News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:We are throttling the FCC to dialup modem speeds until th... by AnthonyMouse on Friday May 09, 2014 @12:34PM (#7721760)
> If I'm Viacom, I want to capture as much of the user revenue as I can. And I hold all the cards--the user is very particular about watching my content, but probably not that attached to Netflix being the distributor.

Again, Netflix has a lower marginal cost for distribution than the content producer because their fixed costs can be amortized over more than one content producer and the marketing expense of convincing customers to sign up for the service is a historical cost for Netflix but a future expense for the content producer. Simply put, Netflix is more efficient at converting content into money than the individual content producer.

> Or I can license my content to an upstart Netflix competitor that charges (small dollar value) less.

The upstart Netflix competitor has the same problems as the internal studio distribution endeavor. They would have to duplicate all the costs Netflix has already paid. Meanwhile they would have to outbid Netflix for content from the studios. So the new Netflix competitor would have to spread their distribution costs over less content while paying the studio more money and yet charge lower prices. Who is going to enter the market under those conditions?

> Netflix is in a much weaker position. It can't easily replace my content if I pull it.

Why not? If you won't sell them distribution rights for X-Men then they can use the money they didn't pay you to buy distribution rights for Batman from the other guy, or produce more original content like House of Cards.

There are no comments on this comment yet.