'Netflix Effect' Returns As Studios License Old Shows To Their Streaming Rival

Christopher Grimes reports via the Financial Times: Some of Netflix's competitors are reversing a streaming war tactic by licensing their old TV shows and movies to the streamer -- boosting its programming offerings but also potentially squeezing its profit margins, analysts say. Netflix relied heavily on programming that it licensed from other companies when it launched its streaming service in 2007. But after Walt Disney, NBCUniversal, Paramount and the then Time Warner launched their own streaming services, they pulled many of their shows from Netflix to avoid feeding a company that had grown into an arch-competitor. With legacy media groups under pressure to produce streaming profits, however, licensing revenue is looking attractive again -- even if it comes from Netflix. This summer, Warner Bros Discovery's HBO network began licensing a handful of older shows to Netflix, including Insecure, Six Feet Under, Ballers and Band of Brothers.

Analysts at Morgan Stanley said the return of licensing deals was a "long-term positive" for Netflix and would "pad" its lead over competitors in streaming. But the bank added that the cost of licensing -- along with the Netflix's investments in gaming and other sectors -- could add pressure to its profit margins in 2024. The analysts raised their outlook for Netflix's overall cash spending next year by $500mn to $17.7bn. Netflix will report results on Wednesday, with investors expected to focus on whether it plans to increase subscription prices and signs of progress on its new advertising tier. The latest data on its password sharing crackdown will also be watched.

[T]he studios' experiments with licensing deals appear to have given some old shows new life. After NBCUniversal licensed its show Suits -- which aired from 2011-19 and starred Meghan Markle -- to Netflix in June, the show experienced a revival. The legal drama was in the top spot on the Nielsen Streaming top 10 for three months, an example of the "Netflix effect" on older shows. Bloys said licensing shows to Netflix had also boosted traffic for the programs on Warner Discovery's Max streaming platform, home to HBO programming including Ballers, a sports drama that ran from 2015-19. Ballers entered the Nielsen top 10 after it went to Netflix, and Insecure, a comedy starring Issa Rae that ran from 2016-21, had a similar boost.

Netflix needs the extra shows, I think...

[Firethorn]

I remember when Netflix lost most of its licensed content. I was able to limp along with it for a while using the recommended shows, in that it still had enough stuff that was interesting for me that it was able to suggest.

Then they pretty much got rid of that, and I was no longer able to find stuff that was reliably interesting, so I dropped them. I might have to sign up again some day, but unless they bring the recommendation system back...

Re:Netflix needs the extra shows, I think...

[sg_oneill]

This might actually be one of the rare instances where competition is actually garbage for the consumer.

I can get pretty much *all* of the music I like on iTunes, or Amazon, or Spotify, or even f***ing youtube music (folks, dont....). Competition worked well there, because the pool of music wasnt monopolized.

But with movies and TV we've gotten some unholy combination of monopoly and competition where the competing studios demand exclusivity and as a result if I want to *legally* watch whatever I want I need 6-7 different streaming services. I only want to watch the star trek shows on paramount. Only amazon has The Expanse and The Boys. Netflix has a few good ones. Disney.... eh.... Im a bit over marvel, the star wars are fun but not worth $10 a month. And don't get me started on Apple TV. Maybe 4 interesting shows on the entire service, and its more expensive than the lot. And I refuse to pay that great wrecker of democracies, Murdoch.

On their own $10 a month isn't too much, but once you add up 5-6 different streamers, a few software subscriptions, too much goddam money on Ubereats, it all really starts to add up to something quite ugly and completely drains my ability to save.

At least with the music services I can pick one and be pretty comfortable most of what I like is there. (Though to be clear I buy my albums on iTunes, I dont stream. The artist gets a lot more money that way, and I get to own the damn thing)

Sounds like you need to rotate

[Firethorn]

I have to agree with you. Also, having a bunch of different services means that you need to remember what you watched where, have to deal with different interfaces, each service having its own quirks, it quickly adds up to at least a basic cable service bill ($30/month for the last ad I saw, though the full package is $60).

The common "fix" for this is to rotate services - it's a pain in the butt, but activate netflix, binge it's shows, then activate, say, paramount for star trek, then move on to Amazon(do

Re:

[omnichad]

If anyone manages a good TV streaming queue that can let me build a watchlist in a provider-agnostic way, I would pay $5-10 for just that. Roku OS, at least, supports deep linking. So I could browse the master list, find the show I want and then just press a button to have it jump me into the appropriate app for viewing.

Roku should have BUILT this app and made it free, to be honest. Instead, they have a somewhat decent TV and movie search in their mobile app that will let you pick which app (if there are

Re:

[wed128]

I use an app called 'reelgood' for a provider-agnostic watchlist. It's a little clunky, and far from perfect, but it has a good search function. I've used the android app and the website, not sure if there's an iphone app (but there probably is)

try TVguide

[echo123]

tvguide.com is excellent for locating where exactly to watch every single show out there. They also offer a watchlist. The website is very good.

Re:

[Hoi Polloi]

Glad food isn't run like this. "I have the onion delivery guy, the milk delivery, then there are deliveries for cheese, potato chips, carrots..."

Re:

[wed128]

food *is* run like this. There's a burger place, a pizza place, a chinese food place, a coffee place. It's just broken up by product and not by ingredient...

