digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at gizmodo.com

Netflix to Jack Up Prices For Blu-ray Renters

gizmodo.com — What's the best way to punish the same early adopters that made your service a success? If you're Netflix, it's charging them extra for renting Blu-ray. CEO Reed Hastings justifies this action by saying "consumers are used to paying more for high-definition," basically punching this next generation of early adopters in the nads.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • WhoPharted, on 04/22/2008, -36/+116We should have kept HD DVD, people are monopolizing the Blu-Ray players.
    • mywhitenoise, on 04/22/2008, -31/+16Monopolizing would mean only one company is making them at a fixed price.

      1 company hasn't taken over, and prices are still the same, you're wrong.
      • solidus636, on 04/23/2008, -12/+10The technology of Blu-Ray is held by one company: Sony. So..yes..it's a monopoly since there is no competitor for Blu-Ray anymore.
        • mywhitenoise, on 04/23/2008, -11/+6No it isn't you dumbass. Sony and Pioneer created the format.
          As far as the players themselves, there's players made by Sony, *****, Pioneer, Philips, Thomson, LG Electronics, Hitachi, Sharp, and Samsung...they're all competing against each other.
          • Chompy, on 04/23/2008, -4/+9All of those manufacturers must pay royalties to Sony to build those players. Next time, keep your mouth shut until you know what you're talking about.
          • mywhitenoise, on 04/23/2008, -2/+3Having to pay royalties doesn't mean Sony is in control of the market, or even in control of how the other manufacturers price their players.
          • Chompy, on 04/23/2008, -5/+3Since Sony can decide, at any time, to withhold said licenses and thus prevent anyone from making players, yes, they do control the market. Do you want to keep going? Or are you done?
          • Chompy, on 04/23/2008, -4/+1Yeah, you're done.
          • mywhitenoise, on 04/23/2008, -1/+3Yeah...i'm not. I just don't see a point in arguing with you. Sony invented a lot of things (CDs, walkmen, floppy disks, DAT...) That doesn't mean they were in control of the media. That doesn't mean they had a monopoly going.
            You sound like a teenage girl.
          • Chompy, on 04/23/2008, -4/+1They are in control of Blu-Ray. They can, if they decide to do so, prevent anyone else from manufacturing anything to do with it. All of your yammering and name-calling isn't going to change that. You're wrong. You fail. AGAIN.
        • isewise, on 04/23/2008, -1/+4The technology of Blu is NOT held solely by Sony, it is an association of a multiple of companies similar to the DVD and the HD DVD consortium.
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc_Associat ...
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc_Founders
    • ieatpizza, on 04/22/2008, -4/+20You need a Betamax to HD DVD converter.
    • arunforce, on 04/22/2008, -10/+17How does Netflix raising prices justify monopolization? They could of easily done the same even if HD-DVD was still there. Considering that there are plenty of movie rental places, they won't get far.
      • feliks2, on 04/22/2008, -14/+3This has nothing to do with Bluray/ HDDVD, it only has to do with Netflix being assholes. And besides, Bluray is actually better, technically.

        Meant to reply to WhoPharted (wat a ghey name, lern too spele)
      • cawpin, on 04/23/2008, -6/+5I buried you for being an idiot and for using "could of" while being an idiot.
        • BabaRamDass, on 04/23/2008, -0/+3If you don't understand what he meant by "could of" perhaps you are the idiot? Or maybe you're a pedantic asshat who feels better when he corrects other people's misspellings?
          • ArmandoM, on 04/23/2008, -2/+2I'm as guilty of spelling words wrong as anyone else, but using the word "of" in place of the word "have" is not a misspelling, it's using completely the wrong word.
    • nixfu, on 04/22/2008, -4/+14This is total *****.... VHS rentals were $1.50 back when movies were like $80-100 each to purchase.

      They MADE their money back on the rentals over time many times over.

      • BOSyooper, on 04/23/2008, -1/+6They enter revenue sharing agreements with the studios now. That is why they are allowed to buy for less and rent them out.
    • FriedTurkey, on 04/23/2008, -10/+9Dude it is time to let the HD-DVD thing go. It's OK you can get over it. You pick the wrong format. It happens.
      • wageslaven, on 04/23/2008, -9/+6And the market would be better if the studios werent paid hundreds of millions of dollars to kill the competition.

        You'd be better off, I'd be better off becaues we wouldnt be in a this totally artifical format monopoly.

        $400 million to Warner to drop HD-DVD support if I recall correctly...
        • FriedTurkey, on 04/23/2008, -2/+6I have a feeling if HD-DVD won you wouldn't feel this way.
        • HappyScrappy, on 04/23/2008, -0/+5You don't recall correctly. Or actually, I can't tell. Since there is no figure. There's no number that wasn't made up from whole cloth by people on the internet. There's no way to verify which figure is correct since Warner explicitly denied receiving any money. Note that denying they were getting paid to support a format exclusively is something that Universal and Paramount (exclusive backers of HD-DVD) were unable to do.
    • nobody7, on 04/23/2008, -2/+1No it's just more plastic youtube 'plastic vortex'
    • piper999, on 04/23/2008, -5/+2RIP Blu Ray.

      I wonder if Netflix is going to rape HD-DVD renters as well?

      As soon as this get officially announced how many of the admittedly few Netflix Blu Ray renters will immediately remove every single Blu Ray disc from their Queues? Pretty much all of them I would guess.

      • HappyScrappy, on 04/23/2008, -1/+4They dropped HD-DVD.
      • Sherman901, on 04/23/2008, -0/+2dude, where have you been?
      • OpaqueMurdock, on 04/23/2008, -1/+1Depending on the amount... I am not likely to remove any unless its outrageous. For all we know it could be like $1 or $2 extra a month, and for me that would be well worth it.
    • HappyScrappy, on 04/23/2008, -1/+2This has nothing to do with HD-DVD versus BluRay. Did you read the comments? "Because people are used to paying more for HD". HD-DVD is HD, so it comes under this rational too.
    • bobbob1016, on 04/23/2008, -0/+2The same way the HD-DVD group wanted to make HDDVD50's which would not be playable at all on any HDDVD player, apart from HDDVD50 players? Bitch about Blu-Ray Profile 2.0 all you want, 1.x players can still play 2.0 movies, only the movie, but still. HDDVD30 players wouldn't have been able to play HDDVD50's in any way shape or form.

