[user104658]

Part of the issue of course is that it was "the first of it's kind" ... Netflix was sort of synonymous with streaming for quite a while. But now that other content creators are creating their own streaming platforms... it's inevitable that it's going to lose market share.

[bots]

Amazon just bought a mega studio that has a ton of content too, so that makes it a lot more attractive

[user104658]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

Amazon just bought a mega studio that has a ton of content too, so that makes it a lot more attractive

Yes and it's MGM which means they now own Stargate! . They would be mad not to do something with the franchise, it still has massive potential and a huge cult fan base. My personal preference would be to keep the OG series as canon of course, rather than a full reboot... but I'd accept a reboot if done well. The best of SG was really when humans were the scrappy underdogs taking on advanced aliens with their comparatively primitive equipment, their only "futuristic tech" being the gate itself which they knew how to use but didn't fully understand.

They eventually had their own starships and by the end the Asgardians (who went extinct) had gifted them all of their technology. 'twas a different show then, more star-trekky with humans being a powerful race in the galaxy.

Anyway... yes... Stargate content pls Amazon .

[Kizzy]

Pulling out of Russia, password sharing and the price hike will be affecting all subscription services surely, why highlight Netflix?

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Pulling out of Russia, password sharing and the price hike will be affecting all subscription services surely, why highlight Netflix?

Netflix is struggling... I don't know if others have pulled out of Russia, but then they might not have as big a presence to begin with. Also none have hiked prices as significantly as Netflix. the Disney+ sub went up quite a bit but it's still not hugely expensive at Ł8, it has a tonne of content it didn't have at the start, and it was only cheaper before as a sort of "introductory price" while it got off the ground. Netflix "full" (4k) prices are a whopping Ł16 a month in comparison. Amazon Prime is also Ł8 a month, and that's for Prime Delivery as well. Even the cheaper non-4k Netflix package is Ł11.

Password sharing I think is a bit of a red herring really - there's no guarantee that people who are sharing passwords around would actually be paying for it otherwise... you can't project that into any actual figures. A lot of students probably do it for example - continue using the family's Netflix account after moving away from home... which in all honesty I think should be allowed (so long as they're in uni halls etc.)... but it might be more sensible to introduce a "student offer" of say Ł4.99 a month. Amazon has this for example.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Netflix is struggling... I don't know if others have pulled out of Russia, but then they might not have as big a presence to begin with. Also none have hiked prices as significantly as Netflix. the Disney+ sub went up quite a bit but it's still not hugely expensive at Ł8, it has a tonne of content it didn't have at the start, and it was only cheaper before as a sort of "introductory price" while it got off the ground. Netflix "full" (4k) prices are a whopping Ł16 a month in comparison. Amazon Prime is also Ł8 a month, and that's for Prime Delivery as well. Even the cheaper non-4k Netflix package is Ł11.

Password sharing I think is a bit of a red herring really - there's no guarantee that people who are sharing passwords around would actually be paying for it otherwise... you can't project that into any actual figures. A lot of students probably do it for example - continue using the family's Netflix account after moving away from home... which in all honesty I think should be allowed (so long as they're in uni halls etc.)... but it might be more sensible to introduce a "student offer" of say Ł4.99 a month. Amazon has this for example.

Compared to sky it's cheap, and don't they create their own content too now? That's got to be worth it. My kids share a password he just buys her a coffee every now and again.

[ChristmasNeeve]

also I don't know how they can clamp down on Password sharing anyway, if you're paying for 5 users at once for example, why can't 5 different people use it?

[bots]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

also I don't know how they can clamp down on Password sharing anyway, if you're paying for 5 users at once for example, why can't 5 different people use it?

they have clamped down on vpn usage, i know that So im guessing they will just expand that side of it

[ChristmasNeeve]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

they have clamped down on vpn usage, i know that So im guessing they will just expand that side of it

How would they clamp down on it though? If you're paying for a certain amount of screens why can't that many people use it? What even are the rules anyway? Are you all supposed to be living in the same house or is it limited to family members? Like my step son uses ours but he doesn't live with us, is that allowed or not? I'm paying extra so he can use it though so what's the point in clamping down? If they stopped him from using it, he wouldn't pay for it himself and I'd pay for a smaller package (or just leave) so they'd be shooting themselves in the foot anyway

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

How would they clamp down on it though? If you're paying for a certain amount of screens why can't that many people use it? What even are the rules anyway? Are you all supposed to be living in the same house or is it limited to family members? Like my step son uses ours but he doesn't live with us, is that allowed or not? I'm paying extra so he can use it though so what's the point in clamping down? If they stopped him from using it, he wouldn't pay for it himself and I'd pay for a smaller package (or just leave) so they'd be shooting themselves in the foot anyway

Technically it's supposed to just be for people living at the registered address. That doesn't mean it can only be used at that address, just that it's supposed to be user's permanent residence.

From a quick google, the "clamping down" idea seems to be that they might introduce 2-factor authentication, i.e. you'll have to verify a code or whatever sent by email/text when you log in. To be honest I don't see that being a huge deterrent. So long as people don't log out it'll still work just the same. They're not going to start requiring authentication every time you boot up Netflix... it would be too inconvenient and people would get fed up with it. It'll at most be on log in and maybe a random "check" every few months.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

also I don't know how they can clamp down on Password sharing anyway, if you're paying for 5 users at once for example, why can't 5 different people use it?

