Cannes: Theft Leads China Film Group VP To Bow Out Of Keanu … 
UPDATE: Yahoo Board OKs $1.1B Deal To Acquire Tumblr … 
‘Epic’ Toon Begins $14.5M Overseas Rollout 
Cannes: Sony Classics Wins Stateside Rights To Asghar … 
‘Fast & Furious 6′ Breaks Records In … 
Specialty Box Office: ‘Frances Ha’ Triumphs As … 
‘Saturday Night Live’ Season Finale Posts … 
‘Star Trek Into Darkness’ $164.5M Global: Lower … 
Cannes: Backup Media, Memento Bring Heat To Fest Helmer Jim … 
Cannes: Sundance Selects Acquires Dardenne Brothers’ … 
Cannes: Wrekin Hill Acquires U.S. On Gabriele … 
Bill Hader’s ‘SNL’ Stefon Farewell: Video 
Cannes: The Weinstein Co. Books ‘Suite … 
BBC Confirms ‘Doctor Who’ Season 8 
Finally, Cannes Dealing! Radius-TWC Nabs Director’s … 
Hammond On Cannes: Wet Fest’s Official Competition … 
‘Vampire Academy’ Adds ‘Modern … 
RATINGS RAT RACE: ‘Shark Tank’ Finale Up, … 
Cannes: Worldview Options Andrew Dominik’s Marilyn … 
UPFRONTS 2013: The Overachievers 
‘Mike & Molly’ Creator Mark Roberts To … 
Netflix’s first original series, the acquired Norwegian fish-out-of-water dramedy Lilyhammer starring The Sopranos alum Steven Van Zandt, launched yesterday. How did it do? We may never know as the video streaming is refusing to disclose figures. In a memo, Netflix’s chief content officer Ted Sarandos explains why. While instant viewing is less and less important for most TV networks, especially premium cable ones which, like Netflix, doesn’t rely on commercials, I still think that Netflix should provide cumulative streaming data over time, especially as it paints itself as a viable alternative to pay cable. As for the future of Lilyhammer, it probably doesn’t depend on its performance on Netflix as it launched big in its homeland and reportedly has Netfix already on board to co-produce a second season. Here is Sarandos’ memo:
Many of you have asked us to disclose day-after viewership numbers for our new original series “Lilyhammer,” which Netflix members in the U.S., Canada and Latin America could watch instantly beginning yesterday. Let me explain why we won’t.
We have over 23 million streaming members and they’ll have the opportunity to discover Lilyhammer not just yesterday, today or this week, but over the course of several years. Some members have loved the show so much that they’ve already watched the entire eight-episode first season; we put all the episodes up at once for that reason. Over time, other members will hear about Lilyhammer from their friends or discover it through our recommendation engine, based on the shows and movies they’ve enjoyed in the past.
At Netflix, we are all about giving people choice in the way they enjoy TV shows and movies. They can watch one episode or all eight back-to-back. They can start in the living room on their Smart TV and end in the bedroom on their iPad. We don’t show commercials so we don’t have to deliver audience numbers to advertisers. We do have to deliver a great experience to our members.
We’re confident Lilyhammer will build a sizeable audience on Netflix and we’re excited to be at the forefront of change in the way consumers get their entertainment.
TV Editor Nellie Andreeva - tip her here.
Loading ...
The answer is there in that memo: “Not many.”
If there was a number worth crowing about, they’d be crowing.
Exactly. Though I think they’ll eventually release numbers but not until they reach an acceptable and unembarrassing level.
@BatHatHarry
That is pure nonsense. Serando’s statement makes absolute sense. Netflix is not in the business of getting EVERYBODY to watch something AT ONCE. People can watch whenever they want. That’s exactly the reason why so many of us are leaving the traditional broadcast model in favor of streaming services like Netflix.
So whatever number they’d be able to give you right now would be meaningless in their grand scheme of things.
B.S. His explanation makes perfect sense. That’s the beauty of Netlfix. The viewer is in control of what he/she wants to watch. I’ll definitely be watching the show, but don’t know exactly when that will happen. And Netflix doesn’t have to rely on my views of the show to please an advertiser.