      I own both, Serenity is HDDVD, HHGTTG is Blu-Ray. I just hate HDDVD people saying how much better a 30gig disc is compared to a 50gig disc, that is being upgraded to 100gig and 200gig while still being playable on current players.
    • mweflen, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1Does anyone besides me not even know what this comment means? "Monopolizing... Blu-Ray... players?" I'm sounding it out to try and figure out its connection to a disc rental service raising its prices for... disc rentals.
  • HMTKSteve, on 04/22/2008, -12/+58Three submissions about this (minutes apart) and they are all now buried?

    http://digg.com/business_finance/NetFlix_increases ...
    http://digg.com/movies/Netflix_to_charge_more_for_ ...
    http://digg.com/movies/Netflix_to_Jack_Up_Prices_F ...
    • OJdidntdoIT, on 04/22/2008, -4/+14I'm starting to think Digg is part of the Gawker MAchine
      • fkr3, on 04/22/2008, -2/+7Gawker only exists for digg. It's a shame digg users like to vote for their ***** blogs instead of the higher quality content they summarise and spew ads all around.
        • SirPopper, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1Gawker! Gawker! Gawker! I have had a submission which went popular and then after 66 diggs it got buried! I checked the comments on my submission at digg.com, they all were negative. Then I checked the tons of comments on the Gawker side to my submission, and really people can comment positive, that looks like that there is a problem, but i dunno which kind of sort it is. What is with Gawker? What do you all have againstit? Please explain it to me!
          c
    • DaviDTC, on 04/22/2008, -1/+42Does it surprise you which one made it to the front page?
      • iZealot, on 04/23/2008, -0/+7Nope submitted by MrBabyMan, featured on Diggnation multiple times, and surely has his own Digg posse. Just a focal point in this hivemind, nothing new .
        • skyroket, on 04/23/2008, -2/+1Natural Selection is beginning to take its toll. Be patient, Diggers!
    • HypocriteDigg, on 04/22/2008, -14/+3Netflix is like WIndows and Sony to Diggiots. They don't like seeing their favorite fanboy brands tarnished.
      • oblique63, on 04/22/2008, -1/+6what?... last time I checked, Diggers complained about windows all the time, and sony only gets a bit of respect for the ps3... I think you were trying to compare Netflix to something like Apple, or Obama...

        not that I agree or anything, just an observation...
    • outkaster, on 04/23/2008, -2/+3He probably doesn't actually have any one digging his comments he just has 50 alt accounts.
    • Bukowsky, on 04/23/2008, -6/+8Woah... Now lets at least be fair here. While all of you blindly thumb these up & bash the submitter...

      First off, it was only TWO submissions, the first two you linked to above.... NOT THREE submissions as you state. Because the last digg submission Link you leave is for this same exact submit. So it was obviously not Buried as you state above.

      Lets take a look at the first URL:http://digg.com/business_finance/NetFlix_increases ...

      The source is from a site called scamstocks.com. Just from the domain name of the original source, my first impression is not very good. I've never heard of it. It's got the word "SCAM" & "STOCKS" ..Which also happen to be two very spammy keywords. It was submitted into a completely different category (Business & Finance), whereas THIS submit that went popular was submitted in the Movies category. Which seems more appropriate of a category for this specific article, and what it was about.

      Now lets take a look at the Second URL you linked too above: http://digg.com/movies/Netflix_to_charge_more_for_ ...

      It comes from a very reputable source -- crave.cnet.com -- I personally love this site. I read it often. But look at who submitted it. An avatarless user that goes by the name of Shzam, and this happens to be his very first submit. Seriously? Are any of you gonna take that serious? I'm surprised that he got as many votes as he did... and not completely slip deep into the depths of the upcoming sections.

      Now the third link from Gizmodo.com, the same one that we are all lookin at now (by the way) Has a much better description, title & picture. Plus, the submitter has a very large following, just based on who he is and the quality content he regularly submits.

      Why the ***** are any of you never-leave-the-front-page diggers so surprised that this made it? This is the only submit out of the three that even deserved the Front Page of digg!

      I could careless about MrBabyMan or this article.... which is why I have not dugg it. But, seriously, can't you just grow the ***** up!

      oh, one more thing - How many of you wankers dugg this story, but not the other ones? [ Exactly! ]
      • skyroket, on 04/23/2008, -0/+3I don't know if this is good or bad, but Gizmodo actually links to the crave.cnet.com article at the bottom. They're just putting their spin on it. Does that mean people like Gizmodo more than raw news, or does that mean MrBabyMan has a better hook on Digg.com?
      • thanakar, on 04/23/2008, -0/+4Why should it ***** matter WHO submitted the article? The point you make is total *****. By your reckoning nobody new will ever be able to submit stories on Digg since they have no history yet. You say you could care less about MrBabyMan but you sure are kissing his ass all over your comment.
    • giantsfan134, on 04/23/2008, -1/+3Maybe because the article is stupid and pointless. Blu-ray costs more to buy so it costs more to rent.
      I see no problem with it considering how quickly the disks will scratch (and need to be replaced) from being transferred through a lot of people who don't care what condition they return it in because it isn't theirs.
  • dupswapdrop, on 04/22/2008, -4/+12can I pay more also
  • coltrane68, on 04/22/2008, -21/+137Bad move, Netflix.
    • jahoo876, on 04/22/2008, -11/+3it's not like there are other ppl to rent from
    • Ajajadude, on 04/22/2008, -19/+65Why? BR movies at stores cost more to purchase, why wouldn't it cost more to rent?
      • SkippyDoorknob, on 04/22/2008, -2/+25BR movies at retails need to drop pronto if they want to start making significant inroads against DVD.
        • wageslaven, on 04/23/2008, -1/+3Hahah. No. There is little real incentive for the masses to move to BR frankly. The install base, and low-cost of DVD players are going to mean that DVD is around for many years to come.

          And, why would the MPAA (Sony, Disney, Warner etc) *want* to kill DVD? They'll be very happy to have two products at two price points. They'll be able to charge "premium" prices for BR discs for years to come.

          BR discs (or players) have no reason to come down in price at all. The early adopters are going to slowly pick them up, but there isnt much pressure for the discs or players to fall.

          That said, I'm not buying another disc player. Its Digital Download for me.
      • MScrip, on 04/22/2008, -6/+6Because Netflix has millions of DVDs in circulation... and I think they could cover the cost of a few thousand Blu-Ray discs to keep their customers happy.

        Netflix is a billion dollar company. Blu-Ray is a tiny % of their inventory. If they have 20,000 copies of Spiderman on DVD, and 100 copies of Spiderman on Blu-Ray, don't you think they could keep the Blu-Ray prices the same?
        • mike17032, on 04/22/2008, -1/+11As a DVD renter from Netflix, I dont feel the need to subsidize the extra cost of BR disks for those that want them.
        • TheFinaleofSeem, on 04/22/2008, -1/+13So Netflix should eat the cost? Should they have to fix their prices at the same level regardless of any new technology that may cost more? Blu-Ray will keep building up, but it may be a little while before prices fall to a more reasonable level. Netflix is going to keep buying Blu-Ray movies as they come out. They can't just keep eating that cost. I sure hope you never run a business.
          • MScrip, on 04/23/2008, -5/+2Hey, I'm just speaking for the consumer! Every Blu-Ray owner on here is threatening to run to Blockbuster if Netflix raises Blu-Ray prices! I don't care either way!!! We like Netflix and hate Blockbuster... remember?
        • AON99, on 04/22/2008, -1/+6Counter arguement:

          Netflix is a billion dollar company. Blu-Ray is a tiny % of their inventory. Why should they give a steep discount to such a tiny % of their customer base, when that user base obviously has extra disposable income (seeing that they already bought a blueray player) compared to the vast majority of their customers?
          • juanchopancho, on 04/23/2008, -1/+2Dude I got a combo HD & blu ray player for $300. Cheap & it works great!
          • Leo21k, on 04/23/2008, -0/+2My DVD player cost $15.99, that's cheap.
      • p0tent1al, on 04/22/2008, -3/+25Because it's deceptive. Charge a cheap price for Blu-Ray, wait until tons of people sign up for your service just for the fact that you now carry Blu-Ray, and then all of a sudden up the price? Blu-Ray has been the price it has, since it came out. So basically so sum it up, they pulled the ol' switcheroo on their customers.
        • Jrr6415sun, on 04/22/2008, -2/+7then their customers can just cancel?
          • p0tent1al, on 04/23/2008, -2/+4yeah they can, which is why this article is relevant. I was merely responding to the people who had the "so what they are jacking up prices" attitude.
      • mooninite, on 04/23/2008, -0/+2What? I get my Blu-ray from Amazon.com. I pay the same for DVD as I do for Blu-ray.

