SAG-AFTRA Sued For Witholding Foreign Residuals And … 
Zach Braff Ends $3+M Kickstarter Campaign 
Fox Unscripted TV Czar Mike Darnell To Exit 
FIRST BOX OFFICE: ‘Fast & Furious 6′ Easy … 
NBC Sets Oklahoma Tornado Benefit Concert For May 29 
Cannes: Directors’ Fortnight Honors ‘Les … 
SHOCKER: Tom Cruise Exits ‘Man From … 
A+E Rebuild: BBC’s Jana Bennett To Run Bio And LMN … 
RATINGS RAT RACE: ‘Hannibal’ Hits Low, … 
‘Katie’ Shakeup: Rachel Miskowiec Replaces … 
Hammond On Cannes: French Hero Jerry Lewis On His Return To … 
Cannes: Another Jewelry Heist? $2.6M Necklace Missing After … 
Hammond On Cannes: Leo DiCaprio’s Moon Trip Tops … 
Specialty B.O. Preview: ‘Before Midnight’, … 
2012-2013 Season Network Rankings: CBS Sweeps In Final … 
Full 2012-2013 TV Season Series Rankings 
TOLDJA! Paramount Pocketing $190M From Disney For Marvel … 
‘Good Morning America’ Hits 19-Year Viewership … 
MGM Buys ‘Modern Family’ Producer Ben … 
‘Fashion Police’ Writers Chant On Picket Lines: … 
Universal Makes Seven-Figure Deal For ‘The School For … 
Shares of Netflix fell 5.8% today as the king of online movie rentals took some hits from multiple sides during the past 24 hours — a significant dent in the fender for a company whose stock more than tripled last year. Earlier in the day, Warner Bros. announced that it is using Facebook to offer pay-per-view movies for 48 hours in exchange for 30 Facebook Credits ($3) to its network of more than 500 million users. Selected movies will be offered on each film’s Facebook page, starting today with The Dark Knight. The move comes on the heels of initiatives from such players as Time Warner (HBO Go), which seek to find their own way against Netflix. As another recent example, Comcast cable president Neil Smit said Monday during a Deutsche Bank investors conference in Florida that he his confident his company can compete in the sector via video-on-demand offerings and new content, compared with Netflix’s emphasis on library titles.
Facebook-Warner Bros. Pact Takes Bite Out of Netflix Shares
-
Marketplace
News/Opinion Poll
Loading ...Box Office Poll
Loading ...
3 bucks to stream movies for 48 hours? This sounds like an awful deal. I can stream movies all month on Netflix for far less.
Sorry for the above post.
I’m sorry but unless these companies can offer a better deal than Netflix, which allows unlimited use of DVDs with no late fees, and streaming movies twenty-four hours a day, I will not switch to another company.
The Facebook $3.00 rental fee for 48 hours is no better than precious Blockbuster fees and offers no competition for my home movie dollars, unless they offer some of new releases.
Win for WB – content distribution on their terms…
Win for Facebook – now they can log what movies we watch plus game the micro transaction…
Lose for Netflix – another media giant shuts them out…
Lose for the consumer – Netflix just *works anywhere*… tv, computer, mobile, iPad…will this solution?
If the big studios are not careful, they are gonna have a fractured music industry type business model before too long. They should have reached out to Netflix and worked a deal there. I wouldn’t mind paying a couple more bucks a month for a larger streaming library. The music biz would crap their pants for this kind of deal.
I want one payment a month for unlimited movie rentals from a large library of first run movies. I dont want a fractured system of “pay XYZ entity since movie 123 came from studio QRX…” Not gonna work, Hollywood.
“I want one payment a month for unlimited movie rentals from a large library of first run movies. I dont want a fractured system of “pay XYZ entity since movie 123 came from studio QRX…” Not gonna work, Hollywood.” – - Ben
Very true Ben. I think the movie company to catch on to that idea of partnering up with Netflix is going to find better return. Especially with an original companies from the US.
With the VAST amount of movies produced by one of the giant movie companies come hundreds of classic movies that will most likely never be seen again, as they are left to die a VHS in people homes. I bet people would also love to watch classic movies in digital.
*Sigh*
When are Old Money executives going to understand that the old way of doing things doesn’t work with New Consumers and New Media? Why would I pay 3 bucks to watch a movie on my computer when I could do it for free via torrenting? Do they not understand that this sort of behavior is the very thing that drives the younger tech savvy crowd, whom they appear to be targeting with this move, to piracy in general? How stupid are they, and why do they continue to have a job?
Netflix, on the other hand, is a great alternative because I can watch it on all three devices I use daily (computer, TV, smartphone/tablet)and while it may not be free, the selection and convenience make it a good value and worth the money. Why would they try to mess with not only a great thing, but a business model that is working?
Because you may go to jail.
No one has ever gone to jail for individual piracy, only for selling copyrighted materials without permission from the rights holders, which was illegal long before the DMCA came about, coincidentally. So that is a total non-issue. As I said, I’d much rather pay a fair amount for the convenience and selection offered by services like Netflix, which this new Facebook strategy lacks both of.
