House Of Cards: Netflix Is One Of The Poster Children For Tech Bubble 2.0

How can a company that is going to generate $2,000,000,000 in negative free cash flow in 2017 be worth 70 billion dollars?

theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/house-of-cards-netflix-is-one-of-the-poster-children-for-tech-bubble-2-0

>Netflix has soared in popularity in recent years, but so have their financial losses. Just like during the original tech bubble, investors are ignoring basic fundamentals and are greatly rewarding firms that are bleeding giant mountains of cash year after year just because they are trendy “tech companies”. But somewhere along the line you actually have to quit losing money if you are going to survive. Just ask tech bubble 1.0 victims Pets.com, Webvan and Etoys.com. The investors that poured enormous amounts of money into those companies ended up losing everything, and similar tragedies will play out as tech bubble 2.0 bursts.

>So far in 2017, the S&P 500 is up about 8 percent, but FANG stocks (Facebook, Amazon, Netflix and Google) are up a whopping 30 percent.

>But at least Facebook, Amazon and Google are making money.

>Netflix is not.

>The bleeding of cash at Netflix only seems to be accelerating. The number for the first quarter of 2017 was 62 percent worse than the number for the first quarter of 2016, and it was more than twice as bad as the number for the first quarter of 2015.

>What we are witnessing is a modern day version of “tulip mania”, and at some point this irrational euphoria will come to a sudden end. In fact, there are already some signs that tech bubble 2.0 may be in a significant amount of trouble.

>All over the financial world, prominent voices such as Paul Singer are warning

>>Given groupthink and the determination of policy makers to do ‘whatever it takes’ to prevent the next market ‘crash,’ we think that the low-volatility levitation magic act of stocks and bonds will exist until the disenchanting moment when it does not. And then all hell will break loose (don’t ask us what hell looks like…)

Other urls found in this thread:

bgr.com/2017/01/20/netflix-dvd-rentals-subscribers/
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

My grandma told me that netflix used to deliver movies in the mail LOL

isnt netflix pretty safe considering at any point they can quit pumping money into netflix originals and just keep their existing portfolio? the only real overhead they have is their streaming infrastructure,


bgr.com/2017/01/20/netflix-dvd-rentals-subscribers/

They can lead the charge in commercial p2p. The tech already exists all they need to do is activate it.

>source is theeconomiccollapseblog
>not biased

Their revenue last year was 8.83 billion with a 187 million profit. At what point are they going to have a bubble when they're spending like mad on new content and still rolling in a profit?

You're biased yourself if you don't even consider reading the article

licenses friendo

netflix has literally nothing.
>server: amazon
>content: mostly licensed for set period
>originals: nobody is going to work for free though

Why would I read your shitty article when Wikipedia is significantly more reputable?

>commercial p2p
sounds like a security nightmare

>citing wikipedia

Aside from being stupid with money which is probably the case, I cannot for the life of me understand how a company that just has a shitload of servers with video files on them in this day and age can lose that kind of cash considering the number of subscribers.

What the fuck are the idiots running Netflix doing so completely wrong?

>originals: nobody is going to work for free though
He is talking about existing portfolio, as in what they currently own. Stuff that has already been produced.

not really. content distributors have recently started holding nextflix hostage charge more and more for their old stuff every time their netflix content lease expires.

They are probably investing in shitton of series

They spend a lot of money investing in their original shows, and licensing popular shows isn't cheap.
They're going to start trimming fat soon though, there isn't an unlimited market for subscription VOD.

I don't understand why the hollywood studios just not renews the licensing contracts with Netflix? They couldn't survive with only their own 3 TV-shows

Probably because Netflix pays them a shit ton of money?
Also they aren't all directly in collusion, so it'd be difficult to orchestrate a large content pull.

house of fire

not him, but, yes
wikipedia has become ever more credible as it's community grows
when you were in high school 3 years ago you werent allowed to cite wikipedia, but now it is much more reputable

Well, it's still not a good idea to cite Wikipedia.
You should always click the citations and find the original source for whatever it is, to ensure the paraphrasing was accurate and whatnot.

well memed

>terrible selection
>poor bitrate
>some content not even available above SD quality even with BDs out
>DRM
>sells user data to third parties as per their privacy policy
>can't play above 720p in browsers other then Edge
>requires hardware DRM to even play 4K content
>consumers buying new hardware are paying for DRM so Netflix can serve its business model
Why are people so stupid to use this utter anti-user tripe of a service?

Doesn't Anson notoriously lose money every year

>netflix has literally nothing.
Figuratively nothing, you illiterate moron.

>Using neflix instead of T / O / R / R / E / N / T / S

Plebs.

>terrible selection
You a non-American or something. Feels bad man.

Look, I've already seen most of their originals. If they want me to keep paying, they will need to release more stuff.