        I paid for *ONE* movie at "cheapo-depot" A.K.A. Wal-mart at $30 when it is online for $20 (SHIPPING INCLUDED). Rip off at stores. Buy online. I'm never buying a movie in a store again.
    • laserob, on 04/22/2008, -6/+26I see .mkv files in my future...
      • feliks2, on 04/22/2008, -4/+14I see them in my past.
        • wageslaven, on 04/23/2008, -6/+2Why anyone would want to bother with plastic discs is beyond me. The same reason that the audio-cd is doomed, the DVD and BR discs are.
        • rizla420, on 04/23/2008, -0/+2I dunno, i think DVD's and now HD DVD's will have a longer shelf life than CD's given the size of a full dvd rip. Most people dont either have the bandwith/patience or knowledge to get full rips. I dont know how many people would want divx files that then require either a standalone player that recognizes it or watching it on their PC's. DVD's are still int he domain of the living room. Maybe if we move more towards a HTPC convergance, then it'll be viable, but def not within a year/two timeframe.
    • AON99, on 04/22/2008, -9/+15Bad move?
      Ok, Blue Ray disks cost more. It makes sense that they would cost more to rent unless you have some real good reason they shouldn't.
      Do Blue-Ray disks have a much longer play life than DVDs for some reason? Do they resist scratches much better so they don't need to be replaced as often? Are they more immune than DVDs to being lost in the mail, or accidently damaged than DVDs? Is there any other thing you can think of that spreads out their larger cost more? If not, then you have no good reason to take the position you have.
      When you go rent a car, a big expensive luxury car is going to cost more to rent than an economy subcompact. It costs more and degrades in value over roughly the same length of time. To recoup their larger investment for it, they have to charge more for each rental.
      You guys sound bitter because you bought a Blue-Ray player, but didn't compute the higher cost of their disks into your thoughts of total cost of ownership.
      • bluesatin, on 04/22/2008, -2/+10If I remember correctly, blu-ray discs did have a lot harder coating than standard DVDs...
        But that may well have been just been marketing scam, besides, I'm pretty sure it's generally the content that looses value quicker on something as cheap as a DVD rental.
      • DarkShroud, on 04/22/2008, -2/+3Blu-ray last longer than DVDs. I've rented plenty of Blu-ray and they all look great. The DVDs have plenty of scratches.
        • AON99, on 04/23/2008, -2/+4Because it would be impossible in this anecdotal evidence that the DVDs had been passed around through the hands of more customers than the Blu-ray disks, which have a much much smaller user base?...
        • marx2k, on 04/23/2008, -2/+5By that infallible logic, 2008 quarters are made out of indestructable, unscratchable metal while 1950s quarters are made of wax
        • DarkShroud, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1Blu-ray have a proven scratch guard while DVDs do not. This is a simple fact, deal with it.
    • kansai22, on 04/22/2008, -7/+5Yeah Ill just continue to rent my for free from torrent sites. 1080p rips + media server FTW.
    • TheFinaleofSeem, on 04/22/2008, -4/+8Netflix does not set the purchase price of Blu-Ray discs. Should they have to eat that extra cost?
      • marx2k, on 04/23/2008, -8/+1Yes, I'm sure Netflix employees are going to Best Buy to buy up as many BR discs as they can to send to customers. I'm sure they don't have special deals on media.
    • Rsulliv1, on 04/23/2008, -2/+3I don't think any commenter actually hit the real issue yet.

      The issue is that people, like myself, that signed up for netflix in the beginning (2000 for me) receive a "grandfathered" rate. I currently have the same rate that I signed up for in 2000. This plan, nor the matching rate, exist now. So, if netflix is saying that we have to make a plan update in order to rent HD discs, we'll lose the perk we now have. This perk is for sticking with Netflix for so long and being an early adopter to their service.

      I understand that we're not owed anything, but people have to understand that it's been a long journey with Netflix and it's not always been great. Their policy was to allow us to keep our plans, and now that may change. It's not great PR and it's also appears (to me) to be a bit underhanded.

      I did call netflix and verify that they have not officially made this decision. They are only considering an additional surcharge to existing accounts, but this is not set in stone. They could go either way on this. I voiced my concern and that this is the general opinion on this... I don't think it'll make much difference unless everyone calls

      1-877-638-3549
      open 24/7

  • Donoram, on 04/22/2008, -18/+44Netflix' next big business plan; dicking customers just as bad as Blockbuster did!
    • KMartSheriff, on 04/22/2008, -5/+4It's funny how everyone thought Netflix was somehow "better". They're still a company no matter what.
    • marx2k, on 04/23/2008, -0/+3As someone who has seen Netflix' financial department at work, they're dicking customers a hell of a lot more than most people think
    • Darph.Bobo, on 04/23/2008, -6/+2WTF is your problem? Blu-Ray products cost them more. Lost, stolen, missing, damaged BR discs will be much more expensive and traditional discs. So now they're the Anti-Christ? It's the same business decision you'd have to make if you were in their shoes. Don't be a ***** tool! Scratch that, you're on digg and that's just your nature to be clueless, stupid and ignorant.
      • mekareami, on 04/23/2008, -0/+2Actually the blu ray disks I have purchased were the same price as their non blu ray counterparts. I cannot imagine that they would be 25% higher cost to buy in bulk... This is about charging a premium for a larger profit margin.

        Also, like to point out that you are also on digg... Pot, meet Kettle
    • Pyroteknik, on 04/23/2008, -2/+2This is a smart move by Netflix for one simple reason: the early adopters of Blu-Ray have already shown, with their purchases, that they are less sensitive to price than average consumers. Netflix is letting customers price discriminate all by themselves, because really, aren't you going to pony up a few extra bucks to watch movies on your brand new $600 movie player and $2000 TV? It's just good business practices.
  • jahoo876, on 04/22/2008, -24/+2i dug 4 the 300 pic ROFLMFAO
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AdFA6WWJ7E
    vid on this
    • ieatpizza, on 04/22/2008, -3/+38ROFLMAO OMG 300 BEST MOVIE EVER CAUSE MY MOM LET ME WATCH IT AND SHE DIDNT KNOW IT HAS BLOOD SHE THOUGHT IT WAS ABOUT MATH I KNOW HOW TO POST HYPERLINKS
  • mattiP, on 04/22/2008, -8/+48I love the image posted with this story :)

    Seriously though, we're used to paying more for hi-definition because a few years ago, it DID cost a lot more to produce and distribute. Now that hi-definition content is cheaper and easier to make, the price should be going DOWN, not up. A big F U to netflix on this one :(
    • TheFinaleofSeem, on 04/22/2008, -7/+6Netflix doesn't set the cost of Blu-Ray discs, which are a lot more expensive than DVDs even if they're getting bulk discounts (which they would be getting on DVDs as well). Blu-Ray costs more to buy, costs more to rent locally, and Netflix can't just eat that cost on their end.
      • SkippyDoorknob, on 04/22/2008, -2/+8Of course they can eat the costs. It may cut into their profits, but it could result in more subscriptions that would make up the difference.
        • TheFinaleofSeem, on 04/22/2008, -2/+3No it wouldn't, because people who generally buy Blu-Ray players have already paid a premium on the player, pay a premium on the TV, pay a premium on the movie purchases, pay a premium on HD dish/cable, pay a premium on local Blu-Ray rentals. They would expect to pay more here and would likely not have a problem doing so. If they don't like the cost, then they can rent the DVD, because they're not likely to get HD rentals cheaper anywhere else. It's going to do very, very little to drive customers away.
          • wageslaven, on 04/23/2008, -1/+1That customer sounds like he doesnt mind paying a premium.

