Netflix, the Game Pass of Movies to Put Their Original Content in Theaters for 45 Days to Offset Losses

I'm still struggling to get the point being made by the OP.

the real reason for netflix issues is market saturation. Cable tvs and the music industry in the past had a monopoly, and those monopolies were good times for them. Cable cos owned the cable infrastructure, and that infrastructure is expensive. I mean, just digging up the ground and laying cables, its much much cheaper to do for the first mover. Imagine digging up ground in new york city to lay cables in 2022?? Its literally impossible for new competitors to enter the market. Thats the reason cable tv and the music industry had so little competition for decades.

Streaming services is different, you only need the internet. Nowadays, internet service is getting cheaper and cheaper. Its all because of more competition. Trust me, internet access is going to improve even more. Theyre building drones with solar panels, where the drone can stay in the air for months on end without any issues.

Also lol at your derping about the music industry quality going down. You got that old man mentality whining about the good old days when music was better.

@blaznwiipspman1: You missed the point of my music comments. Labels only sign artists to 360 deals. Meaning the labels own their music, social media, name and likeness etc. Any time an artist wants any sort of ownership rights to their music, the labels blacklist them. Listen to any of the artists I listed on their podcast/Twitch streams. You even have newer acts like Tee Grizzley basically leaving the music industry because there’s no money to be made. The dude makes his money streaming GTAV ffs. You’re either a Billie Eilish, Drake or Ed Sheeran level act, or you’re a nobody. And the streaming model mixed with the label contracts leaves the artist with practically nothing. There’s no in between anymore. Some say that same thing is happening in gaming.

He said: "our goal is to be able to have essentially a Netflix for games". You're reading too much into that. He mentioned netflix because they were the most popular at the time, so people understand the business model on a whim, so it was an easy analogy for the streaming business model.

He wasn't making a deep dive in to anything saying that, it didn't literally have anything to do with Netflix. He can either explain the ENTIRE business model "one monthly payment and play as much as you want" etc, or say Netflix for gaming.

I could say apple music is the Netflix for music. It's not THAT literal. And it's still doesn't change the superficial commonalities you're basing their relationship on for this thread.

Sounds like you're spinning the quote. Here's more of it:

In particular, we now have a subscription offer with Game Pass that's off to a good, very good start and our goal is to be able to have essentially a Netflix for games, so that we can have the game subscriptions that people can use across all of the devices that they play in.

The other area is streaming. As you know, there is game playing and game watching and there is secular growth on both fronts. And we feel very, very good about the engagement increases in a pretty unique value proposition we have in Mixer. So that's another opportunity that we believe will shape in addition to things like e-sports and so on.

He makes the distinction between gamepass giving access to games across multiple platforms (Netflix for games) and streaming services (Mixer which is dead now).

MS wants you to be able to play xbox games on anything that'll support it much like Netflix. All through a subscription.

@goldenelementxl: day one content is a clear selling point of Game Pass and it's a contributing factor to its relatively rapid growth in popularity and sub numbers..

Microsoft claims it's already sustainable.. If that dynamic changes, i'm sure they'll make adjustments.. If those adjustments result in an end-user service that's no longer appealing, they'll lose subscribers (myself included).. That's the tightrope they'll have to navigate but i doubt they'll be making any sweeping changes to the Game Pass model anytime soon..

I'm not personally concerned about how Microsoft is making this work for them financially.. The only thing i care about is what they are providing me.. And currently, Game Pass is a heck of a deal.. If that ever ceases to be the case, i'll unsubscribe 🤷🏽‍♂️

So? That's literally where their comparison ends, period. Doesn't make Netflix's problems Microsofts.

@Antwan3K: Thats a very reasonable take. No argument from me

It's not. MS is also putting brand new original content on the service day one. Something that Netflix could eventually stop doing. So the model of putting brand new content in a subscription instead of selling licenses to the content is proving to be financially challenging for Netflix if they're considering moving away from it. MS may face the same problem because they're doing the same with Day 1 gamepass releases.

And this isn't some SW logic. Other gaming companies in the industry are saying the same thing.

Folks are so busy trying to argue things like, “Netflix and Game Pass aren’t the exact same thing,” which nobody is arguing. Thank you for getting the point. Netflix, like Game Pass, puts their biggest, most expensive, and most popular content in the subscription service day one. So does Game Pass.