>ignores the rest of the arguments
oke bud. also 4000 movies isnt exactly a large selection ... amazon prime has around 20.000 movies. passthepopcorn has fucking 140.000.

We had a teacher that explained it well.
You can't cite encyclopaedias. Wiki or not.

amazon also suffers from those other problems too though
and passthepopcorn is an illicit service

>amazon prime has around 20.000 movies.
And like five TV shows.

netflix has better customer service

yeah? they respond to your email with a premade response that basically tells you to go fuck yourself?

>and passthepopcorn is an illicit service
yea, just for comparison. i mean even on PTP it happens that you dont find a movie you wanna watch

i dont fully understand why it's possible for music streaming services like google, spotify, itunes to have huge exhaustive libraries with significant overlap between the services, yet for shows/movies you have competing services with relatively small libraries and as an end user you're in the awkward situation where to get satisfactory coverage you'd have to subscribe to all of them. or rent them from a library but who the fuck does that.


close to 2k actually, almost twice what netflix has

> where to get satisfactory coverage you'd have to subscribe to all of them. or rent them from a library but who the fuck does that.
the true solution is to buy the movies you want to watch

>buy this movie that you're gonna watch once or maybe, mayyyybe twice
yeah nah i'll just download them

>wasting your time viewing a film that is only worth watching once
consider doing something else

house of cards went dry after season 1

no

Okay, get fucked then.

>the true solution is to buy the movies you want to watch

ABSURD
THIS IS CRAZY TALK, YOU'RE INSANE. DO YOU BUY MUSIC YOU WANT TO HEAR TOO? LEAVE THIS PLACE, NOW

>and passthepopcorn is an illicit service

oh shit call the police

>this is what the mainstream media wants you to believe

Netflix has tons of revenue. They could easily become cash positive if they needed to.

Snapchat on the other hand, valued at was it 20 or billion? They have like zero revenue, zero ways to generate any revenue. How the fuck is that worth anything? Netflix isn't something to worry about, Snapchat fucking is.

>every Faceberg service has stories anyway
What's the point of Snapchat again? Nudes that you can't even save or screenshot?

Oh no. He's not citing the root source on my programming for females + penis board.

Snapchat is the current AIM, at least that's the impression I get, I'm old and have never used it, nor has anyone in my social circles except for my divorced friend who does a lot of internet dating.

So the only way they could make money is by selling user data, which there isn't much of, putting ads into the app, or adding premium pay features.

It sounds like your teacher explained something that was wrong well

You should seriously not talk about things you don't know. You'll only brass yourself.

Snapchat posts add videos to its users. A big thing with snapchat are area filters. I was on a pun crawl that paid about $500 on a snapchat filter that super imposed their logo over your photo.

And obviously the biggest way to make money is sell user data, but there bot that much. Remember, Facebook needs to remain cool otherwise it will become another MySpace. Also your not the cool police. Before you say something about normies and you don't get it.

No one cites anything on this fucking website, except for advertisers spamming their latest clickbait articles.

I didn't Police any cool or mention normies. Are you reeeeeeee'ing over there?

I don't understand what you are saying about this $500 filter. Can you elaborate? If you used Snapchat in the pubs involved it automatically added the logo?

Yes we're in tech bubble 2.0

Blame HN-tier silicon valley retard culture for this

Can't wait for massive layoff. Hope the shitty """millenial""" culture dies with it. Bring back 1990s office culture.

what sucks is non-tech people will suffer the most. the history and English majors get jobs in QA/Sales/(((dev culture))) and shit like that.

I'm not looking forward to it, but I'll stay afloat ever if I have to take a pay cut from competition. I've spent the last 10 years building a good resume. At least maybe they'll be a drop in filthy indians flooding the development space since you will be able to get code artisans for pennies.

Wikipedia has the most leftist bias in existence

Every article about a corporation has some bullshit liberal "criticism" in it citing literally one person who doesn't like the company over some irrelevant bullshit

Torrents are for anything not on netflix
I'm paying for instantaneous playing of any given series without the worry of having to store or back it up.
If it leaves netflix but I want it, I'll torrent. Until then I'm paying for convenience

Doesn't it mean that the subscription fee for netflix is extremely cheap compared to the value they give for customer?
How much would the fee have to be for netflix to be revenue neutral?

>How much would the fee have to be for netflix to be revenue neutral?
It'd have to be cheaper because Netflix had a net income of $187M in 2016 despite what OP's illuminati blog said

>sounds like a security nightmare
Hard perhaps, but it is already a solved problem. Encrypted p2p dist is a solved problrm. They could cut back by a large amount if they could get people to go the route of popcorn time and host the files of the last x number of movies/shows they watched locally.

Their buggest issue would be the number of mobile, tablet, and tv/mini/set top device streamers that wouldn't have any hard drive or bandwidth to burn by also being uploaders.