            I'd be willing to bet some Accountant/MBA at Netflix ran some numbers that showed them they could do this without loosing BR customers.

            Hello, my name is Price Elasticity.
          • Emmo213, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1You mean: Hello, my name is Price Inelasticity.
      • DarkShroud, on 04/22/2008, -1/+4They don't pay retail prices. They buy in bulk for a fraction of the price.
        • wageslaven, on 04/23/2008, -2/+1Yes, that is accurate. But, consider (something like) this:

          DVD from retail == $10. BR from retail == $20
          DVD from the MPAA == $5. BR from the MPAA == $10

          This is the Netflix passing their costs down.
        • philhatesyou, on 04/23/2008, -0/+3wageslaven, that's a bunch of *****. DVD prices have declined over the past few years. Have Netflix rates declined in a similar fashion? No, of course not. That's because the price of the media has a very minimal impact on their business model. That, or they're just trying to fist us.
      • notadiggtard, on 04/23/2008, -1/+1They've been renting them for a long time at the same price,now suddenly they realize they cost more?That's what many object to.If they need to charge more they should have done it from day one.
        Reminds me of ATM fees,back in the 80s,any bank,no fee.Then once everybody got used to it Bang!$2.50 a pop.
        • wageslaven, on 04/23/2008, -3/+1Now that Sony has paid BILLIONS to the MPAA to kill HD-DVD, they've probably raised the prices.
          • DarkShroud, on 04/23/2008, -0/+2It's never been proven that Sony paid out money. Toshiba on the other hand was proven to have paid out. Warner just said no their money.
    • bacon_skoda, on 04/22/2008, -8/+5you asked for blu-ray, this is what you get. eat it.
  • toddmc, on 07/08/2008, -7/+82Back to pirating?
    • ogisdan, on 04/22/2008, -8/+1I'm waiting for a private tracker invite.:/
    • fearlessfx, on 04/22/2008, -0/+23Back to?
    • mnemy, on 04/22/2008, -11/+1good luck pirating BR quality movies
      • marx2k, on 04/23/2008, -0/+9heh... been on any torrent sites lately?
      • solidus636, on 04/23/2008, -0/+2Dude...I've already pirated more than a few BR quality movies...get on some different torrent sites or something.
    • eshiki, on 04/23/2008, -0/+3AARRR!
    • subESC, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1Have you seen that new pirate movie?
      It's rated ARRRRR.
    • kocurejd, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1We're going back to the pile!
  • abgemma, on 04/22/2008, -10/+5DVD DVD... D...V...D......
    • frogman54, on 04/23/2008, -0/+5Don't feel bad. I got the reference. I'll digg you up for McGuirk-isms anytime.
  • Petrarch1603, on 04/22/2008, -7/+38if you don't like it take your business elsewhere, simple as that.
    • davepres, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1That's a GREAT Idea !!!
    • notadiggtard, on 04/23/2008, -1/+2I will if anyone will compete,but at minimum I will go back to DVD only!
  • Rhymenoceros, on 04/22/2008, -1/+2When or how much is this happening for?
  • ogisdan, on 04/22/2008, -9/+31Its not like Bluray costs THAT much more to produce.
    • spikedtuba, on 04/22/2008, -1/+6The poster is correct, and to add to that, although there is a significant increase in production costs for going SD to HD, most if not all of the Blu-ray content coming out is from sources that are already well beyond HDTV resolution because they come from Film or high-end digital equipment. One of the final steps in the process of putting a title out is authoring the DVD/Bluray and at that point, all of the footage is already in a high resolution format. As time goes on and standard definition starts to phase out, you will be paying the higher cost of high definition content because comparatively it initially cost more to produce. Unfortunately, also at some point economies of scale are reached and high definition content actually becomes about the same price to produce as standard definition content. In the end the only people that get screwed are the consumers. To be fair, its not Netflix who should be adjusting their pricing, its the studios who should, over time, come down on theirs.
    • EntropyFan, on 04/23/2008, -5/+2I have to ask, since you seem to know.
      How much more does it cost to produce? Is the life expectancy of the disks the same? What are the operational costs of offering BR?
      If you can answer those, precisely, I'll let you know what the "THAT" cost is.

      • spikedtuba, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1Your extra costs (as compared to a standard definition production) come from the cameras and storage devices and increased computer power needed for HD editing and post production. I couldn't say specifically because its different for every production. You might need 2 cameras, or you might need 20 on some of the highest end live television specials. And your post production can vary as well because of how many editors, animators you might put on it. Life expectancy of the discs I can not comment on but I would assume it would be very similar if not the same as standard DVD. Operational costs would be really just a few hundred dollars extra per burner, but since most of those duplication facilities are custom built anyways, I'm not sure that this cost would be all that much larger than DVD.
    • posure, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1To produce? No, but Blu-ray discs are $35 per if you buy them in a store. I buy mine on Amazon and save atleast some money, but they're still significantly more expensive than DVD's (or HD-DVD's before the format died for that matter).
  • amawg9, on 04/22/2008, -6/+16Blockbuster here I come?
    • DarkShroud, on 04/22/2008, -3/+3I was about to quit Block Buster Ultimate Access in favor of Netflix. But I'll stay with BB now. I can return my envelopes in store to exchange for DVDs or Blu-ray. And once a month you get a coupon for one free movie or game.
      • DivisibleByZero, on 04/23/2008, -0/+6Which Blockbuster plan are you on? My old plan with them let me have unlimited in-store exchanges, plus the 1-a-month coupon. But several months ago they took away the monthly coupon, capped the exchanges at 3 a month, AND jacked up the prices. Now I'm a netflix customer.

        If you're still getting the level of service I used to, you must be paying out the ass.
        • BruceCLin, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1It's all based on the time you signed up. My Total Access Premium account is grandfathered in at $19.99 with 3 at-a-time, Unlimited mailings
          Unlimited in-store movie exchanges +1 FREE bonus Movie or Game Rental E-Coupon / Month. My brother, who signed up the same account a few month after me, got bumped down to 3 in store exchange and the coupon taken away. My friend signed up right at the beginning, and his account stayed the same as mine but with 2 coupon.
      • DarkShroud, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1I should have been a bit more clear with my main complain. Blockbuster is just slow, on average for me it's 3-4 business days. That damn free game rental coupon is like a collar. I just leave getting to rent a game for free, especially if it's a new release.
  • emt1451, on 04/22/2008, -8/+26Dammit...I really liked Netflix...they seemed like a relatively non-evil company that I didn't have much of a problem giving my money to. This changes things...
    • cathpah, on 04/22/2008, -3/+2aaaaaaaaaaaagreed.
    • SkippyDoorknob, on 04/22/2008, -3/+7I would prefer they just bumped the monthly fee across the board by $1 and not said anything as to why (or blame gas prices or something). At least then it wouldn't leave a bad taste in your mouth like with targeting just blu-ray renters.
      • wageslaven, on 04/23/2008, -5/+2You'd like DVD renters to pay the cost of your higher-priced product?

