[b4pjoe]

It's your responsibility to log out of the account when you check out. It's been a few years since I've used it but I seem to remember that there's some mechnism that when you check out, it logs you out, but I'm not certain. I get your concern about forgetting to log out and being at the mercy of the next person to use your credentials. I thought about that too. And yes that's a real concern. My point is, it's being done and it's certainly a way to access ST outside of your home, if you wanted to. The technology is certainly available, and on a massive scale.

And yes, with 4g and even 5g available, maybe the need to log into a bar's WiFi might not even be needed (though it would probably be more robust than even a 5g signal which is dependent on location.)

Netflix is going start charging extra for logging in outside of the home. Netflix is finally going after password sharing. Here’s how it’s likely to work

 

[harsh]

Netflix is going start charging extra for logging in outside of the home.

They've been rattling this saber for years and it still hasn't happened. I think they may be concerned that it will cause more departures than new accounts given that account holders can't spread the cost across their extended families.

 

[James Long]

It's been a few years since I've used it but I seem to remember that there's some mechnism that when you check out, it logs you out, but I'm not certain.

I cannot speak for every TV in every hotel in the country, but one local business in my area has Android driven set top boxes with access to all the major streaming platforms plus web browsing. The devices are wiped twice between customers ... immediately on check out and immediately on check in. The apps remain but all the private settings are cleared. The remote controls the STB not the TV directly (HDMI-CEC control for volume and power) so it would be difficult to use any apps built in to the TV.

It did surprise me the first time I walked into a hotel room and found the TV on with a "Welcome James" message on the screen. I am accustomed to "power on channels" with hotel information but a personalized welcome screen is a nice touch.

 

[James Long]

Netflix is going start charging extra for logging in outside of the home. Netflix is finally going after password sharing. Here’s how it’s likely to work

That might work. A couple dollar fee that will allow customers to share their accounts and focusing on the accounts with the most users.

 

[NashGuy]

They've been rattling this saber for years and it still hasn't happened. I think they may be concerned that it will cause more departures than new accounts given that account holders can't spread the cost across their extended families.

Hasn't yet happened in the US. But Netflix has, in fact, already rolled out an account sharing fee in three Latin American test markets: Costa Rica, Chile and Peru. Obviously, account sharing isn't something they're concerned about only in three small LatAm countries. They're trying it out in relatively unimportant markets first before shaking things up in bigger, more impactful markets. (See link posted above by b4pjoe.)

And Netflix indicated on their last quarterly call (when they announced a surprising, small Q1 global sub dip and anticipated a huge 2M drop for Q2) that they're contemplating some way to address account sharing here in the US (or even globally). Don't kid yourself. It's coming here.

 

[harsh]

And Netflix indicated on their last quarterly call (when they announced a surprising, small Q1 global sub dip and anticipated a huge 2M drop for Q2) that they're contemplating some way to address account sharing here in the US (or even globally). Don't kid yourself. It's coming here.

My point was that this wasn't the first time that Netflix had broached the subject and it probably isn't the last time they talk/warn about it before it actually happens in the US market.

 

[NashGuy]

My point was that this wasn't the first time that Netflix had broached the subject and it probably isn't the last time they talk/warn about it before it actually happens in the US market.

Agreed. They'll make some noise about it at least once more, to get American consumers conditioned to what's coming, before they finally do drop the bomb on us. If it hasn't arrived here within the next 12 months, I'll be quite surprised. And I expect an ad-supported Netflix plan to become available in the US by the end of 2023, if not sooner.

 

[James Long]

I expect the account sharing fee within a year .. not sure about the ads. Normally services offer an ad tier to keep the price low and charge more for (mostly) ad free. Netflix users can keep their price low by buying less streams. Unless Netflix wants a one (SD) stream for $5 price point. Two HD streams for $10 with ads?

Not expecting Sunday Ticket via Netflix.

 

[Steveknj]

I am not disputing the technology. I am disputing your claim that people are going to want to go to a bar and watch a football game on their 5" screen with their own Sunday Ticket account whether the bar provides internet or not. If Apple has no commercial access for bars/restaurants they are going to be preventing a lot of money from falling into their pockets. I would think, maybe wrongly as I haven't ever saw the numbers for commercial, that the commercial Sunday Ticket is a money maker for DirecTV based on how much it costs while residential is the big money loser even at $400 per season.

Maybe you're right and they won't want to go to a bar to watch. And, well that's just too bad. Times change. If I'm Apple, I'm not in the business to placate bar and restaurant owners. I'm in the business to to make money and get as many subscribers as possible. It's up to bar owners and restaurant owners to figure out a way to give customers another reason to come to the establishment. Just like any time tech changes, there's winners and losers. I'm not an Apple fan, but I also don't think it's Apple's responsibility to make sure these establishments have Sunday Ticket either. Apple needs to do what's best for Apple.