Netflix, the industry leader in the subscription space, is telling us this model may not last much longer, for financial reasons for the company. This is a stance PS execs have expressed, but their skepticism was met with fanboy backlash. Well now the streaming standard in the industry is telling us the same thing. Instead of trying to argue points nobody is making, a few on this board need to accept this possibility. Disney+, another streaming giant, already puts their biggest titles into theaters at launch instead of the streaming service. At some point, folks need to look at the evidence that’s right in front of their faces…

Exactly. I don't believe it is Microsoft's strategy to keep this business model around indefinitely - either there will be a steep price increase per month, or they will imbue the service with in game ads in an effort to pay for them (or both). The in game ads, by the way, were revealed in future plans in a thread *in this forum* not long ago - for both Microsoft and Sony games. I am sort of beside myself how people are denying this. Microsoft paid for a lot of PR around their Xbox division being the "good guys" and the responses in this thread are showing how well it has worked -- they are still a larger tech company than Google and people need to see them that way.

Rather than this being a long term strategy, I believe gamepass and the massive tech acquisitions are simply aimed at pushing Sony out of gaming completely, and then switching to cover their losses in the period following. After all, Microsoft is not going to just hand out billions of dollars of content to consumers; they are in this to make money.

I think the real question is who would actually go watch a theatrical release of a Netflix original?.. I think the last movie that caused any serious buzz was Bird Box..

I'm perpetually about to cancel my Netflix sub and it's basically because Netflix isn't giving me a consistent reason to stay subscribed (though i did really enjoy Stranger Things season 4)..

Ultimately content is what drives any service.. Netflix's problem (in my opinion) goes well beyond this idea that "day one content bad".. It's the idea that Netflix's content in general is bad and they are asking an ever increasing amount of money for said content.. If Netflix was still charging a reasonable amount a month and there was a true steady stream of "must watch" content, maybe there wouldn't be this issue.. But the harsh reality is that every major player is branching off with their own streaming service and you either sink or swim at this point..

Again, the market has spoken.. People prefer streaming and subscriptions in order to access their media and they prefer to have access to that media on all the devices they own.. Just because Netflix is currently failing at that doesn't mean it spells doom for anyone else, including Game Pass.. Companies simply have to step up if they want your money..

Will i eventually cancel my Netflix for the reasons cited above? Probably.. On the flip side, i have zero intentions on canceling my Game Pass sub under the current model.. I think that difference is key in the overall outlooks for both services..

@goldenelementxl:But MS already sells their games on PC and Xbox day one for all those not subscribing to Game Pass, and they sell games on other platforms like PS and will sell even more in the future after the Activision acquisition. On top of that, games have other ways to make money, you are probably aware that some already make much more money from in-game monetization. The biggest earners right now probably make it from there and not by traditional sales. Plus, Microsoft already played with the idea of selling their games before "day one".

I mean, there are so many differences between the two services, you sound like you're saying that because X restaurant is in financial trouble this means all restaurants are unviable.

I get this thread is probably just bait but what point are you trying make? I really don't get it. Why should a person that already got, and will keep getting, thousands of dollars worth of games through the years be particularly concerned if Game Pass will eventually fail? How will it be, in 2026 if GP collapses, you're going to make fun of all of those gamers who played a ton of games and saved money? Help me out here, I'm confused.

@Antwan3K: I think part of the issue is that the cost to the consumers doesn’t match the financial burden of the level of content you’re demanding. The base Netflix plan is $9.99. That won’t get you into a movie theater in most places. My local theaters are all $10+. And that’s a 2-3 hour visit vs a months worth of access to seemingly endless content. I get that consumers are looking out for themselves first. But at some point, these demands become unrealistic. Expecting monthly access to endless entertainment for less than the cost of a value meal at McDonalds seems disingenuous.

I get it though. That’s none of your concern. And I‘m subbed to these services just like you are. So 🤷🏾‍♂️

@goldenelementxl: again, at this point, the company has to figure it out.. Because there is zero chance we are going back to buying physical media at full retail price anymore in terms of the mass market.. Streaming/subscription services are where it's at for the foreseeable future..

