Netflix behind Gold subscription?

Interesting topic.



BongKaos has an intersting point about the BBC player. The BBC recieves it`s funding through a television licence and doesn`t charge for viewing of non-live braodcast in the UK, even for those people that do not purchase a television licence.



The Netflix service is a paid subscription and is not free to watch (not taking in to account the free trial month offer that they supply) as it`s subscription fee pays for the licence to stream it`s content.



It is clear that many devices can be used for the ability to stream internet content to a viewing device and that many means of doing so do not require fees to operate.



Netflix is an optional application (app) for the xbox (360 or One) and is not a primary use of the console in it`s design as a gaming machine.



I could spend half the cost of an Xbox 360 to purchase a blue-ray player with internet ability to watch Netflix through, and if I give this console away (as I have with others) that is the route I would take.



If microsoft (Microsoft/Micro$oft) took payment from gold members for every application cost that a member used, and then forwarded the payment to the respected companies; it would add administration fees and legal obligations, which would in turn work out
more expensive for the end user.



Not only would it be more expensive, it would no doubt incite some people to accuse microsoft of being greedy, and incite others to suggest that all application usage should be included in the gold membership fee; not only included, but with full content.



I use the console to access the internet and to visit subscription sites, maybe my gold membership should cover the cost of annual access to such websites ?

 

Balph, that's what I'd like to see happen. That, of course, is up to those services. Like Netflix, for instance. If they would allow Xbox Gold members to utilize their streaming service without a paid Netflix subscription, maybe at least only on the Xbox.
Kinda like letting the Gold membership cover a limited-use off-the-menu Netflix subscription level. All the same streaming, minus the ability to use Netflix across multiple devices. Then, if you want the full functionality of a Netflix subscription, you'd
just pay Netflix directly for it. If this principle could be applied to all subscription services, that would be fantastic. Microsoft would have to pull off some serious negotiation magic to make it happen, though, I'd bet.

 

[quote user="Klokkwork"]

I still can't figure out why anyone would buy a whole entertainment console for use with one app. It's not like Xbox has cornered the market on ways to stream Netflix on your TV.

[/quote]

When I worked in retail during college a few years ago, the whole Netflix streaming thing was starting to get popular and at the time, Bluray players with wifi were about the same cost as a game system, and there was more word of mouth knowledge of using
Netflix on consoles than Bluray players. I dealt with a lot of people buying one of the three main consoles for the sole intention of using Netflix frequently. However, some were wanting maybe 1-2 games for it, especially dance games with the Wii but with
the intention of playing offline; the only purpose of internet would be Netflix. The paywall with the Xbox sometimes steered people toward PS3 or Wii, but then with the Kinect people started choosing the Xbox for the Kinect games, again, online only for Netflix
(after all, why bother playing other people online in a bunch of games with a 10 minutes of experience skill ceiling?). I found this out so frequently because when asked if they wanted the Gold sub card with the console they would always say "sorry, we just
want Netflix" at which point I would explain they still needed it, even for Netflix, usually leading to either buying the card or putting the Xbox back for a different console (again, until the Kinect release when there was no other option if you were wanting
that device).

-

It was always the same type of person; middle-aged, middle class with money to blow and little prior research aside from word of mouth information on how to get Netflix or Hulu Plus on their TV. They were way outside the typical demographic of adolescents
and young adults who want to play CoD online for 10+ hours a week. Really, only on occasion did someone state not even having an interest in games (and nowadays, people can just buy a streaming player for much less so I imagine at this point that doesn't
really happen anymore), usually there was some interest in using it for offline games but a general lack of interest in online play, cloud storage, etc. When you have this demographic of people who have no interest in any feature of Live aside from using
streaming apps from 3rd party providers, why not get them to pay the fee too?

 

Greed doesn't really come to mind.

It's like MS is getting any of the NF money.

But the do have to recoup that billion plus dollars they spent on infrastructure.

Whats the problem again?