 

[b4pjoe]

Maybe you're right and they won't want to go to a bar to watch. And, well that's just too bad. Times change. If I'm Apple, I'm not in the business to placate bar and restaurant owners. I'm in the business to to make money and get as many subscribers as possible. It's up to bar owners and restaurant owners to figure out a way to give customers another reason to come to the establishment. Just like any time tech changes, there's winners and losers. I'm not an Apple fan, but I also don't think it's Apple's responsibility to make sure these establishments have Sunday Ticket either. Apple needs to do what's best for Apple.

It is in Apple's best interests to offer a commercial package. If not they will be throwing money away...which Apple never does.

 

[harsh]

It is in Apple's best interests to offer a commercial package. If not they will be throwing money away...which Apple never does.

Apple doesn't have a particularly stellar record in dealing with commercial entities.

 

[b4pjoe]

Apple doesn't have a particularly stellar record in dealing with commercial entities.

It is not rocket science.

 

[James Long]

It is in Apple's best interests to offer a commercial package. If not they will be throwing money away...which Apple never does.

I am sure Apple will do the math and determine whether or not a commercial offering could be profitable. DIRECTV is losing money on their distribution. While Apple streaming opens up the base for potential subscribers far beyond people willing to pay for DIRECTV any commercial offering needs to be profitable on its own. Expecting residential streaming income to cover commercial losses is not good math.

DIRECTV can rationalize their losses since every subscriber also pays for a high price satellite package. Apple could not rationalize a loss.

 

[b4pjoe]

Is there proof that DirecTV wasn't making a profit on the commercial side while taking a bath on the residential side. Unless they sold very few commercial packages I would think, based on the prices they charged for commercial, that they might have made money on the commercial side but lost all of that and more on the residential side. As far as I know those numbers have been made public though.

 

[James Long]

It is hard to say. Even the claimed financial loss on the service is a matter of bookkeeping. Overall DIRECTV was a profitable service (at last report) making about $20 per subscriber per month in profit. Strict bookkeeping may have placed what they collected in subscriptions for Sunday Ticket below the $1.5 billion they were paying ... but having Sunday Ticket led to more people paying for the satellite service that not only covered the line item loss but turned a decent profit. Apple TV + doesn't make $20 per subscriber per month in profit.

 

[harsh]

It is not rocket science.

That hasn't seemed to help.

 

[harsh]

Is there proof that DirecTV wasn't making a profit on the commercial side while taking a bath on the residential side.

DIRECTV's numbers have been obscured for several years now. What we know as fact is that the joint venture put into writing that AT&T would be responsible for some or all of the losses. That such a clause exists suggests that there was little hope of making a profit.

If you compare the per-head prices, the residential version likely offers a much higher profit margin to DIRECTV. $650 spread over up to 100 patrons is a much better value than $300 for what you can fit in front of your TV screen.

The cost of operating NFLST isn't much impacted by the cost of turning subscription flags on and off.

 

[b4pjoe]

It is hard to say. Even the claimed financial loss on the service is a matter of bookkeeping. Overall DIRECTV was a profitable service (at last report) making about $20 per subscriber per month in profit. Strict bookkeeping may have placed what they collected in subscriptions for Sunday Ticket below the $1.5 billion they were paying ... but having Sunday Ticket led to more people paying for the satellite service that not only covered the line item loss but turned a decent profit. Apple TV + doesn't make $20 per subscriber per month in profit.

It is kind of weird that AT&T would be giving it away to so many subscribers and yet claim massive losses. It seems like they might want it to lose money. They have gave it me for free several times without me even asking for it so it can’t be because people were threatening to leave if they didn’t give it away. It will be interesting to see if they give it away to so many people this year as they did last year.

And right…Apple is most likely losing money on Apple TV+ without ST. ST would definitely boost their subscription numbers but not enough to cover the price of ST. That is why I don’t believe they are going to be throwing in ST just for the $4.99 fee.

And if Apple does not have a commercial option they are just leaving money on the table. It is just money sitting there for the taking.

 

[b4pjoe]

Apple doesn't have a particularly stellar record in dealing with commercial entities.

So what have they down when “dealing with commercial entities”?

 

[AngryManMLS]

That might work. A couple dollar fee that will allow customers to share their accounts and focusing on the accounts with the most users.

Except most comments I've seen on this has basically been people seeing this as a cash grab. Plus people already feel like they are paying "too much" for Netflix just to pay more to share their account. In their minds they are already paying for the service so they are entitled to share it with their family member/friend/etc as they see fit. I get it. And to be fair it's also a dangerous slope that if Netflix gets away with this then what will stop all the others from charging extra for account sharing?