If Netflix wants to put their content in theaters, more power to them.. I just don't believe that remotely addresses the core problem of Netflix's content being mostly trash and they are asking too much for said trash.. 🤷🏽‍♂️

@kathaariancode: I’m not saying Game Pass will fail. I’m saying the day and date games in the service doesn’t make a ton of money sense. Yes, Xbox still sells their games at retail day one. The impact of Game Pass on games sales is obvious. Look at the software NPD charts. Games that go into the service day one, chart once in the top 10 at best. Halo Infinite was completely out of the top 10 in a month and out of the top 20 in 2 months. Now we are seeing 4 out of the top 10 selling Xbox games being COD, while the usual 1st party games are missing from the lists altogether. The first party PS4/PS5 games continue to chart on both the PS lists, as well as overall software lists

Day and date games are drawing gamers to Game Pass while also eating into their 1st party game sales... Doing the EA/PS+ thing of providing trials and/or only selling the games for a brief period would likely be the best middle ground. But that also wouldn’t be the most appealing strategy when trying to grow a service. Xbox is probably doing the best thing for them at this point of the cycle, but day and date games will more than likely be altered/addressed sooner than later

YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY! Unrestricted, bastardized capitalism!

God forbid they tighten their belts like the rest of us and have a few bad quarters when times are tough. God forbid their CEO and other officers maybe take a $20,000,000 bonus instead of a $60,000,000 bonus.

No no no...**** everyone else! CAPITALISM! Run your company in order to make it more profitable the next day, and damn any day after the next. Longevity and moderation is for the birds.

@mrbojangles25: ok, calm down.

Yes there are execs making crazy amounts of money. But which employees are the ones hurt when the companies preform poorly? The ones making $50K-$100K a year, paying bills and feeding their families like the rest of us…

It appears all those shitty adaptions are catching up with them.

Nah, I'm calm, just having fun. I mention socialism and anti-capitalism a couple times on these boards and some folks on here make you out to be a foaming-at-the-mouth ANTIFA communist. So I figure, in for a penny, in for a pound 😁 Play the role.

Anyway, to your question: yes, they are the ones, and they don't need to hurt. Cutting a few million from a few officer's bonuses and/or salary would go a long way in both retaining those employees that have built up the company, and ensuring those employees contribute to the economy.

It doesn't always need to be the working class that bears the brunt of economic hardship. In fact, it shouldn't be; while we are rarely the ones that cause it, we are often the ones that get the economy out of it. Given some sort of stimulus to encourage spending, a few hundred million people spending a few extra bucks can often kickstart the economy.

I think the reverse argument is that theaters charge too much. I mean, why should a ticket cost $15? Why should a drink and popcorn make the cost of a movie $30?

I don't believe we should view theatrical releases as the "standard cost" and therefore view Netflix as this insanely good deal. You don't watch 95% of what Netflix offers. Most of Netflix is garbage that cost them nothing to make.

Netflix model has proven sustainable for a long time, and it's only recently they ran into trouble; they made some poor decisions that cost them subscribers, and now that we are entering a recession--one that is harming everyone--they want consumers to foot the bill. Combine that with the sudden upsurge of competition from a million other companies, and it's a recipe for tough times.

**** 'em. You want to increase the cost a dollar or two every five-to-ten years? Fine, we all have to deal with that. But this is some desperation on their part.

@mrbojangles25: Haha!

Sorry, there’s no telling with this place. Folks can act quite entitled to their entertainment.

And I’m all for sticking it to a few of these CEOs. I just don’t know how you do it without hurting thousands of innocent, hardworking folks.

Ive sourced this info here in the past, but I’m having trouble finding it at the moment. Netflix wasn’t “doing fine” until recently. They were receiving huge sums of funding during their expansion, and just recently became independent. That’s when the money trouble started. There were folks over a decade ago saying the Netflix model wasn’t sustainable, and that without the outside cash, the service would fail. Those folks were called all sorts of names, but are starting to look for apologies right about now.