Again I say stupid, stupid move by old executives that need to retire and get out of the way before it costs their companies everything.
So true. I’m willing to throw a bone and watch it legally through Netflix because of the convenience. It’s also available on my TV through many devices, like XBox.
Only a moron would actually decide to watch a movie on their computer and pay 3 bucks for it. Tech savy people who now have no morals thanks to Hollywood will either go to one of the illegal web sites that stream them or download it off torrent.
Bigger question is why do I need to see Dark Knight again? Plus, paying for anything on FB seems annoying, like paying for AOL or text charges. Parents will be so happy to get the big credit card bill for Twilight marathons.
Price isn’t bad but I FB overshares way too much; do you really want all your friends to know that you’re watching Justin Bieber in 3D?
I use Facebook all the time.
I would never watch a movie on Facebook.
Good luck with that.
Great more crap in my news feed. Now not only do I know when all of my friends check into places, now I will know what movies they are watching. Facebook really is becoming Myspace.
I agree with the above posts. For now, Netflix is still the way to go.
I keep an excel inventory of everything I watch via Netflix, be it instant or DVD. Netflix subscription beats $3 for 48 hours any day of the week. If it means not being able to stream something, so be it. The streaming doesn’t include bonus features.
So I have to 1) think of a movie I want to watch, 2) know if it’s a WB film or not, 3) find its Facebook page, 4) determine whether its one of the films WB is offering for download, and then 5) use a proprietary payment system to rent it?
Yeah, that sounds easy.
I agree that it’s not a better system than netflix but your logic doesn’t make a lot of sense.
“1) think of a movie I want to watch” – Is that too much decision power for you? I understand that you can’t browse facebook to discover movies, yet. Yet being the key word. This is clearly a starting point. Imagine when independent films will be able to offer their films on the site. It could be a nice part of their distribution models.
“2) know if it’s a WB film or not” Either the page has a “watch” button or it doesn’t
“3) find its Facebook page” Type in the movie in your search browser just like you would on the netflix site.
“4) determine whether its one of the films WB is offering for download” Same as point 2. This is not difficult.
“5) use a proprietary payment system to rent it?” This is the only point you made that I agree with. Netflix is cheaper and has automatic payment.
So, again I agree that the Netflix model is currently better, but I think this is an interesting move, and I’m sure they will improve its the service grows. In the meantime this rant makes you come off lazy and computer-illiterate
It really is too bad, because at the start, Zuckenberg seemed to have high aspirations for FB – but now it is just another mega-Internet application interested in taking over everything (just like Google).
I’ve been with Netflix for a long time and their customer service is exceptional. I doubt I’d get that same level of service from FB. Netflix is still a much better deal.
Bad idea. Very bad idea.
I spend too much time on Facebook as it is. I’m not going to add more time on it. I also don’t like the idea of Facebook tracking what movies I watch.
If this is the future of home viewing, then home viewing won’t have a future.
I don’t even know where to begin. One, this has NOTHING to do with Facebook as far as I can tell. From everything I’ve seen, this is simply WB making an app available on the Facebook platform. One studio, making select titles available, on a platform that isn’t built for optimized viewing, does not portend the future of media distribution. It’s a freakin’ WB store in the mall of Facebook.
I agree that if FB took control of the content licensing process and offered films from multiple studios in a premium, full screen viewing environment (remember, we’re talking feature films not web shorts) then it would be in competition with iTunes, Amazon, Netflix and Hulu – and it would still have ground to make up.
As things stand, Netflix can flip a switch and offer a better experience with way more films on Facebook than WB is currently offering. They do it with every set top device and IP connected TV, why not have a Facebook app? The reason is the 30% fee FB wants. There’s no need for Netflix to pay the premium for FB’s users. One, FB is not widely used in a big screen environment. Two, FB users don’t use the platform to watch long form video.
So ultimately, it doesn’t make any sense for Netflix. Nor, imho, does it make any real sense for WB other than the A+ they seem to be earning for effort.
The shift in Netflix shares is, unfortunately, a successful push by Goldman to ramp up FB value. It’s a shame, as this deal will not have an economic effect the current landscape.
A Disney acquisition of Netflix would shift the landscape. Netflix losing one or multiple major studios will shift it. And even Facebook building an iTunes knock off would shift it.
WB offering an ecommerce app on Facebook affects the broader business about as much as WB selling movie titles on its website does.
More crap strategy from Warners. They have been one of the most aggressive studios about windowing their releases to the home video market (didn’t they recently threaten to extend their new release window on Netflix to 60 days?). Meanwhile consumer-friendly Paramount has stayed away from windowing with minimal impact to its bottom line.
This isn’t really a step forward in integrating emerging technologies, it’s more of a saturation strategy: “FB has 500 million users, we’re bound to make money off a few suckers.” Yeah you’ll make some dough, but Facebook is not in the movie business. Stop beefing with Netflix and come up with a model that works.
