Netflix is proud to present password crackdown and backlog of strike-avoiding content
Netflix isn't worried about users canceling over new password sharing program or losing content from writers strike
Aux News Netflix
In what is sure to be a popular move, Netflix is moving forward with its password-sharing prevention program. The long-threatened new modus operandi has already launched in Canada, New Zealand, Spain, and Portugal (plus a test run in Latin America), but it’ll be coming soon to a device near you in the coming weeks, according to Netflix’s first-quarter earnings results for 2023 (via IndieWire).
“In Q1, we launched paid sharing in four countries and are pleased with the results. We are planning on a broad rollout, including in the U.S., in Q2,” the streamer announced.
As a refresher, this means that Netflix users will have to set a primary location for their accounts, and only users within that household will be able to share that account’s password. Primary users can add users outside their household for an additional fee. Travelers can access their accounts on the go (e.g., in a hotel room) with a temporary verification code.
Per IndieWire, Netflix knows some of its spoiled subscribers will cancel altogether with this step, but the service isn’t too worried about it. Apparently, it’s seen success in Canada with wringing a few extra dollars out of users paying that bonus household fee, or even new sign-ups conceding to the Basic With Ads tier. The streamer expects similar success in the U.S. (at least eventually), and Netflix is still enough of a novelty in some countries worldwide that subscriptions may not slow down at all.
It would seem a bad time to alienate subscribers with an ever-more-likely writer strike on the horizon, but Netflix isn’t too worried about that, either. At the earnings review on Tuesday, co-CEO Ted Sarandos reassured that Netflix respects writers, really, and it wants to avoid a strike and find an equitable solution, really. But—and this is a big but—if the strike goes forward, “we have a large base of upcoming shows and films from around the world, so we can probably serve our members better than most,” he said (per IndieWire). “We really don’t want this to happen, but we have to make plans for the worst, so we do have a pretty robust slate of releases to take us into a long time.”
Netflix does indeed plan its slate well in advance, so it has many projects already in production, meaning the effects of a strike will be a lot less obvious than the television shutdown that occurred in 2007. However, WGA members have also spoken up about the common streaming-era practice of studios employing “mini rooms.” In some cases, this means a writers’ room is assembled and generates a full season’s worth of scripts before production even begins, meaning these companies have access to a backlog of content that can be moved into production even if there are no writers working. In fact, studios have “been preparing for years” for exactly this eventuality, The Bear writer Alex O’Keefe recently told The A.V. Club, “because they understand how screwed up the industry is and they understand that the writers are pissed, they’ve been stockpiling scripts in order to prepare for a massive work stoppage.”
“But just to be clear, we’re at the table, and we’re going to try and get to an equitable solution so there is no strike,” Sarandos clarifies. It should be noted that Netflix, which virtually created streaming culture as we know it today, is at least partially responsible for the conditions that have led up to the current contentious contract negotiations. That includes lack of residual pay, shorter episode orders per season (meaning less work and therefore less money), and frequently fewer seasons (meaning fewer writers being promoted, meaning fewer writers learning the business and reaching career stability, and also, again, less money), among other issues. The current WGA contract expires on May 1, after which the guild has voted in an overwhelming majority to strike if an agreement is not reached in negotiations.
28 Comments
I have zero problem with this move. Netflix is not a utility, and they are allowed to run their business however they please. They are also allowed to make changes to their policies at any time. They are not required to maintain the “status quo”, just because some people are upset about change.I also appreciate how openly defiant they are towards losing subscribers, basically saying “Bye, Felicia!”Their future revenue will determine whether or not this was a bad idea.
I think the emergence of ad supported tiers is more than making up for any subscriber bleeding that is happening with the big services (Netflix and HBO Max, primarily).
I also am not sympathetic about shorter seasons with fewer episodes. I really am not interested in shows spinning their wheels over 22+ episode seasons anymore.
lol what the fuck are you talking about, you could say the same about literally every business decision any company makes. this comment reads like it was written by ChatGPT, the decade-old meme is the cherry on top
Thanks for your opinion, and adding to the conversation…human
What’s your point? RE: the business decision, not the bit about the dude being a AI bot.
“Netflix is not a utility, and they are allowed to run their business however they please.”No one was saying otherwise. It’s just a completely pointless and empty comment that boils down to “no one should complain about corporate decisions because they’re allowed to make those decisions.” Just nonsense.
