Netflix Hammers the Last Nail into Linear TV's Coffin | Hacker News Reader

Netflix Hammers the Last Nail into Linear TV's Coffin

bloomberg.com

25 pointsmfiguiere53 comments

> The streaming giant added 13.1 million subscribers over the last three months, beating its own forecast of 9 million, and nearly 30 million new subscribers flocked to the platform in 2023

It’s like the author isn’t aware that over the last year Netflix got super aggressive on cracking down on shared accounts … and giving promos for shared account people to get a discounted new account.

Hey, someone's OKR got met, C-suite don't care how.

And tbh, if some of that growth was achieved by converting coat-tail riders to paying customers, that's a good outcome, a fair few pundits predicted that it would have the opposite effect.

Netflix got super aggressive on cracking down on shared accounts

Did they? I still share my account with a few people. I haven't noticed them being super aggressive.

If I recall this was based more on region/country. I could be totally wrong, but I think it more of, they got more aggressive in certain places, but not all places. I vaguely remember seeing a mention of Canada being one[1].

[1] https://mobilesyrup.com/2023/07/20/netflixs-password-sharing...

They are doing it strategically to spread out the effect of uptick in new subscribers. Don't want to shoot their wad in one single action. Better to let the effects of the crackdown roll out over a few years.

It's regional and based on user likelihood to convert. So NA and parts of Euroland (particularly the anglophone regions) are being targeted most heavily right now.

They avoided the blanket rollout specifically to alleviate exactly what the person above you suggests. It was strategic and is, generally, working...but will probably be far less successful (numerically) when they get to LATAM, Eastern Europe, most of Asia and do a blanket rollout on the rest of the current countries.

My prediction: This is hyper-optimization of legacy media and Netflix will get disrupted by AI.

We'll be producing Netflix-yearly-content-hours per day on 0.0001x the budget.

Innovator's Dilemma: Netflix is not set up for discoverability and distribution here.

I am disappointed with how y'all hate this idea so much. I suppose most people aren't on top of the bleeding edge, but the developments here are mind bending.

Industry leaders see this too:

https://www.indiewire.com/news/business/jeffrey-katzenberg-a...

Also straight from the horse's mouth:

https://variety.com/2024/digital/news/netflix-generative-ai-...

> It’s like the author isn’t aware that over the last year Netflix got super aggressive on cracking down on shared accounts

That's mentioned in paragraph 4:

> What’s its secret? For one, it didn’t listen to the grumblings of customers after announcing it was going to cut down on password sharing outside of households — once a pillar of its business model. When the streaming giant told shareholders in 2022 that password sharing was siphoning away 100 million subscribers and that it was going to crack down on it, viewers threatened to boycott. The latest numbers clearly show that the revolt didn’t quite pan out.

Slightly OT: has anyone played any video games on NFLX? I recently learned they have GTA titles, which I thought would be interesting to play, but I still haven't gotten around to finding out how to access games (looks like they're standalone apps, and you log in with your credentials?), let alone downloading any of them.

I'd be interested to know what others have found. Am I missing out on something that I've apparently been paying for?

I haven't held a sub at Netflix for some time now, but when I did, you'd just download the games from the (android) app store. No idea what the situation is for iOS.

Of the games I've played, none were noteworthy.

Yeah, you install via the app store and then log in using netflix credentials.

I'm a big fan of Into the Breach, and their android port is a netflix exclusive. It currently has 2.8 stars on the android store with many users complaining about not having a netflix account.

I have been unable to play it on more that one occasion because I did not have service.

I have to disagree here! Netflix has released/published/made free with Netflix creds several games that are quite good and which had generally good reputations.

A few standouts: * Into The Breach (great Android port) * Moonlighter * Poinpy * Dead Cells * OXENFREE * World Of Goo

Many of these were already available, but all those on the list were/are indie darlings and pretty good games. For the most part they're putting out good stuff, not just the typical mobile trash.

Full games list here: https://help.netflix.com/en/node/121442

Dead Cells alone costs $30 on Switch. Netflix offers it for free. It's the full game with all available expansions including the recent one that references Castlevania.

The difference is that you get it on Android or iOS.

If you buy a gamepad and are able to output to a decent sized monitor or have a tablet, you have a great gaming experience worth dozens of hours. I think Netflix can really find success expanding into gaming. For now they seem to be working very much Undercover, but they've been adding a ton of content there. I'm sure they're building it up and at some point they'll throw some marketing behind it.

