Hacker News Reader

Comment by elq | Hacker News Reader

The notion of what makes a flop is quite different in the netflix model vs normal TV.

Could you elaborate on what you think that difference is?

I imagine that it would be possible to make lower-cost shows that attract a smaller audience but still earn enough to be worth it.

For example, space sci-fi has not representation on network TV right now despite existing demand for such a product. The problem is the number of people that want to watch such a genre are smaller than those that want to watch reality TV or other genres.

The potential with a distribute model that doesn't have a TV schedule is that it doesn't have to compete with other shows in the same timeslot, thus allowing for a less-expensively produced show to see earn enough money even if the audience is relatively small.

That is the market that I'm looking forward to, removing the time-slot competition and allowing shows to compete on quality.

I agree entirely but that's what makes Netflix's choice all the more interesting. They have the opportunity to serve the long tail but thus far they haven't (with their original programming at least). Instead they've spent 100 million on 1 show on the belief that it would pay off big - in both attracting new customers and retaining existing.

Well, in general Netflix seems interested in providing content that falls into one of two categories. The first is what I think of as "low barrier to entry" tv shows. These are shows that people can turn on while cooking, cleaning, or doing other things around the house to replace pre-programmed tv channels.

"Many of the most-watched series have been off the air for years, like Star Trek and The X-Files." [1]

Personally, I think this kind of content goes a long way to keeping subscribers on Netflix, when they might have otherwise been tempted to turn on a tv channel.

The second kind of content Netflix appears to be interested in is content that pulls in new subscribers, This could be things like movies that were very recently released, or their own original content (mainly to replace the expensive deals to get those new movies).

But the thing about Netflix is that even a new show that might be viewed by other network producers as a flop can end up being a a good call. This is because Netflix isn't constrained by the same limits that cable tv is. The shows Netflix produces don't need to be blockbuster hits, as long as they can help fill the gaps in the "low barrier to entry" tv that keeps subscribers happy over the long run.

A cable channel can only show one thing to all it's viewers at a time, so filling that time slot with something that everyone likes is critical. Netflix can afford a slower burn with content that might not get a million viewers in the first season, but could easily be watched by several million viewers in the next 5 years.

[1] http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/the-exchange/netflix-dropped-...

Netflix is, more or less, looking to minimize cost per hour. Network TV is looking to maximize advertizing share.

Netflix's cost per hour goes down as long as the content is available on the service.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com