        The mass market has no interest in Netflix, and they have no interest in BR. If the MPAA gave Netflix BR for the same price as DVD, why would the Netflix customer (arleady an early adotper) *buy* BR discs?
    • mike17032, on 04/22/2008, -6/+8Then you are a fool who does not understand economics.
      • emt1451, on 04/23/2008, -1/+4I understand economics. You do not understand good customer service and not being evil.
        • BabaRamDass, on 04/23/2008, -1/+3I have a feeling this is not Netflix's move, but rather they're passing down higher prices from above. Like from the movie industry.
          • emt1451, on 04/23/2008, -0/+3I wish they would just say that then...and not "you're already used to paying more so deal with it."
        • wageslaven, on 04/23/2008, -4/+1Then you are a naive fool.
  • colincornaby, on 04/22/2008, -6/+7Online rentals are starting to look more like the future every day.
    • SkippyDoorknob, on 04/22/2008, -1/+6I just wish our broadband speeds would increase to match that demand.
      • wageslaven, on 04/23/2008, -4/+1Which is faster: Deliver a Disc from Netflix or Download a BR movie?

        Digital Download is already here, discs are expensive, they're annoying and inconvenient. I stopped buying CDs when I found Napster. I stopped going to Blockbuster for DVDs when I found Bittorrent.

        And it had *NOTHING* to do with the price.
    • DivisibleByZero, on 04/23/2008, -1/+1I've watched so many episodes of Sliders on netflix's streaming site, it's ridiculous.
    • jfg84, on 04/23/2008, -1/+0Yeah, because ITunes doesn't employ the same policy and has super fair prices....
    • schroeder, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1Downloading HD over SD will always be more expensive because of the direct cost of bandwidth for such large files to be served.
  • JohnDavis730, on 04/22/2008, -3/+8lame.
  • TheFinaleofSeem, on 04/22/2008, -28/+89Or maybe it's because Blu-Ray discs cost a lot more for Netflix to purchase. Nah, that couldn't be it because the online geek community always needs someone/something new to hate!
    • blixco, on 04/22/2008, -9/+13This is a generation of people who steal music, so wanting something that costs the producer more money, for the same or less is, like, their right, ya know?
    • HypocriteDigg, on 04/22/2008, -13/+5Do you have ANY idea how much Netflix pays for movies? I didn't think so. Quit talking out your ass.
      • blixco, on 04/22/2008, -3/+6Would it surprise you if Blu Ray cost more? This is THE MOVIE INDUSTRY. They overcharge FOR A LIVING.
      • TheFinaleofSeem, on 04/22/2008, -4/+12Hmmm, lemme see: Everywhere you look, Blu-Ray is more expensive than DVD. Do you honestly think that Netflix can get them for the same price as a standard DVD? I'm sure they get volume discounts, but you're high if you think the prices on both are anywhere near the same. Use your brain for two seconds.
    • p0tent1al, on 04/22/2008, -3/+17Question: Why did they choose to up the prices now? Blu-Ray has costed more than DVD's since they came out! It's called deception. They add Blu-Ray, same price as everything. Wait until people sign up, just for the mere fact that Netflix now carries Blu-Ray at regular subscription price. Then jack up the prices.
      • DivisibleByZero, on 04/23/2008, -3/+2Isn't that how pretty much every business works? When you come out with a new product, you sell it at a discount to give people an incentive to try it instead of staying with your competitor.
        • notadiggtard, on 04/23/2008, -0/+4Like the PS3!
        • p0tent1al, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1Name one company that does online rentals that even comes close to the behemoth that is Netflix.

          Yes a lot of business do this, but nonetheless it is deceptive. It is a reason to boycott them and vow never to use them again? No, but it does deserve an article about it, and it does deserve some front page time.
    • kh99, on 04/23/2008, -0/+4But I don't think that's how they do it - I mean, they don't think "we'll charge more for Blu-Ray because it costs more", they think "where can we get away with charging more". I think it's a "hidden" price increase because in 2-3 years Blu-Ray will be the default and everyone will be paying more.
      • galeninjapan, on 04/24/2008, -0/+1Thats how markets work, they will charge the maximum you will pay.
  • OJdidntdoIT, on 04/22/2008, -16/+3GIZ ***** MO...........= BURIED.

    Pieces of *****
    • solidus636, on 04/23/2008, -0/+2Did you seriously just bury it because it's on Gizmodo?...
  • Alix7, on 04/22/2008, -5/+38The choice is clear: Pirate Bay
    • HydrogenOxide, on 04/22/2008, -8/+6WHY THE HELL IS HE GETTING DUGG UP?

      ITS CALLED D-E-M-O-N-O-I-D, it's back, we need to kill that virus-infested ***** we took as a silver trophy.
    • marx2k, on 04/23/2008, -1/+3Correct. Pirate Bay isnt going to charge me more if I download blu ray over standard dvd
  • AnimalTaglits, on 04/22/2008, -9/+32I love how everyone is hopping on the "Netflix is evil" train but don't consider that maybe, just maybe, Netflix is losing money somewhere and needs to make up for it somehow...
    • bacon_skoda, on 04/22/2008, -0/+4or that there is no competition. companies don't do price wars to make gizmodoodoo happy.
      at then end of that war, they reap the rewards.[clap][clap][clap]
    • TheFinaleofSeem, on 04/22/2008, -4/+4Like on the cost of new Blu-Ray discs. Netflix can't just eat the price difference between DVDs and Blu-Ray discs. If Blu-Ray costs a lot more to buy, then they have to offset that by charging more for Blu-Ray rentals. Does that piss you off? Go rant at Sony and the studios.
      • notadiggtard, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1Again-What have they been doing all this time since they started renting them?Quit ignoring that!
      • wageslaven, on 04/23/2008, -2/+1Sony is the studios..... see the problem yet?
        • DarkShroud, on 04/23/2008, -0/+2Sony is one of many studios. And Sony is not head of the BDA either. So this can't just be blamed on Sony.
    • jamaster06, on 04/22/2008, -1/+4Look at their income statement. They are making money hand over fist.
    • mnemy, on 04/22/2008, -1/+4If that's the case, the rep could have phrased it better than "consumers are used to paying more for high-definition." I doubt the cost is that much more. They get more customers due to renewed interest in renting movies as people get their HDTVs and BR players. Also, BR disks are much more resilient than DVDs, so although they cost more, they also last longer.
  • DubBucket, on 04/22/2008, -3/+11Hey, if this means that every Blu-Ray won't be "Very, very, eternally, long wait" I'll pay.
    • XtheXlanternX, on 04/23/2008, -0/+2amen
    • AmateurX, on 04/23/2008, -0/+2My sentiments exactly! I don't mind paying a "modest premium" as long as my damn discs don't ship from across the country!
  • cheezeme, on 04/22/2008, -13/+35It's really not a big deal. I'm sure after Obama wins the election -- he'll just institute some kind of socialized blu-ray rental plan
    • teamgreen02, on 04/22/2008, -6/+5Funniest comment on Digg, ever.
      • giickr, on 04/23/2008, -10/+4if by funniest you me completely stupid then sure
        • oblique63, on 04/23/2008, -4/+8if by completely stupid you mean just quasi-funny and mediocre enough to make you jealous, then sure
  • hooges, on 04/22/2008, -7/+19This is a horrible move. Netflix has a relatively clean rep and I really do love them, but this is just a bad move. Don't screw this up Netflix....
    • TheFinaleofSeem, on 04/22/2008, -5/+7Netflix doesn't set the purchase price of Blu-Ray discs, which is far higher than standard DVDs. How do you propose they offset that cost? Should they just eat it?
      • clackerd, on 04/23/2008, -3/+2just go with the flow. netflix sucks. see how easy that was?
  • jonnyboy1544, on 04/22/2008, -2/+6BOOOOOOO
  • rhbama13, on 04/22/2008, -9/+21Go to Blockbuster Online no extra charge for blu-ray and you can trade them in for in store rentals.
    • mike17032, on 04/22/2008, -2/+6Of course the service costs more in general, so are you really saving money?
      • DarkShroud, on 04/22/2008, -0/+5They also give you one free game rental a month. So it's still in our favor at the moment. If you go with their mail only service it's cheap than Netflix but not as fast.
    • clackerd, on 04/23/2008, -3/+3for now. blockbuster is the one that really sucks. their brick and mortars used to rape all their customers with late charges as much as possible. they will raise their prices too, just because netflix is their only competition.
      • wageslaven, on 04/23/2008, -1/+1Uhm, since the beginning of the rental industry, there were severe late charges. Waayy before BB came along.