To be fair, if everyone did that it would make the effective price of the standard package Ł2/month per household... there's no way that would be sustainable

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

they have clamped down on vpn usage, i know that So im guessing they will just expand that side of it

You're allowed to use it out of the house though, that's sort of part of the appeal. They could perhaps flag if people are frequently using it from two different IP locations and it's obviously two different households. However if the non-main-households only use mobile data for example, there's no way to flag that really. They can't possibly know it isn't a household member.

[ChristmasNeeve]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

To be fair, if everyone did that it would make the effective price of the standard package Ł2/month per household... there's no way that would be sustainable



You're allowed to use it out of the house though, that's sort of part of the appeal. They could perhaps flag if people are frequently using it from two different IP locations and it's obviously two different households. However if the non-main-households only use mobile data for example, there's no way to flag that really. They can't possibly know it isn't a household member.

My Step son uses it on his phone anyway because he doesn't even have a TV so we'll be grand

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

My Step son uses it on his phone anyway because he doesn't even have a TV so we'll be grand

It's more the connection than the device, if his phone is connected to wireless they can still see a rough location of where the device is (not exact, but down to the town/city). On mobile data (4g/5g) it usually just shows the network like EE/Three or whatever so they have no idea where in the UK you are.

[ChristmasNeeve]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

To be fair, if everyone did that it would make the effective price of the standard package Ł2/month per household... there's no way that would be sustainable



You're allowed to use it out of the house though, that's sort of part of the appeal. They could perhaps flag if people are frequently using it from two different IP locations and it's obviously two different households. However if the non-main-households only use mobile data for example, there's no way to flag that really. They can't possibly know it isn't a household member.

But 5 people are allowed watch at one time, so it is effectively that price per person anyway

[bots]

i think there will be cases where 10 or more people are streaming the same account simultaneously from different ip addresses. Thats who they are after. By stopping vpn masking they can identify that type of abuse much easier. I dont really think they are after family members

[user104658]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

i think there will be cases where 10 or more people are streaming the same account simultaneously from different ip addresses. Thats who they are after. By stopping vpn masking they can identify that type of abuse much easier. I dont really think they are after family members

The biggest package is actually 4 "screens" at once so you couldn't have 10... but I agree it's more entire households sharing they're looking for rather than a family sharing with a grown-up kid or being logged in at Gran's house. You could in those cases have 4 entire families using the same Netflix account, so long as it was only logged in on the main telly.

[ChristmasNeeve]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

The biggest package is actually 4 "screens" at once so you couldn't have 10... but I agree it's more entire households sharing they're looking for rather than a family sharing with a grown-up kid or being logged in at Gran's house. You could in those cases have 4 entire families using the same Netflix account, so long as it was only logged in on the main telly.

Yes you're right, it's 4 screens, I thought it was 5

[user104658]

Speaking of the cost of subs by the way, if anyone has a YouTube Premium sub, I've basically had it half price for the last 6 months with this one NEAT TRICK...

... ... so basically, they keep giving me free trials . I sub for a month but don't set it to renew, it expires, they give me a free trial... I use that then sub at the end of it... let it expire... they offer me another free month. It seems this may never end? .

Also just found out you can get 6 months of Disney+ with 800 (Ł8 worth) of clubcard points which is practically free so I'm doing that once I have 800 . I rack up a frightening number of clubcard points. 2 points for every Ł1 on fuel at Tesco pumps and I'm currently filling up Ł90 a week . Still... free Disney+ woooo!

[In the Drunk Tank]

I pay for the basic package and it does me just fine at Ł5.99 a month (going up to Ł6.99)

Have never felt tempted by any of the higher priced packages. Paying like 75% more just for HD seems crazy

[ChristmasNeeve]

Originally Posted by MTVN

I pay for the basic package and it does me just fine at Ł5.99 a month (going up to Ł6.99)

Have never felt tempted by any of the higher priced packages. Paying like 75% more just for HD seems crazy

I definitely don't pay for it for the HD, I pay for it for the screens

[In the Drunk Tank]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

I definitely don't pay for it for the HD, I pay for it for the screens

Yeah can understand that, was mainly TS' disbelief here I was replying to

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

The cheapest option for one person would be fine for individuals I think, IF they just made it HD?? It's standard definition which in this day and age... well... just daft really. Just... why. They could at least offer 720p or something. No one is realistically going to go for anything lower than the "medium" package surely.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by MTVN

I pay for the basic package and it does me just fine at Ł5.99 a month (going up to Ł6.99)

Have never felt tempted by any of the higher priced packages. Paying like 75% more just for HD seems crazy

Suppose it depends on your telly... anything under 720p on a 55"+ TV isn't just going to look "not as good" it'll look full-on blurry. I guess some people don't mind that . If you're only watching on a little laptop screen or on a phone/tablet it's probably fine I guess.

Also the "middle" package is Ł4 more than the cheapest which makes it 57% not 75% more expensive

[bots]

i have a 4k tv and dolby atmos so i go for the top option or it's not taking advantage of my kit at home. The other streaming services don't make that distinction though apart from sky, where you have to take out their top sky q box plus other stuff and i draw the line at that

[James]

I have a bad habit of signing up for services, or getting them on a trial, and then not using and forgetting to cancel them.

[bots]

i pay annual subs where i can. It works out a lot cheaper. Netflix would gain a bit of loyalty if they had an annual cheaper sub or at least rewarded those who have been with them for a while somehow. To me that is the way forward. Make people feel they are valued