It happened a long time ago, at least I became aware of this shift when an exec from Netflix was quoted saying "The goal is to become HBO faster than HBO can become us" http://www.gq.com/entertainment/movies-and-tv/201302/netflix...
That's a massive downsizing of ambitions -- so big it's kind of surprising that a share of NFLX today is worth around 5 times what it was worth at the beginning of 2013. The hype around their original programming has successfully papered over the bigger story of their abandoning their plans to be the toll collector of online video.
[1] http://variety.com/2014/tv/news/netflix-now-pulls-in-almost-...
The only reason Netflix has yet to achieve utter dominance is the copyright cabal that no longer sees why it should entertain Netflix's money-making when they can create Streaming Video Clone Site #2019 for their properties and collect all the money from subscriptions + ads themselves. Netflix eventually realized that their model was utterly fucked as long as copyright law stayed as it is (since their existence was dependent on the continued cooperation of third parties) and has been forced to rely on its own content to carry subscriptions, since everyone and their dog started making unrealistic demands and pulling their content, many to host on their own sites instead.
Consider that under current copyright law, almost the entirety of film history remains inaccessible without an explicit license grant from the rightsholder. If our terms were a little more reasonable, say anything pre-1980 was now public domain, Netflix may have had a chance to exist independent of Big Media's permission. Under current conditions, Netflix can only stream content published prior to 1924 without permission (plus a smattering of mostly-unwanted films that lapsed into public domain due to registration errors or technicalities). Consider that in 1924, sound had not yet been added to film.
Cable television as we know it is doomed. People don't like relying on programmers to decide what content they want to watch, they want to decide for themselves and get their content instantly. Netflix was one of the first services to offer this to the masses, but it can't reap the rewards because of the oppressive state of copyright law.
Once Netflix really breaks away from dependence on Big Media's copyright grants, they may become one of the biggest champions for modernizing our IP laws to reflect the realities of the digital age.
Only surprising if you think Netflix's prior ambitions had any relation to what most investors actually expected them to accomplish. Management's ambitions better aligning with what investors believe is realistically attainable should make stock price increase. It reduces the perceived likelihood that management will blow the opportunity for the best growth they can get in favor of a quixotic and doomed quest for something unrealistic.
Netflix is solid on the technical side, and their original series (in my opinion) eclipse what HBO currently offers. HBO has one show that really interests me (Game of Thrones, of course) and Netflix has a handful (House of Cards, Orange is the New Black, Bojack Horseman, hopefully with more new interesting series on the way).
The only reason I'm even subscribed to HBO at this point is because Verizon gave me a few months for free, and I'll be ditching it once that expires.
I realize it's your opinion, but...really?
HBO has a massive catalog of brilliant shows[1]. Netflix isn't even on the same planet when it comes to original content (but I hope they get there, better for all of us).
[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_programs_broadcast_by_H...
The competition for new subscriptions and paying that one more month always takes place in the present/future, or at least for content you haven't watched yet which for any fan is going to be present/future.
And Netflix is kicking ass there, TBH. They have high-quality dramas, resurrected cult (and my!) favorites, the deal with Marvel, and probably half a dozen other things that got me salivating that I'm forgetting.
To be honest, I think Netflix, Amazon and Hulu are -all- schooling the old school providers in terms of interesting new content, HBO included. I love Six Feet Under, Mr. Show, and Deadwood as much as anyone, but aside from Silicon Valley and GoT, nothing else current excites me. At the very least, HBO needs to get much better at both making -and- fulfilling promises.
I flat out refuse to pay Comcast after their sales people tried to resell me on movie packages just after I canceled them (we're talking less than a week after I canceled). I had to tell the saleswoman who called me to stop her sales pitch (after already asking her to stop 3 times) or I'd cancel Comcast altogether :-/ I refuse to order HBO through cable again and that's hurting HBO's business IMO.
Marco Polo made me fear for Netflix's future more than anything I've seen in a long time.
It is also done by the Weinstein Company. The brothers have a long history of original content that others wouldn't touch, and turned out good. For example they did Tarantino's earlier works.
I would much rather they take chances and sometimes fail, rather than only bet on sure things. The latter leads to the sequel only mediocrity that is Hollywood's current output.
Does it really get that much better? I want to like this show.
I wouldn't be betting against HBO anytime soon.
HBO allows some of the best in the business work together and do amazing things, Curb Your Enthusiasm could have only happened on HBO and it is probably the best comedy show ever.
HBO is the only reason left other than live sports to have TV.
Part of the reason HBO is so good is lots of the original content is produced like a movie or like a full binge season as Netflix is doing. Because both don't have to chop things up and change or only write a few episodes out to get ad revenue, better quality content is produced. The networks that aren't writing in movie style or full season binge mode will miss out on this quality aspect.
Put in those terms I'll bet on Netflix.