        They have to keep their inventory down (space, disc-purchase costs..) - dont want to pay late charges, uhm, dont be late.
    • DivisibleByZero, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1Blockbuster's customer service was terrible (though I haven't had to deal with Netflix's). Every issue I had was handled by somebody overseas with a minimal grasp of English who never actually addressed the problems I reported.
      Their account cancellation page had a "why are you canceling" box that I used to give them some pretty thoughtful suggestions. They decided to respond by telling me (after the fact) that I was limited to 255 characters, then proceeded to bug out the rest of the form. Took me about an hour to finally get it canceled, and they ended up with no feedback as to why. And something tells me that they don't want to know, because they just don't care.

      As for the in-store exchanges...they started severely limiting those (only 3 a month unless I pay an extra $25 or something ridiculous). Netflix's streaming videos are a far superior alternative for me. If I could watch those on my TV more easily, it would be perfect,
      • rhbama13, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1i have the three movies at a time plan it costs 19.99 a month and i have unlimited in store exchanges. so this crap about an extra $25 per month bull *****. also, the cancel process for netflix and blockbuster is about the same (originally had blockbuster then switched to netflix and back to blockbuster for in store), and the survey at the end was optional. i haven't tried netflix "watch on your computer" but to get the same number of blu-ray rentals i would have to pay over $40 per month
        • DivisibleByZero, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1They must have given you a special deal for switching, or you're not using all you exchanges. Current 19.99 / 3 at a time plan only gives you 5 exchanges ( https://www.blockbuster.com/signup/rp/regPlan ). At least at the time I cancelled, the unlimited exchanges plan was a significant amount more. Now they don't even list it.

          As for the cancel form, blockbuster made you select a reason. If you picked "going to a competitor", they forced you to say which one, but (on firefox) didn't recognize that you had actually picked one.
          • DivisibleByZero, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1Oh, theres a "show all plans" link. The one you say you have is shown at $34.99
          • rhbama13, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1well i guess i got in while the price was low because I only pay $19 per month and have unlimited instore. sorry for my bull ***** comment i only looked at my plan i didn't know they jacked up the prices so much, but the "19.99 / 3 at a time plan plus 5 exchanges" plan is a good deal if you want cheap blu-ray's
          • DarkShroud, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1I have the 3 @ a time with unlimited for $19.99 as well. It's because we signed pre in store exchange or during the sign up promotion period when the in store exchange was first started. If we quit or change plans we loose the unlimited at that price.

            My complaint about BB is that they are so damn slow.
          • DivisibleByZero, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1It's odd that they let you sign up and keep that rate. I was in long before the in-store exchanges started, and they just up and jacked the price up on me one day.
    • jfg84, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1Half of my queue was on a wait list when I used BB.
  • JasonCox, on 04/22/2008, -21/+18People actually use BluRay?
    • repick3, on 04/22/2008, -7/+5As opposed to what?
      • Dabisu, on 04/22/2008, -5/+9People who like movies in HD use it.
        • wageslaven, on 04/23/2008, -2/+2People who like movies in HD also use Digital Download services.
          • DarkShroud, on 04/23/2008, -0/+2Name one Digital Download service that does 1080p with 7.1 surround sound. You can't, because HD digital downloads can't even be compared to the quality you can get with Blu-ray and HD-DVDs.

            And for those of us in the Midwest where Comcast reigns king it's faster to wait on a disc in the mail then to download an HD movie.
  • loggia, on 04/22/2008, -6/+20...Eh. I don't think this is such a big deal. The truth is, unlike most Digg readers, the public has given a profound shrug to buying Blu-ray players when regular DVDs still look pretty good - and even better on HD screens.

    The studios are charging more for the Blu-ray discs, so why blame Netflix?
  • blondon, on 04/22/2008, -7/+5Online rentals are the way...

    Even though they have streamlined their delivery process quite well. I'm going to be canceling soon in favor of movies on my AppleTV and Xbox360... just makes more sense to me. Yes I will be suffering in image quality, but having it when I want it and not having to stay on top of some Queue to make sure I'm getting the movies at the right time. Besides... if I want something for the "Quality" Ill just buy it regardless...
    • oblique63, on 04/23/2008, -3/+5AppleTV?... *shiver*
    • jdaniel284, on 04/23/2008, -0/+3I like the XBox 360's reward program better too. You get a Ring point after every HD movie you watch. Collect 10 points and you get the Red Rings of Death.
  • skyz, on 04/22/2008, -4/+5this is a mistake in their thinking - i think they will realize this pretty quickly - bad public relations move -
    • clackerd, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1yeah, those oil companies sure learned that raising prices is definitely NOT the way to go.
      • kh99, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1Yeah, I'll just go buy my oil somewhere else, or do without it.....oh.
  • highlyhigh, on 04/22/2008, -8/+2netflix is evil. last time i was a subscriber, i had some movies stolen out of my mail box. we had video camera evidence, detectives, and netflix was notified of this because the company was the one who was the legal victim. so little later, i call them to clear off the missing movies on my queqee and these bastards wont delete the ones that were reported stolen! I was like wtf you bastards let me talk to the manager! and we were like blah blah blah! and then the manager goes yes we will try to take care of this asap. please await for an email. and i do. and they send me a messege that says ' you have been discontinued from our service. hope to resolve it in the future blah blah blah.' ***** bastards! so as you can see, i have a reasonable distaste for netflix custoner service.
    • mike17032, on 04/22/2008, -1/+4Thats funny, the few times I had something lost in the mail they sent out a replacement right away.