OXENFREE is such an underrated gem. Dead Cells was quite enjoyable as well.

On iOS, you only have to logon to the main app. Game installs and launches are normal - App Store, Home Screen - and they can detect the account from the main app. It looks like they've added "which profile?" selection.

I tried out Laya's Horizon, but my main device isn't powerful enough to play it, so it's been a while.

On iOS you download them from the app store and then log in with Netflix. There are links to them from within the Netflix app, too.

I'd at least recommend trying Into the Breach, if you haven't played it elsewhere yet. Great game. I'm not a regular Netflix subscriber so the exclusivity annoys me.

Good to know! Is this game (and NFLX games in general) best on iPad, or is iPhone OK?

I think it's way better on iPad, but I don't really like landscape-oriented iPhone games. Most of the action happens on a square grid so I think portrait could work...

You install the games directly from the iOS App Store. Then you log in via your Netflix account and can play them.

If you already have the Netflix app on your iPhone and you are already signed in, you can go into the Netflix app and see a list of all available Netflix games. Just pick one and it will download in the background. You also won’t have to sign in again when you open the game this way.

Also the iOS App Store sometimes has paid versions of the Netflix games. Don’t get those by accident. Make sure to download the free Netflix versions because otherwise you’ll have to give money to Apple lol

Cat Soup has a Netflix version. It has no ads, which is great. It also doesn't have any of the buffs that ads give you, making the game a lot less fun lol.

IMO a bad "adless" port without much thought.

https://archive.is/XUlbC

If you go to Amazon and search "tv antenna" you find lots between $20 and $70. They're very small, too. One of these days I'll go up on the roof and take down the old analog monstrosity and just leave the pole & new antenna.

Besides NFL, all the really big sporting events (MLB, NBA, Olympics) are still on broadcast, although usually not the quarterfinals & other minor games. As is PBS, the local news, and most of the classic TV shows. Not often but sometimes, Cheers, Taxi, and The Bob Newhart Show are more appealing than the streaming garbage.

I've been hearing about the death of broadcast TV for 20 years now. It's not happening, and neither is the death of print magazines.

https://theconversation.com/magazines-were-supposed-to-die-i...

Antennas don't know the difference between analog and digital signals. If it's a large antenna and not in too horrible shape, it will most likely significantly outperform any small antenna from Amazon.

Yeah, this has come up before on HN. But being able to take down that relic of the 50's will be totally worth it.

Okay, but if you still live in Silicon Valley be aware that many of the VHF channels are active (RF channels 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 12 and 13). 12 is ABC and 13 is NBC. The ATSC 3.0 lighthouse is on 7.

all of them perfect via OTA on my TV.

The ATSC 3.0 broadcast standard gives a flawless 4k picture.

> I've been hearing about the death of broadcast TV for 20 years now. It's not happening…

OTA has been steady and even increased a bit, but broadcast overall has plummeted over the last 20 years. Cable has gone from 70% to about 30%, for example. https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/15/media/cable-broadcast-tv-decl...

the first derivative is negative, but the second is positive. It's not going to zero.

It must be that over the air tv watching is going down though. One reason broadcast tv is surviving is cable tv and streaming has to pay them to carry them. So that nfl game on nbc is getting paid from youtube tv I guess based on number of users. You don't pay directly and both groups get commercials.

It's definitely going down. But the fact that streamers pay them must mean they have some perceived value.

Walked down a street recently where ~50% of the TV aerials were on their way to falling off. Even saw one that had fallen into a tree the other day. Terrestrial is clearly dying, wouldn't be surprised if satellite is too.

I put an antenna in my attic a couple of years back to get local ATSC broadcasts because it's a good source for PBS and local news/etc. It works marginally better than the built-in one and just as good as the monstrosity the neighbor has way up a pole.

So, is this just a case of digital TV killing the marginal signal stations that were available 30+ years ago if one didn't mind watching 50% static/snow? These days its an all-or-nothing proposition, one either gets crystal clear picture, or its unwatchable. And it turns out that massive complicated antenna configurations don't do much for bringing in otherwise unavailable stations.

Had my aerial removed last year - the little broadcast TV I watch is via Sky TV satellite, the rest is via streaming.