Here’s something fun: go and find the OFFICIAL Dark Knight page on Facebook. There’s abunch that come up when you search in Facebook, and none look legit. So how do I find the movie.
Not only that, but what benefit is derived from partnering with Facebook over Netflix? They’re are giant company that is privately owned, and some consider them the most evil of evil internet corporations. This is a boneheaded move on WB’s part. These studios should seriously see the Netflix partnership as a positive and not a negative. Netflix is another revenue stream for them, and isn’t that what they want? Besides, if I want to rent a new release online, I go to Amazon, not Facebook. Just dumb.
It took one attempt to find the correct page. One indicator is the number of fans. If you see a page that has 11,000 fans you’re clearly not in the right place.
Furthermore, you clearly don’t get the concept of a “social network”. Access to a centralized pool of 500 million users don’t seem that useless to me. Just Dumb.
I didn’t know social networks are about watching movies, so thanks for clearing that up. I thought social networks were a way to keep in touch with people you know. Even the games have a social component. Movies just seem out of place.
While you might be able to find the official Dark Knight page on Facebook, many will be confused. It’s not prominent in any way except by the number of fans. Then when you do find the right page, it’s not clear where the movie is. It’s a bad experience all around for the user compared to Netflix.
And the industry forgets everything it learned from the success of iTunes. Consumers want a one-stop shop. By fracturing the delivering system, creating 30-day windows, returning to the Blockbuster pricing model, the studios are creating unnecessary obstacles.
It still amazes me that they charge $6.00 for an OnDemand HD rental, when you can get it for $1.50 from Redbox or as part of your Netflix subscription.
I don’t know much about these “facebook credits” but it looks to me like there will be more integration with games and ads where you’re not actually paying $3 for the movie – you’re going to earn $2 worth when you play facebook games then maybe you’ll say “I might as well add that extra dollar I need and watch a movie for $1 plus the credits I have.” $3 does sound stupid at first but this facebook credits rewards system will probably start to take shape and really you’ll be watching a movie for free (or your time spent playing games and clicking on ads).
I ahh mmm- had something pertinent to say, but then I just hit the netflix button on my browser bar and I’m going to watch – ummmmm
Spartacus gods of the arena or reaper
why not both tonight.
FLAT FEE PEOPLE
The thing about fb, and the internet, is that you don’t always know who you’re talking to, really. Face to face, on the phone, you get a better sense of what people are really saying. I guess playing movies on fb makes it a little more clear that real communication is happening. It’s just one-way, tho. Dark Night is a great movie to start out with tho!
compared with Netflix’s emphasis on library titles.
So again, why the fuck does Warner Bros. keep freaking out whenever Netflix is mentioned? It’s. a big. playground.
At some point, someone top-brassy over at WB will simply have to get a goddamn clue. If this was 1985 would the studio be fighting Blockbuster? They would have bought a stake in it. Because Blockbuster, like Netflix, filled their shelves with library titles that were dead and forgotten. If it’s Netflix’s flat fee that’s making CEOs’ sphincter clench, those guys are just going to have to breathe and use some lubricant for now. And why do they need me, some random person on the internet, to reiterate that entertainment media has always changed and studios have always adapted?
Frankly speaking, it really just sounds like some top cat at WB is just being a punk. Well, here’s me, random person, telling you you’re embarrassing yourself.
This deal is a non deal. I have been a Netflix lover for years and if u noticed they killed the community aspect which is annoying. You can’t see your “friends” queues anymore. That is because they have a deal in works with facebook to I think really integrate into the site. I like the old Netflix simple community cause now I will get film suggestions from some random I friended at 2am at bar
It would be awesome if it worked. Just went to watch and facebook is clearly having some technical difficulties. Annoying as all hell, especially when their help centre is also useless more often than not.
It’s pathetic. Bewkes keeps on posturing, calling Netflix a gnat or two-pound gorilla or whatever (thus showing that really he’s scared to death of them) but then okays this lame idea (yes, it’s just an app) which pretty much everyone above has called out for a couple of obvious reasons. Apple/Disney should buy NFLX and let the other studios try to build a streaming market on FB and Twitter, both of which should stick to their knitting. When companies and people get fat heads, that hubris marks the beginning of their declines. In any event, between NFLX and, in a year or two, YouTube, the distribution business as we’ve known it for 40+ years is over.
I find it quite interesting to see how a company like WB is trying to use Facebook as a way to deliver their movies to their audiences. I totally agree with the statements that WB should not ‘exclude’ Netflix as an output channel, nor have a delayed release window. They should focus on both (and more) ways to deliver their movies!
In Holland, we don’t have Netflix (though my cable operator has some nice VOD options), so it might be an option to check a movie through Facebook. However, I have yet to see whether these movies are available on Facebook world-wide to their 500+ million users. Won’t this interfere with current distributor/territorial deals?
I’m eager to see
Just checked… Not available in my region… There goes the 500+ million audience……
JUST CHECKED…not available in my region… There goes the 500+ million audience……there goes the 600+million audience………