      Sounds like you tried to steal a few to many movies.
    • highlyhigh, on 04/22/2008, -7/+1lol shut up you make assuptions like that about otheres youre gnna get boot up your ass someday, boy. mark my word, boy. BOOOY!~
    • Kronos6948, on 04/22/2008, -1/+11...and I was like "Nuh Uh!" And they were all like "Uh Huh!!" So I said "Bite me!" and they were all like "Whoooaa!"
      • marx2k, on 04/23/2008, -2/+0...and she was all like OMIGOD and I was UH HUH!.. and she was like OMIGOD and we was like OMIGOD NUH UH NO YOU DINT!
      • Twisted871, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1You captured the stupidity of highly's post perfectly.
    • robopuppy, on 04/22/2008, -1/+2Why would you have to have so much evidence over movies that Netflix doesn't even really care about all that much (note that they believe you and remove movies from your queue if you just fill out the web form stating that the movies have gone missing for reasons not under your control)? How would you know they would be stolen to set up a video camera? How much did the detectives cost to track down the $15 in bulk-duped movies?
      • centerblack, on 04/23/2008, -0/+5If you put some netflix's in your mailbox, and wait a few days, and they never receive them, and it happens over and over and over again, obviously something is happening to the dvd's. Go check YouTube, people have posted videos of exactly this kind of ***** happening.

        If you fill out the "movies are lost" form to many times, they can cut your service.
  • HypocriteDigg, on 04/22/2008, -7/+4Screw this *****. I don't NEED HD movies! I can wait until Blu-Ray POS discs are the same price as DVD (which btw my PS3 plays them back worth a *****, as the screen goes blank and sounds cuts out at random times during playback). Goto hell Netflix, I cancelled Blockbuster when they raised prices and I have no problem canceling Netflix.
    • clackerd, on 04/23/2008, -1/+5if you were an animal, i would call you a kangarooster, since you jump up and down while making lots of noise.
  • CoronaVegas, on 04/22/2008, -3/+2As long as I can get them as soon as they are released, no problemo, Friendo!
  • TheLastFreeMan, on 04/22/2008, -8/+7I think MrBabyMan deserves to get kicked down that ***** and be reunited with the rest of his submissions.
  • myranttoyou, on 04/22/2008, -1/+10Wow. If someone had recently made a movie that didn't suck ass, I'd really be upset about renting it.
  • bieber, on 04/22/2008, -7/+8WTF? Why would we expect them to offer Blu-Ray and DVD rentals at the same price, when the Blu-Ray disks are clearly superior technology? Am I missing something here, or are we all just assuming that we're entitled to the best of the best for whatever we feel like paying for it?
    • notadiggtard, on 04/23/2008, -2/+2Um...Maybe because that's what they HAVE been doing since picking up HD?Why did they decide to lose money before?
    • kh99, on 04/23/2008, -1/+1But there are a lot of issues - Netflix doesn't go out and buy discs at Walmart and rent them out, they pay a special price (i.e. more per disc) because they rent them out...or maybe they actually pay a fee per rental, I don't know, I just know they don't pay the same as retail. But the price of the actual media is less of an issue. And movies are already higher def than even HD, so it's not like it costs more for the movie - they actually have to do more processing to get it down to standard def. But of course everyone will use the excuse of it being "superior technology" to charge more even if the cost isn't actually greater. Even Netflix's statement says it. They don't say "this is costing us more", they say "consumers are used to paying more for high-definition,"
  • mbraynard, on 04/22/2008, -3/+16What a lame complaint. Everything costs more for HD. The Dish and Cable HD channels have a premium price, the HD content on Xbox is more than SD, etc. etc.

    The price of something isn't based solely on how much it costs someone to give it to you - it is based on what you are willing to pay for it (same for oil, btw). In the case of BR, there is an unlimited supply so it's pretty much a straight up demand curve function of probability.
    • DarkShroud, on 04/22/2008, -3/+4Put an HD antenna on your house and you can get HDTV signals for free.
  • monkeyrun, on 04/22/2008, -0/+9I think I'll be happy with DVD for a while.
  • jzuska, on 04/22/2008, -15/+11I'm canceling right now.
    • jzuska, on 04/22/2008, -8/+4Way to digg me down. I still canceled the account. I went to blockbuster.com
      • mike17032, on 04/22/2008, -3/+7Your loss.
      • BabaRamDass, on 04/23/2008, -1/+5Good for you, that's the marketplace at work. Competition. Boycotting businesses you don't agree with.

        Of course, I don't blame Netflix too much here; sounds like they had the prices increased on them, so they had to pass that along to the consumer. But hey, you pick your own battles.
        • notadiggtard, on 04/23/2008, -1/+1There has been NO mention of their costs increasing
      • ExSlashdotter, on 04/23/2008, -1/+4I dugg you up. I completely agree, and I just did the same.

        I canceled my XM Radio back in the day when they shut down a bunch of music channels to make bandwidth for a whole slew of low-bitrate, mono talk channels for MLB (which had nothing but a repeating message most of the time).
        • thestaton, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1just cancelled mine as well. it's summer, and we have some great things to look forward at the theatre.
  • 1310nm, on 04/22/2008, -5/+7Blu Ray discs are more expensive...what's so cryptic about it?
    • DarkShroud, on 04/22/2008, -2/+4They last a lot longer so they don't need to be replaced like DVDs do.
      • BabaRamDass, on 04/23/2008, -1/+2They can get lost and stolen just as easily.
      • DarkShroud, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1Before BB started their in store exchange program I would drop my movies off at the post office. It's faster and cuts down on the theft.
  • mike17032, on 04/22/2008, -7/+8Well no ***** *****, the disks cost about 2x as much as DVDs. Why wouldnt it cost more to be able to rent them? Be glad you got it for free for as long as you did.

    I have a Netflix account, and I love the service. We dont even know how much extra it will be yet.
    • DarkShroud, on 04/22/2008, -3/+42x as much? What are you smoking? At retail through Best Buy they're not even twice as expensive. This isn't even counting Netflix's volume discount.
      • BabaRamDass, on 04/23/2008, -2/+2And it shouldn't count the volume discount, as I'm sure they get one for regular DVDs as well.

        The fact is Blu Ray technology costs a ***** more than DVD technology. DVD is established and has been around for a long time, we all have burners in our computers, and the discs themselves are cents to produce. Blu Ray on the other hand is still establishing itself.
        • kh99, on 04/23/2008, -1/+1But what "Blu Ray technology" are we talking about, as far as Netflix is concerned? Just the manufacturing cost of the discs, and that's got to be a small part of their cost per rental, doesn't it? I don't know exactly how much more the Blu Ray media costs, but I bet it's not much, and not enough to make Netflix lose money on Blu Ray. Maybe the movie studios are charging them more fo Blu Ray content, but again it shouldn't actually be costing the movie studios more, since the movie is already high def and needs to be processed down either way.
  • CrimsonBlur, on 04/22/2008, -9/+21To those saying they can't eat the increased cost of buying Blu-ray discs: "*****!"

    Netflix makes a killing off DVD rentals because they buy them in bulk for dirt-cheap and most people don't rent anywhere close to the amount of movies their 3-disc subscription is "meant" to pay for. Netflix knows this, so that itself pays for any discrepancy in Blu-ray costs.

    Further, I highly doubt the purchase cost to retailers (and Netflix/Blockbuster) is significantly higher that it would hurt their profit margins. Many Blu-ray movies are already starting to sell at the $19.95 price point upon their initial release, which is exactly what DVD's sell for now.

    The sole reason Netflix is increasing the price is because they can, evidenced by the quote, "people are used to paying more for HD." They're raising the price simply because they see an opportunity to make even more money while they still can, not because they are losing money from the cost of Blu-ray discs.
    • mike17032, on 04/22/2008, -7/+5Its a good thing you have such an inside track on Netflix's business model and expenses. Clearly they should hire your ass as their chief financial advisor. Better go give your two weeks notice at Mc D's.