Related from a few days ago:

Netflix is turning into cable TV

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39111600

The costs were paid off so long ago, the cable companies could easily compete if they got rid of most of the ads.

The recurring costs go to the content providers on a per subscriber basis. This is why channels are often bundled together as part of the deal making on this price.

The ads are placed by the content providers to pay for the production.

There are several content providers that require payment up front and they do not have ads.

I wish every program that contained ads; had to give the user a signal to noise ratio as part of its listing. Some programs only show ads 5-10% of the time. Others have nearly as many ads as content and are unwatchable. Unfortunately, you may not have any idea which is which until you have wasted 15 minutes watching.

Could we also cap the loudness of Ads while we're at it? It's frankly absurd how loud some of these things are. It's like they're trying to make sure you hear the pitch even if you're on the other side of the house...

That's probably genuinely the intent considering that ad breaks are often an excuse to go to the bathroom/kitchen and thus are less eyes on the screen.

I wonder what kind of viewership they have compared to top linear TV shows? In the US, that's almost all National Football League games. I think last weekend one had ~ 40 million viewers (if I understand the statistics correctly).

93 of the top 100 highest viewed TV shows in 2023 were NFL games. It is almost entirely football now.

I wonder when the NFL is going to finally abandon all the various single-game exclusivity deals and just say “the only way to watch NFL games is through the NFL app.” Cable would die overnight. The NFL could basically charge what they wanted, and people would pay (a cable plan already costs $60+ a month and many people only subscribe during the season anyway.)

Whatever the NFL is raking in through these exclusivity deals for individual games, and whatever Comcast/whatever is paying them, I’m sure they can find a price point for a single unified NFL app that will make them more money.

40 million for NFL is an exception, not the norm. It was mostly because of the playoffs. Viewership in traditional TV is much lower than sports events. There are only a few non sport programming that come in top 100 when it comes to traditional TV and those are programming the Voice, 60 mins etc. But the numbers for those are around 6-7 million. Even the peak GOT was at 16-20 million, which was all time high for HBO.

They recently started releasing per-show viewing data. You can download a spreadsheet at the bottom of this press release. https://about.netflix.com/en/news/what-we-watched-a-netflix-...

This is interesting because many actors and other industry players complained that they had no idea if the streaming shows they were working on were big or not, and the streaming companies held out on the data for a long time (and perhaps continue to do so).

"Ginny and Georgia S2" is #2 ... I've watched part of the first season but apparently I'm not cut out to be a TV Exec cause I can't figure out the huge numbers

A lot of people don't really "watch TV" as much as "let the TV on so they can hear people talking in the room". It's maddening to me, but I know quite a few people who do that. From that perspective, you don't want The Witcher or Game of Thrones, because they're loud and scary and complex to follow.

There are also a lot of people who like to leave the TV on at a low volume while they go to sleep, because it's close enough to white noise that it helps them sleep. I think nowadays people do that with Twitch streamers instead.

> A lot of people don't really "watch TV" as much as "let the TV on so they can hear people talking in the room".

I guess I'm guilty of a variant of that, I always have something going on on the TV in my office at low volume, but it's never anything I have to pay the least bit of attention to (it's usually reruns of old TV shows, or multi-season stuff I've seen a zillion times on Hulu), and it's just background noise to break up the monotony.

But I suspect such high numbers for that show means someone is actually watching. It was entertaining enough, but I'm just floored at it being #2 of all the shows they have

You mean the Peacock-only Wild-Card game?

Honestly, it's not surprising. I mean, what is the use case for 'linear television' anymore?

Is it even something you could sell to someone in an age where streaming and video sharing sites and platforms are a dime a dozen and offer content that's far more interesting?

Even the idea of sitting down to watch a show at a certain time just feels archaic in this day and age.

The benefit of linear TV was that everyone was on the same schedule so all the post-viewing social aspects worked better. It also helped the social aspects that there were three or four networks with all major content, so the odds were very good that any particular person watched the same thing as you did.

Almost the only substantial TV or movie discussions I've witnessed in the last ten years were about fandom-style properties - Game of Thrones, Stranger Things, the MCU, Star Wars. TV and movies in general are rarely discussed. If you share a fandom with someone you can talk about the fandom, if not then the two of you may as well be from different planets regarding media.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com