And theater ticket prices are only that high because that’s what the studios require for their product. Then the refreshments cost what they do because that’s how the theaters make money. It’s all a racket, but it works. It works so well that post pandemic, studios are putting their work back in theaters instead of day and date on streaming. We saw plenty of examples of upset studios during the pandemic, crying poor when they didn’t get the expected return on investment from streaming. And others just sat on their products, waiting for things to return to normal.

@mrbojangles25: Found it.

NYT

Netflix Will No Longer Borrow, Ending Its Run of Debt

“The streaming giant borrowed over $16 billion in less than a decade as it built out its content library. The strategy prompted criticism that the company was unsustainable.”

“Netflix announced Tuesday in its fourth-quarter earnings report that it would not “need to raise external financing for our day-to-day operations,” a significant move for the heavily indebted company.”

That was Jan 2021. They needed 200 million subscribers to get to this point

There's really no point in arguing with you. You'll just keep deflecting and spinning. Please no one take this man seriously anymore.

@Zero_epyon: But Netflix are having other problems. They increased the cost of subs, now people don't think it's worth it and they're losing a lot of subs, so they laid off a lot of employees, they're still trying to expand though and push through their own content. It's what Netflix is doing that is the problem.

@goldenelementxl: I'll read that later for sure.

I mean, I suppose it makes sense. They had some really good (and also a lot of just regular good) movies and shows, and quite a few Hollywood and well-known names to boot.

All that has to cost a lot of money, and when you're starting out you need outside cash.

Idunno, I'm relatively old (for this website, at least). I remember when Netflix was DVD-in-the-mail service, and then streaming came and everyone bet against them and they had major studio titles for years, then everyone wised up and they had to make their own stuff. I still view Netflix as that younger company that pioneered the streaming model (or at least was the first to do it well), but I probably shouldn't.

@Sagemode87: Stop being triggered by my post you Sony snowflake.🤣

And why did they feel the need to do that? Is it because the cost of operating is way higher than what they bring in from subscriptions? Do you think MS is never going to increase sub prices when they start losing more money?

Streaming is just not going to be sustainable in the longterm future for new game and movie releases

@mysticaldonut: I think you are confusing Streaming to subscription

you subscribe to streaming services

Nope, I think video streaming market is saturated now and competition is too high, Netflix feel they don't have a choice but to push for exclusive content despite the costs and loss of employees to keep consumers from going elsewhere.

People are also cutting some of their video subscriptions, because of the rising cost of living. So Netflix increasing their price was a bit silly, because a lot of people like me just jumped ship.

Netflix are kind of coffin cornered, because they still have to compete with the 20 other streaming services with new content but they can't really afford to.

So I understand, the next step for them is to release content in Cinema to make some of the money back.

@mysticaldonut: The majority if folks using game subscriptions are not streaming. So, your comment just reads odd since it states new games on game streaming when these new games are typically not streamed.

All first party MS games are going to be on GamePass, even some third party games have been there day one release.

Exactly and I'm fairly sure, Xbox still consider Xcloud as a beta service. It's also a thrown in feature. And it's something you can't really use when your out, despite what they'd want, because you need a fairly good internet connection, not fast, but good as in low latency.

This has nothing to do with my comment

My point was that services like Netflix, GamePass, etc putting content day one on their service, instead of the consumer having to go to the store or movie theater to access it, will not be sustainable in the longterm

You are not articulating your points well at all. What I believe you are trying to state is that releasing games or movies/shows day one on these services is not sustainable and that is better to have the consumer purchase these games/movies/shows instead of renting via a subscription. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Currently, there is no evidence backing the claim that such a model is not sustainable. There is a strong assumption that is based on hypotheticals or guesses. Until there are some hard numbers to back this claim, it falls under speculation.

That's why I wasn't replying to you.

Look at D+. People find out how quickly a movie hits the service, theater ticket sales drop off signifcantly.

Also movies that look so-so people will easily wait for a streaming release, look at the box office sales of Lightyear

I don't know what D+ is so I can't comment. However, gamers waiting for games to drop in price or to hit a service isn't resolved by removing day one access. These folks are still going to wait. The issue that is facing most of these companies is the over abundance of content for consumers to consume. It is so easy to move on to something else if any hurdle is imposed on the customer.

