HBO Still Doesn’t Get It

[Azure]

House of Cards has had great reception and from all accounts has been a big plus for Netflix. All they need to do is get more subscribers and apparently that has been the result.

You have to have your head pretty far in the sand to not realize that Netflix has the better business model.

HBO has tremendous shows, but increased viewership is not from subscribers, but from piracy. Not a very sustainable business model.

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by Azure

House of Cards has had great reception and from all accounts has been a big plus for Netflix.

It's well received critically but there are no specific numbers on how popular it is. In terms of cultural footprint, I would say it ranks far below GoT, TWD, Breaking Bad or even a Downton Abbey.

All they need to do is get more subscribers and apparently that has been the result.

A season of House of Cards costs more than Netflix earns in a quarter, it has to do a lot more than that.

You have to have your head pretty far in the sand to not realize that Netflix has the better business model.

HBO still generates more revenue and earns significantly more profit than Netflix. While it's possible that Netflix will Blockbuster HBO, TV is a $100+ billion industry, who's to say multiple business models won't coexist successfully.

[Azure]

Again, HBO has great shows. The problem is the way they deliver them.

They are leaving money on the the table because they choose to stick to an archaic business model.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Wow, twice as expensive as netflix.

Great business model.

The problem is Shaw forces you to buy a bunch of garbage to get HBO. No, I don't want your ####ty Movie Central, but I have to get it if I want HBO.

[theinfinitejar]

Originally Posted by Azure

They are leaving money on the the table because they choose to stick to an archaic business model.

No, they aren't, that's the whole point.

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by Azure

They are leaving money on the the table because they choose to stick to an archaic business model.

It's hard to say, they have strong relationships with cable cos that do most of the marketing and promotion for them and provides a stable source of revenue. Enabling a streaming only option will affect those relationships.

I say it's more of a choice between a table with a known amount of money, and two tables (cable + streaming) where the total amount of money could in fact be smaller. And even if HBO itself made more money, it could have a negative effect on its sister networks which could have been bundled with it before.

[Knalus]

Originally Posted by fotze

If you could get an add-on to netflix for $10-$15 for HBO I think I'd do it in a second (I don't subscribe to netflix currently).

I've never subscribed to HBO because I hate shaw and cable pricing of including garbage, so I just wait to some day watch all these great shows out of stubbornness.

But at the same time HBO probably has deals with these guys. I am sure they are looking at expanding. I imagine the capital to create a netflix streaming would be pretty awful if HBO wanted to stream themselves.

Doesn't that pricing schedule for Netflix you described sound very similar to a cable company's pricing schedule? That's kinda like paying different amounts for different channels...

[Boblobla]

Originally Posted by Knalus

Doesn't that pricing schedule for Netflix you described sound very similar to a cable company's pricing schedule? That's kinda like paying different amounts for different channels...

You can't just get HBO though, you have to pay $18/mo for movie central.

[cDnStealth]

Being able to subscribe to a single channel like HBO would be huge. Even if it cost $20 as a Netflix add-on that is still significantly lower than even the most basic cable package.

[DuffMan]

I had heard the govt was pressuring cable providers to offer a la carte channels, so I went looking for some info and found this...

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/bundle...mers-1.2054603

Now Im not too sure it's a good idea, it's like revenue sharing for Hockey teams.

[mykalberta]

I do wonder what the downloaders believe would be a fair price per episode.

Would they consider 3$ to expensive? At what point does someone who is getting something for free without any consequences choose to pay for it if there is no reason to do so.

The only way for HBO so solve this issue is to give added value to having the network and force you to watch it via their own distribution method. Maybe for shows like this they give you the hour long show, then an extra 20 minutes but only via their HBO GO account.

Until the average person figures out torrents HBO wont switch.

[DownhillGoat]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

Until the average person figures out torrents HBO wont switch.

You don't think we're there yet? 5.4 million viewers for the finale, vs 5.9 million torrent downloads?

Maybe not the average person, but I would think the average person that watches HBO has figured out how to download a torrent.

[Flames89]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

Would they consider 3$ to expensive? At what point does someone who is getting something for free without any consequences choose to pay for it if there is no reason to do so.

Never underestimate the depths of laziness and the value of convenience

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by kunkstyle

You don't think we're there yet? 5.4 million viewers for the finale, vs 5.9 million torrent downloads?

It's 5.4 million American viewers for the first-run episode versus 5.9 million downloaders from around the world. HBO claims somewhere in the neighborhood of 14+ million viewers total for that episode through repeat showings and on-demand. I'd also expect some of the downloaders probably have an HBO subscription and download a copy for archival purposes until the Blu-ray is available.

Besides, as I mentioned before relatively available shows like Breaking Bad, TWD and US broadcast network shows also show up in the top 10.

Maybe not the average person, but I would think the average person that watches HBO has figured out how to download a torrent.

But HBO's #2 show, True Blood (which until recently drew more viewers) doesn't show up in the top 10.

[Azure]

Netflix gained another million plus subscribers in the US and is turning a profit now despite the high cost of their original programming.

Obviously HBO has a good head start, but don't underestimate the power of being able to consistently add subscribers.

5.9 million torrent downloads is concerning for any show. Not sure why that is so hard to understand.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Azure

5.9 million torrent downloads is concerning for any show. Not sure why that is so hard to understand.

Maybe, but obviously can't be affecting them that much. Since we don't have access to their financials, there's really no way to know how it is affecting them. Besides the GOT DVD/Blu Ray for Season 1 is one of the highest selling TV DVD sets ever. HBO might be leaving some money on the table, but odds are its not very much.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Seeing those numbers makes me think that HBO had 5.7 million viewers that paid for their service.

Not everyone that pays for HBO will watch their most popular show, so there are more subscribers than that.

5.9 downloaded torrents. How many are in areas that have access to HBO? If we say 2/3 do have access to buying HBO (which is probably high) then 4 million potential customers are torrenting.

Let's say 1/4 will torrent regardless, that's 3 million subscribers they're missing out on.

I believe a subscription is $20 currently, and they lower the cost to $8 to be on par with Netflix to gain those subscribers.

HBO is currently getting in excess of $114 million currently; increasing that to 9.2 million subscribers at $8 per month they would be collecting $73.5 million or 64% of what they currently are getting in subscriptions.

Perhaps HBO does get it? Perhaps they are losing less money with torrenting of GOT than they are by dropping the price and getting more subscribers?

Now these numbers are mostly fictional, so they could very well be wrong, but they might not be far from the truth? What do we know?

[Azure]

Well they don't need to drop the price. They just need to offer a way for people to legally watch their shows beyond cable subscriptions.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by Azure

Netflix gained another million plus subscribers in the US and is turning a profit now despite the high cost of their original programming.

Obviously HBO has a good head start, but don't underestimate the power of being able to consistently add subscribers.

5.9 million torrent downloads is concerning for any show. Not sure why that is so hard to understand.

I am not convinced that they would earn more money with an ala carte offering of some type.

How many people subscribe to HBO after watching the back seasons pf GoT through torrent? How much extra hype is generated by people who torrent? How many of the people who see that hype subscribe to HBO?

If they offered an ala cart service, how many people would pay the $20-$50 it would cost for 10 episodes of GoT and cancel their HBO entirely? I think it is $240 regular price for a year of HBO. I watch 2 shows and cancel the rest of the year, and still at $50 per show, I would be saving a small amount of money.

[Burninator]

I subscribed to HBO because of GoT. I kept the subscription because they always have new episodes through out the year of shows I am interested in.