patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,364,663 comments by 15,736 users - HANrongli, Misc online now
And that my friend is why "Suck em in first then raise the price" fails.
2011 Oct 25, 12:50am 1,965 views 7 comments
by TPB follow (0)
« First « Previous Comments 7 - 7 of 7 Search these comments
The real culprit is the Studios, who squeezed the hell out of Netflix in terms of royalties. Netflix was just passing along their increased costs
Yeah, exactly. The early adopter studios paid the price -- they got underpaid for their content. Of course, lots of the studio contracts have since been renegotiated for higher fees. Netflix was never quite economical as a streaming business at the original price per month. The price only made sense when Netflix had a tiny amount of content that was available for streaming.
If they didn't Flinch then they could have Sued the studios.
Based on what claim? That would be a frivolous suit if I ever heard one.
« First « Previous Comments 7 - 7 of 7 Search these comments
http://money.cnn.com/quote/quote.html?symb=NFLX&source=story_quote_link
Netflix Inc (NASDAQ:NFLX)
77.14
-41.76 / -35.12%
Today’s Change
74.33 Today|||52-Week Range 304.75
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- The Netflix nightmare continues. Shares plunged 36% in early trading Tuesday after the video service revealed it lost 800,000 subscribers in its difficult third quarter.
Now is that on top of the initial Million or so, that was reported to have ditched them in August?
Netflix (NFLX) earned $62 million, or $1.16 a share, on a record $822 million in revenue in the quarter that just ended, beating analysts' estimates. But shareholders ignored that fact and focused on the sharp decline in its subscriptions.
How do you make money when everyone is bailing?
http://money.cnn.com/2011/10/25/technology/netflix_stock/
Ever notice the numbers don't add up, these days when News sites do these cheer leader pieces.