D+ = Disney Plus streaming service for Disney content

Xbox GamePass is looking more and more like it loses Microsoft money as time goes on. Big hitters like Starfield, Fable, Redfall being on the service day one not only hurts retail partners who would generally sell the games for $60 USD on release, it's also looking like it's going to be hurting development cost recoups. There's just no way games that cost $100+ million USD to make can be given away on a subscription service for years on end.

Even articles like this have existed for a few years now:

https://wccftech.com/microsoft-admits-xbox-game-pass-isnt-really-making-a-lot-of-money-right-now/

So why exactly are they dying? Is it because the quality of their movies/series is lower? I can't imagine its competition since there isn't that many.

Netflix? They were receiving billions of dollars while growing their content. That funding stopped, and Netflix had to stand in their own. 18 months later, Netflix is cracking down on account sharing, getting in contract disputes with some of their biggest stars, looking to implement ads, and possibly putting their big budget content in theaters exclusively for a period of time. Even with 200 million subs, the financials behind the business model don’t make sense. Netflix has always been seen as the golden standard for a streaming service. Take their $16billion in outside funding away, and they’re as vulnerable as the others.

Games take longer to make, and can be far more expensive to produce. Millions of folks are enjoying the incredible deal Game Pass is currently offering. I hope for their sake, (and mine) that Xbox is able to pull this off. I just don’t see how they do it without pulling the day and date content. Pulling in all the COD revenue will be a HUGE help, though.

Feel free to speculate all you want but that's all it is: speculation..

Officially, Microsoft has already gone on public record saying that Game Pass is very, very sustainable right now as it sits. And it continues to grow.

You keep saying this but it just doesn't make any sense to me..

so what happens if Xbox Game Studios titles are delayed by 90 days before they come to Game Pass?.. Some people will stop subbing to Game Pass (not good if you want to grow numbers) or the people who stay subbed will just wait until they drop into Game Pass (not good if you want to boost retail sales)..

the fact of the matter is that the vast majority of gamers are still buying games at retail.. and the Game Pass subscribers are providing steady revenue monthly rather than the 1 or 2 times a year a game is released.. launch windows for games are the key time for engagement so if you want to sell games AND push Game Pass subs, day and date content is the clear path to do so..

removing day and date harms Game Pass growth and if people know they can wait to get the game when they drop in Game Pass, retail sales are still being affected.. not sure how you think that solves anything.. and, speculation aside, Microsoft has said Game Pass is already sustainable.. so officially, there is nothing for end-users to be concerned about..

Isn't it a service to our culture? Isn't cinema a think you would totally miss if - lets say the government suddenly forbid it and closes all movie theaters? It's where you sneak with your girl- or boyfriend to cuddle and kiss, it's where you flee from the fast daily life and it's where the buttered popcorn tastes the best.

I still like to go to the cinema so for me it's fine. Even if it's a movie I am not much excited for, I could wait the extra 45 days.

@Antwan3K: Game sales are their highest at launch. Those first few months. Halo would always break these sales milestones at launch, posting these gaudy numbers. Its not unheard of for big titles to sell 5+ million copies in a week. Most years, COD becomes the best selling game of the year during its launch week. How many of the 25+ million Game Pass subscribers would have purchased Halo Infinite at launch? It debuted at number 2 when it launched. Fell to 18th it’s second month, and we haven’t seen it chart since. You can’t say Game Pass hasn’t impacted what was once Xbox’s best selling franchise.

5 million people buying a $60 game, vs 28ish million people paying $10 a month, and that revenue being split among all the deals, publishers etc… That’s $300,000,000 straight to Halo, vs $280,000,000 coming in from Game Pass, before all the publishers come for their piece of the pie. How much of that came back to Xbox? How much did 343 get? Why not make that $300,000,000 AND the $280,000,000 for those few months? And that 5 million Halo number is modest by even Halo standards. They cleared $500,000,000 in a month with Halo 5…Now that revenue is a fraction of that, simply because of Game Pass

3 “Blockbuster“ games selling 5+ mil brings in a billion dollars. Nintendo does that easily year after year… PS May as well, I dunno. I don’t pay as much attention to them.

@goldenelementxl: that’s what I’ve been trying to say, no idea how people can’t understand that the subscription service model will not be sustainable in the long run. If anything, GP will continue to grow in price, probably $30 a month within the next few years