It DOESN’T MATTER IF THE NUMBERS ARE LOW. That’s the beauty of Netflix. They make their money on satisfied customers like me.
Too many people are stuck in the old model, the old way of looking at things, ratings, blah blah blah. Thank God that will soon be a thing of the past.
Well that’s not much of an explanation. All he says is that he’s not because he doesn’t have to. Leads me to believe the numbers are low, at least that’s the presumption to be made.
I like that they’re not sharing this. Good move.
Tried to watch it yesterday on Netflix …. got some stupid #$@% error message.
It’s working now; I confess I watched them all over the last few days. It is quite charming.
Despite the noble tone of his email, at some point they will have to share viewing numbers, whether it’s on a monthly or quarterly basis, in order to attract other top tier talent who want to their work to be actually enjoyed by an audience
A lot of creators like Fincher aren’t doing TV just for the money. They have plenty of that. They want a new outlet for their art. And if a company don’t share how many people are actually watching, then that becomes moot.
Maybe they’ll share the numbers to investors and people involved in the productions, but not the public and media.
if someone was truly doing for as an “outlet for their art” why would the numbers matter to them? As long as the artist has the resources to create their art, the numbers are of no consequence.
A new outlet is inconsequential if there’s no one watching. They want to share their work in a new medium. If a tree falls in the forest…
Your thinking is skewed by an old model. Numbers are much less important in the new model. Get used to it.
Whether or not they provide exact numbers to specific talents is another matter entirely, though when Netflix offers 100 million to produce House of Cards, I doubt Fincher gives a crap about how many streams some other show got.
just because they aren’t releasing these numbers publicly doesn’t mean they won’t give major Hollywood players a look at those numbers. Especially if that was the point on which they were deciding to sign up for a Series or not. There is something to be said about working in TV that I’m sure some major Hollywood Stars would love… Ten weeks a year working with the same crew filming 6-12 episodes, decent money to stay put in one location, like you mentioned in above post a creative outlet to tell a full story without brushing over the small details… yeah that wouldn’t be a bad life. I think ever since the Sopranos came out actors have really started to look at TV series differently, no longer is it a medium to springboard actors to Movies or help retire people’s careers that have grown stale.
Netflix shouldn’t be so shy. The future is narrowcasting – they above all should know that – it’s their advantage over the networks. They are right that in a world of narrowcasting, the game is no longer going to be about appealing to the few large advertisers with million dollar budgets. It’s going to be all about those smaller and more numerous advertisers you see on AdSense. In that arena, big numbers matter far less than accurate targetting.
There’s no reason for any of us to care that X got Y viewers. What we should care about is that people who like the same things we do, give it a high score and recommend it. I don’t care if only three other people in the world like what I like – as long as I like it (and somehow it makes money to continue
This is the future – it’s not about a few shows getting big numbers, it’s about a big number of shows getting little numbers and everyone sorting themselves into individualized niche taste groups.
“Some members have loved the show so much that they’ve already watched the entire eight-episode first season”
This make me feel like the numbers arn’t that large either. Instead of saying “A number of…” “many member,” etc it just says “some” and could literally mean 2.
But then again I don’t think ‘Lilyhammer’ will have a large effect on netflix one way or another – especially since it was aquired and not an in-house production like “House of Cards” will be.
Any “talent” that wants to reach big numbers shouldn’t be working with Netflix. The name of the game there is appealing to niche tastes. However, that might be a large niche, when you multiply it across the entire globe (as Netflix one day will be able to do). So if someone has a certain specialty in the entertainment field that they want to share with others who appreciate that specialty, then Netflix (or YouTube or Yahoo) is the way to go.
Everyone needs to stop thinking in mass market terms. Think niche.
Watched half yesterday – and second half today. Surprisingly enjoyable. And I’m sure I’m not the only one who will like it.
They have to come up with some metric though. Otherwise what’s the point ?
I was interested in watching this but didn’t even know it was on — a simple email from Netflix touting it and telling its customers it was premiering seems like it would’ve been a good idea.