“Netflix is not a utility, and they are allowed to run their business however they their shareholders please.”Fixed that for you!
But seriously: they’re not open to losing subscribers; that’s the exact opposite reason for why they’re doing this. They need more subscribers, because that’s the major way their growth is measured, and if they don’t get more subscribers, then their stock will tank. So they are hoping this move will push people who were “leeching” subscriptions to sign up for new subscriptions, like it did in Canada and elsewhere.To say Netflix is “not worried about it” is editorializing from the author of this article; they are most definitely worried about losing subscribers. Nowhere do they say they are not worried about it. From IndieWire:“While this will shift some of the membership growth and revenue benefit from Q2 to Q3, we believe it will result in a better outcome for our members and our business. Longer term, paid sharing will ensure a bigger revenue base from which we can grow as we improve our service.”They’re literally saying “don’t expect much from this earnings report, but just wait til you see the next one!” to placate Wall Street. If I’m wrong and someone can point to where Netflix is being flippant about this, please do so.
“It would seem a bad time to alienate subscribers”
Although it’s probably more alienating non-subscribers.
If my parents can’t use my account, I’m cancelling it. Neither of us watch it enough to justify the prices they’re now charging. I might not be in the majority of users, but in an over-crowded streaming marketplace, alienating any users doesn’t seem like a particularly bright business decision.
Yeah, the main point of most of these articles seems to be that Netflix should be wary about upsetting people who have specifically chosen to not actually be their customers. Why? “this person who gives Netflix no money know will continue to give them no money because of this decision.”
People who split a bill maybe?
I’m furious they are going to block me from using my ex-girlfriend’s account!
Never been happier I cancelled my subscription.
don’t you mean Mommy and Daddy cancelled their subscription?
So how did you get brain damage?
Also, is it just Netflix that always makes you go through their website to cancel the subscription? I routinely toggle my subscriptions on/off through my phone depending on what I’m watching. I know Roku and Apple TV have the same type of organized page to lets you know your current apps and when they renew but Netflix never appears on that page. You can’t cancel it through the app, you have to go on the website through a browser to even have the account options. Is that just the way I signed up for it or is this the same for everybody?
I believe it is done this way to bypass different App Store restrictions/regulations. Directing users to a browser for managing monetary subscriptions prevents them from having to give a percentage to the different app stores that they use to publish their app. Not sure if this is true, but that’s what I’ve heard.
All the app stores charge a fairly large commission to take payments through their storefront, so Netflix doesn’t support subscriptions through any App Store. There’s rules about how telling people to manage subscriptions elsewhere, so it’s kinda a nightmare of multiple bad corporate policies.
“In Q1, we launched paid sharing in four countries and are pleased with the results.”
I’m pretty pleased, too. I’m saving $15 a month and still managing to find all the Netflix content I’m interested in for free!
“THE ARTIFICIAL QUARTER-OVER-QUARTER ‘GROWTH’ WILL CONTINUE UNTIL MORALE IMPROVES!”
I just don’t get what problem this is intended to solve. I’d be very surprised if they have any objective data that says they’re losing a significant number of accounts due to account sharing.There are so many legitimate uses of their service that this will render useless. What if I do extended travel, have a winter home, use a VPN, have a child in college, etc.? If any of these are for any length of time, that temporary code won’t cut it. They really don’t want me as a customer or assume I’ll shell out for multiple accounts? No other streaming company, or cable company for that matter, is doing this.
If they had done this a few years ago when we weren’t inundated with streaming services, I think this move would have worked fine. But I think they’re going to find that their content library isn’t as ironclad as they seem to think it is. I mean damn, they should have at least been smart about it and made this move right before debuting a new season of Stranger Things or something.
meaning these companies have access to a backlog of content that can be moved into production even if there are no writers working So, the other performers’ guilds won’t honor the writers’ strike? So much for Solidarity Forever.
This is the best business decision Disney/WB/Paramount/[every VPN service that’ll help people pirate things] have ever made! Jokes aside, I think the real problem with this plan is (apparently if I’m reading the article right) allowing unlimited logins in “one household” factor. It’s explicitly against not just adults who share one login across distances (like me and my parents), but against divorced/separated parents who might share joint custody of kids. A smarter move, imo, would be to limit a basic account to 2, maybe 3 devices, then start charging for additions.
Netflix keeps emailing me after I cancelled service a while back. Can’t say that I miss it at all.
If I up my subscription to 4 devices it shouldn’t matter where they are