Re:

[omnichad]

Competition worked well there, because the pool of music wasnt monopolized.

That's because the pool of music IS monopolized. Spotify et. al. are just the middlemen. Too bad the licensing orgs managed to get musicians to sign on to such terrible streaming royalties. Good for the consumer, bad for the musician.

On the other hand, maybe individual studios should license content on a royalty model and leave it to the streaming platforms to figure out what content to include.

Re:

[WDot]

It seems like competition worked great in the long run! Yes, subscribing and unsubscribing to a bunch of different services was annoying, but basically none of the services could demand year-long commitments (because none of their competitors did). A bunch of studios thought they could stand up a Netflix style streaming service, which was technically correct, but then they ran into the reality that the market wasn’t that big. Now it seems the expected correction is finally happening. Maybe soon the re

Re:

[necro81]

I can get pretty much *all* of the music I like on iTunes, or Amazon, or Spotify, or even f***ing youtube music (folks, dont....). Competition worked well there, because the pool of music wasnt monopolized.

But with movies and TV we've gotten some unholy combination of monopoly and competition where the competing studios demand exclusivity

There used to be something called the Paramount Decrees, coming from a 1948 legal case [wikipedia.org], which required separation between the Hollywood studios and the venues showing

Re:

[tlhIngan]

I can get pretty much *all* of the music I like on iTunes, or Amazon, or Spotify, or even f***ing youtube music (folks, dont....). Competition worked well there, because the pool of music wasnt monopolized.

Actually, for a few years, it was. This is revisionist and ignores the actual truth of the digital music distribution of the early 2000s.

Here's how it really happened. In 2001, Apple released their MP3 player, the iPod, a month after 9/11. In 2003, Apple released their 3rd generation iPod, and at the same

Where is Colossus: The Forbin Project? Brainstorm

[localroger]

Streaming is shit until movies like these are all available somewhere readily accessible.

Re:

[tepples]

Can't help with Colossus, but JustWatch says Brainstorm [justwatch.com] is on the major US pay-per-view services for $2.99.

Re:

[Papaspud]

I remember seeing that in 60mm at the theaters.

Re:

[geekmux]

Colossus: The Forbin Project was released in theatres on April 18, 1970. The film was released on DVD on November 23, 2004, by Universal Studios Home Entertainment.[9] A remastered high-definition widescreen Blu-ray disc version was released by Shout Factory on February 27, 2018.

You sure did pick an odd example of the future somehow not supporting a movie over half a century old. Not everyone gets the Blu-ray remaster treatment.

Most have never heard of this movie regardless of the limited accolades at the time. I've not seen it, but it seems quite relevant even today. At least to a society who cares enough to avoid repeating the worst of their own history. (Obvious caveat, is obvious.)

Re:

[BigZee]

It's worth watching. In some respects it is very dated. It's a universal truth that science fiction will always get computer technology wrong. Yes, given all the concerns about AI, it does seem to be relevant still.

Re:

[Papaspud]

This is the voice of colossus, this is the voice of world control....

Re:

[Opportunist]

Great, yet another movie about the muskrat?

Re:

[necro81]

They're available from Netflix's DVD service.

Oh, wait.

Putting Ballers on Netflix verges on blasphemy.

[Eunomion]

It's not the best show ever, but it's a troubling indication of how the current occupants of HBO's sacred legacy are thinking.

Just one hop, skip, and a fart from putting an edited version of The Wire on Disney+.

Re:

[nightflameauto]

It's not the best show ever, but it's a troubling indication of how the current occupants of HBO's sacred legacy are thinking. Just one hop, skip, and a fart from putting an edited version of The Wire on Disney+.

If you want some real entertainment, read up on the shenanigans happening behind the scenes since WB bought out HBO/Max. They're just big enough to have enough different decision makers that the end result comes across like a bunch of drunken sailors stumbling through their morning after a night out where they just barely made roll the next morning. It's brutal.

Plus, they're licensing out a TON of shows because they don't have to pay creators residuals on shows they syndicate or license out. What creator in

Re:

[Eunomion]

Even odds there are active discussions happening in those executive suites about introducing ads and product placements into HBO shows.

Also, Netflix is just plain unworthy. They remove episodes from beloved, long-running series that they deem "potentially offensive." And not even in the honest way of saying "Episode unavailable": They, like Hulu, re-number the whole episode list. Nobody depending on them for exposure to those shows is even aware those episodes ever existed, unless they happen to run a

Re:

[nightflameauto]

I 100% guarantee the WB execs are trying to figure out how many ads they can shove at people without losing subscribers.

And I have to say, the removal of media on streaming sites is getting really stupid levels of idiotic. I don't understand how being offended became the ultimate superpower. Nor do I understand why it's necessary to safe-space the entire universe. You're offended by something innocuous? Walk away from it just like we used to. If it's not actively hurting someone? Piss off.

A real bugaboo for

Re:

[Eunomion]

Money, divorced from consequences of decisions, is the ultimate driver of nihilism.

Re:

[Eunomion]

I have no idea why they did that, but in fairness, no one other than 80-year-old women and kindergarten teachers ever watched A&E. HBO didn't lose a thing showing it there.

Small Potatos

[Kunedog]

Better pick up the rights to The ***** Show or NO SALE:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]