undo the internet?

Remember that "the others" with whom "Netflix does not play well" include members of the RIAA, the MPAA, and primary backers of ACTA. I'm sure you're also aware that cable operators have a similarly anti-customer track record in Washington DC.

These not-minor details matter. Why? Because the audience is also part of "the entertainment ecosystem". Suing them, DRMing them, and bribing their elected representatives in Congress all count as fundamentally offensive - and all that was going on well before Netflix could get anyone to return its calls.

I'm not saying that your advice isn't good. I'm just saying that Netflix isn't the first company to which it should be directed.

> There's a reason why the head of HBO and Time Warner are taking hard lines against Netflix

A gift from my employer - http://lh4.ggpht.com/_kt8r19d1Kpw/TUCXRpFxEjI/AAAAAAAAA_Y/t_...

(context - http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/13/business/media/13bewkes.ht...)

And Bewkes is probably a bit more pissed about http://www.google.com/finance?chdnp=1&chdd=1&chds=1&...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com