Applaud not revealing #s, as they’re revealing the whole season at once for viewers – which is well worth not explicating the Nielsens. The box set of VOD original programming has arrived.
It makes perfect sense that Netflix will not divulge the numbers, not because they are low (which I’m sure they are) but because it’s irrelevant that they’re low. The company is deploying a completely unconventional programming strategy in releasing the entire season for VOD viewing on the same day; as a result, it would be inane to think that general consumers would personally “eventize” the debut for appointment viewing (why would they when they know that they can watch tomorrow, or the day after etc. without any penalty?). They’ll always de-prioritize watching the show because they can, but that doesn’t mean that they won’t get to it over a longer period of time. This makes next-day viewership posts obsolete for this model.
What is far more relevant is monthly stream totals. based on the natural measurement standards of the web (7,14, or 30 day intervals), a 30 day posting would be far more reflective of series appeal/success than next day. It’s an unconventional model so conventional evaluation standards make little sense.
Agree completely. I haven’t watched yet — but I don’t have to, that’s the whole point. I’ll get to it when I have time.
Who cares who watched it yesterday? How many people even knew it was debuting?
Netflix has made no effort to treat this like a series, unveiling one episode at time. Instead, it’s a chance to re-invent word of mouth indy-film style audience building — but with TV.
Hell, the only reason to care about the month totals is to throw a bone to the industry so it has some way to comprehend it.
By which I mean all the people chuckling over the presumed numbers. Who cares? this is long ball, not about the next morning.
If iTunes and YouTube can provide some kind of popularity/view count info, then so can Netflix.
Just LOLed while at work.
CLEARLY this means the numbers are not good. Because whenever Netflix has the slightest bit of positive news, its press-release galore and full disclosure across the board.
There is always the rating system to look at, which, I assume, is a ballot box that can be easily stuffed. Last time I looked, the star rating was 3 out of 5.
I watched it last night and really enjoyed it.
As a Netflix subscriber it would have been nice to know this was on. It almost seems like Netflix, out of desperation, was more concerned with showing investors it could create a program than having its subscribers watch it.
Most Netflix subscribers probably don’t even realize that Lilyhammer exists and that it’s an original series only available on the service. Netflix has yet to “advertise” it, and since this is an unprecedented release method, we don’t even know what “good” and “bad” numbers look like.
But at the same time, who the hell really cares about Lilyhammer?
Same day release of of an ENTIRE series doesn’t require ratings info. Look at all of the other series released by Netflix, do we demand ratings for the season release of Gossip Girl or MI:5, etc.?
Netflix isn’t streaming Lillyhammer as HBO might its programs. People can pick and choose to see Lillyhammer amongst 1000s of other choices. Many people will see that Lillyhammer released 8 episodes and decide to watch the whole series over a weekend or a month later.
The ratings system has to be rethought with on-demand content.
First episode was quite funny, so I will keep watching. I only knew to look for it because I read about it on this website. It didn’t pop up in “new to instant” or as a recommendation, so I’m curious how they plan on getting people to watch it without advertising it.
Smart movie for netflix, if the number is high or low it can scare content providers. If 10 thousand or 10 million people watched it, those people are missing stuff on regular tv.
If they don’t have to pay royalties based on views, who cares what their numbers are? In a related story, who says the press has to give them any publicity?
To the first part of your comment: Because they still have to license the material for streaming, which they do so at a flat rate (on a scale) and not per view. They don’t want content providers squawking about what a crappy deal they’re getting if they have a hit.
What if, day of viewing no longer matters? What if day-of viewing doesn’t matter at all in 5 years?
What if a show garners 200,000 unique viewers every day for two months? What if ‘overnight’ ratings became as valuable as predicting the number of horse drawn carriages that are gathered outside the mercantile?
Let’s be real here. The show stars STEVEN VAN ZANDT. That’s like having George Ratzenberger star in a series 15 years ago. It’s called LILYHAMMER. There’s not even anticipation for what happens next because Netflix stupidly posted all 10 episodes.
My educated guess is that substantially less than 10,000 people watched LILYHAMMER. Netflix is welcome to prove me wrong.
how can you watch something you don’t know about?
Didn’t even got an email from Netflix…