      BRs are starting to become more popular, so chances are that its just to big of a hit for Netflix to absorb the extra cost of the disks (and dont kid yourself, they are still damn close to 2x what a DVD costs). When it was new and fewer people were renting them, the loss was easy to take. The more people want them, the larger that loss becomes. None of this is hard to understand.
      • CrimsonBlur, on 04/22/2008, -0/+8What I described above is how subscription services like Netflix work. They rely on most customers not utilizing the full potential of the service to make up for the people that do, the low margins of offering a bulk service helps keep profit margins even higher. That's not some magical insight or anything.
        • kh99, on 04/23/2008, -0/+3I think you're exactly right. The idiots like that one above think that because Walmart charges more for Blu-Ray that it must be costing Netflix more. But the only extra cost is possibly a small amount per disc more for the actual media (which will go away when BR replaces DVDs), and that's nothing to Netflix. Obviously the way a business works is they determine (as best they can) what pricing structure will result in the highest profit, not (necessarily) "this is costing us more so we'll raise prices". You don't have to have the "inside track on Netflix's business model" to figure that one out.
    • CrimsonBlur, on 04/22/2008, -1/+3I notice I'm starting to get buried... I think I should add that I don't actually see anything inherently wrong with them raising the price of HD until it becomes more ubiquitous as HD is more expensive everywhere, I'm still going to keep my Netflix account and rent Blu-ray movies.

      I just hate it when people "defend" companies that are simply making a profit, trying to make them sound so altruistic. Get a grip.
    • bieber, on 04/23/2008, -3/+1How is anyone trying to make them sound altruistic? They aren't, and I don't expect them to be. I expect them to, as any company does, maximize their profits. The problem here is that people seem to think that for some reason, Netflix should care more about their personal idea of what price is "fair" than their own balance sheets, which is absolutely ridiculous. Why would they charge less than the equilibrium market price?
      • CrimsonBlur, on 04/23/2008, -0/+5Because iif they raise their prices, and Blockbuster never does (there's no indication they will), guess who all of the PS3/HDTV owners are going to start renting their Blu-ray movies? It's just a needless move to make a few extra bucks that could be a really stupid one.

        If they both raise the price then I won't care, but if Blockbuster doesn't I'm going to switch, there is a Blockbuster within walking distance of where I live. The only reason I've stuck with Netflix is their prices are slightly better and I like the company more, but lately they've been making some odd moves. This decision would pretty much seal the deal for me and a lot of other people I think.
    • BabaRamDass, on 04/23/2008, -2/+3"They're raising the price simply because they see an opportunity to make even more money while they still can, not because they are losing money from the cost of Blu-ray discs."

      Good for them. If people ARE WILLING TO PAY FOR THE INCREASE then what the ***** is the problem? Go to Blockbuster or do without if you don't want to pay for the increase, but don't make Netflix out to be this big bad corporation that sacrifices virgins to the gods. It's called supply and demand. The price you pay is what the market will bear.
  • cresswga, on 04/22/2008, -1/+9I was actually looking forward to the Blu Ray rentals when I got a PS3 but regular DVDs look good enough on my TV so I don't think I will bother thanks.
    • RyeBrye, on 04/23/2008, -0/+5You might want to consider upgrading to an HD TV
    • cresswga, on 04/23/2008, -0/+1I have a 50" 1080p plasma with an upconverting DVD player. It still looks good.
  • HydrogenOxide, on 04/22/2008, -1/+4By the time this comes out, I won't need to have netflix send me movies.
    WatchNow on PS360 FTW
  • Iccanui, on 04/22/2008, -4/+4Netflix is dropping the ball. First they upgraded their DRM on the on-demand service to make it so it only outputs to a monitor which killed my HDTV setup ( sorta mwwhahaha ) and now this.

    Can we please have a competitor to keep this company in line please? Apparently they arent one of the golden companies.
  • jamaster06, on 04/22/2008, -0/+2I was just about to join Netflix since DirecTV just restricted our PPV retention. Now I'm going to wait.
  • hagfish70, on 04/22/2008, -2/+6Blockbuster online could capitalize on this. Advertise no extra cost for BluRay along with some promotional deals and I bet the could steal some of NetFlix's customers in a minute, son!
  • YankeesSuck, on 04/22/2008, -1/+5Can I get a discount for only getting HDDVD's then?
    • monkeyrun, on 04/23/2008, -0/+2Your subscription will be almost useless in a few months.
  • skellener, on 04/22/2008, -9/+13BluRay discs are from $25-$45 retail. Regular DVDs are from $8-$20 retail. Of course it's going to cost more to rent BluRay. Want the higher quality? You'll have to pay for it at some point (unless you pirate it). BluRay ain't coming down in price for a good 4-5 years. Regular DVDs will be with us for a long while.
    • deadbaby, on 04/22/2008, -4/+12Stop with that silly logic stuff comrade. People today don't think it's fair for a company to make any money. In fact, making money is evil. (unless you're Google or Apple then it's OK)
      • skellener, on 04/22/2008, -1/+2I hear 'ya deadbaby
      • OpaqueMurdock, on 04/23/2008, -1/+1Quite a few people seem to think Apple is evil for making money on well made products, so I am not sure any company is safe from this thinking... strange trend.

        The thing I find interesting is that the cost of the extra charge isn't even mentioned... hell it could be like a dollar a month for all we know. Is that really worth going nuts over? Going to the theater costs $14 dollars for by wife and I. The charge would have to be quite big for us to change our minds about Netflix being a good deal. More and more we are skipping the films at the art house and the films that may not be "great" and only seeing the ones we feel require the "experience" of a theater. We have saved I ton of money over the last year. More Blu-ray rentals will open that up even more and I am betting the pocketed cash from a single additional saved trip to the theater will cover any additional "blu-ray charge", possibly even several months worth.
    • stevenk87, on 04/23/2008, -2/+1What?! Netflix is passing on the extra costs to the consumers? THIS IS MADNESS!!!!
    • DarkShroud, on 04/23/2008, -0/+2Quit buying Blu-ray at Best Buy.
  • SgtBaker, on 04/22/2008, -5/+7The tone of the article implies that the author has some sense of entitlement. I'm not a fan of that.
    Early adapters -always- pay a premium to be ahead of the curve. Blu-Ray players, discs, and televisions capable of giving the picture and audio quality expected from them are still much more expensive than the hardware to run DVD's.
    Why is this move surprising or terrible? You're paying for a far superior product, and expect the cost of its technological predecessor even though it's still a niche market?
    • crodulfo, on 04/22/2008, -2/+5but why raise the price? apparently what is/was being paid was enough to cover that.
  • robopuppy, on 04/22/2008, -7/+9Netflix early adopters = Blu-ray adopters? I don't own Blu-ray and likely won't.
    I think the Netflix statement makes perfect sense. Blu-rayers obviously have money. Money = buy movies, all 50 that are out on Blu-ray. Want to rent? Pay a little extra for the HD content, just like you've been doing. You'll run out of movies in like 3 weeks anyway.
    • viewofeverlast, on 04/23/2008, -0/+4"Blu-rayers obviously have money"

      An online movie rental service that ships films to your mailbox is a luxury...Blu-Ray or not.
      • imjohn, on 04/23/2008, -0/+0Agreed -- but it is a luxury that bills itself as less expensive.

  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 101 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.