r/technology • u/chrisdh79 • Feb 03 '23

Netflix says strict new password sharing rules were posted in error Business

https://appleinsider.com/articles/23/02/03/netflix-says-strict-new-password-sharing-rules-were-posted-in-error
16.5k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

1.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

2.8k

u/r3dk0w Feb 03 '23 • All-Seeing Upvote

They already sell in streams, where the normal package gets 2 streams and the premium package gets 4 streams.

Why do they care that 2 streams are used when that's what the package allows?

If they don't want password sharing, then limit the lower-end package to 1 stream. Then it doesn't matter how much password sharing is going on.

1.9k

u/Wildcard36qs Feb 03 '23

This is what baffles me. I'm paying for 4 streams, who cares where they are used?

910

u/GeT_Tilted Feb 03 '23

They care about growth. They know that their sub numbers will reach a hard limit soon. So they bet on people using other's account may convert into a paying sub when the restrictions go live. They did not expect the public to call for cancellations or piracy so they changed course to appear better in the public's eye.

27

u/TacoNomad Feb 03 '23

That means they need to find other ways to grow. Even if they do this, and somehow increase subscribers more than cancelations long term, they'll hit another wall. And then what? Pay for multiple accounts to use on multiple devices owned by the same user?

They should just work on finding other ways to grow revenue.

154

u/AssicusCatticus Feb 03 '23

Or, you know, not expect exponential growth and be happy with the revenue they have. The constant need for more is ridiculous and insupportable.

65

u/TacoNomad Feb 03 '23

Capitalism at its finest.

35

u/Ratso27 Feb 03 '23

I think this is the answer. Even without the competition, there are a finite number of human beings on Earth who have access to the internet, the money to pay for Netflix, and the desire to do so. At some point you have to either radically alter what you offer to get the people who are already subscribed to pay for something else/appeal to a new demographic, or you have to accept that you've got about as many customers as you're going to get and just focus on maintaining them

30

u/CleverNameTheSecond Feb 03 '23

But if not for constant growth how will the stonks go up even more?

16

u/Sam-TheRaccoon Feb 03 '23

But that requires logic and reason and not being a greedy asshole.

7

u/voiderest Feb 03 '23

Private companies and long-term investors can be realistic about the whole finite population thing. Publicly traded companies appealing to short-term investors won't be able to be realistic and will burnout trying to keep profits increasing year after year.

16

u/jdm1891 Feb 03 '23

I don't understand why exponential growth is the goal. If you are making a consistent profit every year as a very large company (adjusted for inflaction and the like - though I bet inflation would be much lower if companies didn't all gun for exponential growth in the first place) - why can't you just be happy with that?

Exponential growth is killing the planet, the economy, our society, and our future.

8

u/cheesyvoetjes Feb 03 '23

That's just how capitalism works. You can not make the same profit next year, you need to show growth. Otherwise you're a stagnant company and your stocks and value go down.

14

u/bdone2012 Feb 03 '23

It really does suck. Because you wind up destroying good companies. Netflix probably spent a lot of money in development costs preparing for this. For example they built out the feature to allow you move profiles across accounts. They wouldn’t have done it otherwise. Plus all the costs of testing it etc. And the cost of all the business people who spent months sitting around in meetings talking about it.

They felt they needed this to make more money, and presumably now their stocks will drop because the plan didn’t work. So now they’ll be more desperate. So they’re likely to do cost cuttings such as firing people, maybe slashing production budgets, and just straight up raising the cost of subscriptions. None of these are great options.

1

u/rastilin Feb 04 '23

Didn't they just raise the cost of subscriptions earlier?

9

u/sushisection Feb 03 '23

stagnant companies sound more reliable to put your money in because of stability in the company, but what do i know

3

u/Skuzy1572 Feb 04 '23

I would prefer to support companies like that.

3

u/torrasque666 Feb 04 '23

There's a reason energy stocks were considered to be "safe" investments for dividends. They really don't fluctuate much, barring extreme situations.

14

u/doomgiver98 Feb 03 '23

I'm sure a big source of revenue for Netflix are the people that are all subscribed and don't bother unsubscribing because it's "only" $10 a month. But now they're calling attention to it so people unsubscribe because they realize they don't watch it anymore.

2

u/zerogee616 Feb 04 '23

And that's already in danger because it's not 2015 anymore, half of Netflix's content is on other platforms and they all want $10 a month. It's not some forgettable number anymore.

7

u/ryper42 Feb 03 '23

Their next problem will probably be revenue per subscriber, with people switching to a lower tier because the new sharing restrictions made the extra streams less useful, and people who get cut off from sharing not wanting to spend much or just not having 4K screens.

3

u/[deleted] Feb 03 '23

[deleted]

4

u/l3rN Feb 03 '23

This, far more than any other reason, is why I'm no longer subbed. The password sharing stuff they're pushing is annoying, but how often I felt like my time had been wasted by becoming invested in a show of theirs was a complete deal breaker.