Disney aims for Netflix. If the deal was made, it would shoot itself in the foot People that invest in Netflix and people that invest in Disney should never meet each other – they would not get on. But it seems there is a danger, according to the Wall Street Journal, that the two shall be thrown together in an unholy Alliance. While we can totally see the logic of such a deal, and how theoretically it …
This post has been deleted by its author
This article assumes Disney are interested so they can control and to some extent merge operations. That's a big assumption. Their interest could well be purely a way to hedge in relation to the future of TV. E.g. a pure risk mitigation play. Famously the Netflix's business model is somewhat incompatible with legacy content producer models. If Disney own Netflix they can bridge across to the future without the valuable Disney brand getting steamrollered by disruptive forces and can at a future date use that brand with the new business model. The point is, if they don't make the acquisition now, there will be in the future an inflection point where Netflix or Amazon or a.n. Other streaming service is the content king and they will no longer have the financial muscle to control their destiny.
1) ABC is owned by the Disney Media Network.
2) ABC Studios is a wholly owned entity of Disney–ABC Media networks and was formally known as Touchstone until 2007.
3) ABC Studio co-produces a shit tonne of shows, including "Luke Cage", which is made along with Marvel Studios.
4) Marvel Studios is a wholly owned entity of Walt Disney Studios.
5) Luke Cage is an original Netflix production.
6) Luke cage is rated TV-MA in the US, and 15 in the UK.
Now, how does that even begin to suggest : "A Disney owned Netflix would almost certainly be told what to do, what content it could create, and be charged with making sure that content could go on a Disney channel without anyone raising an eyebrow."
I love reading el Reg, but you guys really dropped the ball on this one. I understand this was written by Faultline, but it had no place in el Reg. Your readers expect better of you.
It's all about doing The Deal. The bigger the better.
The consequent destruction of value is somebody elses problem.
And with Netflix being a really big deal, the slippery slope from "Netflix by Disney" to "Disney Netflix Channel" to boring irrelevance would take, what 5 years?
If you ask consumers I suspect many of them would be horrified at any of the MPAA companies taking control of Netlix.
They see Netflix as hurting their profits, in the same way RIAA see Spotify as it's enemy. Makes them a ton of money but they are always thinking they can make more if they can kill a service and offer it directly.
With that control comes more control, more geo-restrictions, more DRM and more bollocks everywhere.
Disney taking control of Netflix would be a nightmare come true.
That would ne the same Spotify hating RIAA that sent this to the US governemtn?
We learned today from media reports that the music service Spotify has been blocked from access by users of the U.S. House of Representatives’ network. We certainly can appreciate and understand why the policy was implemented that prevents access to unauthorized peer-to-peer services for security reasons as well as to prevent use of the House network for illegal activity.
Spotify is a licensed, secure online music streaming service. In fact, it is one of the dozens of authorized digital services that the music community is partnering with to offer a catalogue of millions of songs to fans, however they want it, whenever they want it – including members of Congress and their aides. Additional details about Spotify and these other services can be found at www.whymusicmatters.com, a comprehensive one-stop shopping guide of authorized music services that we developed with music business association NARM and our online retailer partners. These services are safe and secure, and assuring access to them not only respects the contractual relationship users may have with these services, but also achieves an important public policy goal of promoting legal, safe digital providers.
Oh dear god, Another wanker who thinks that seeing two men kissing, or two women making love in a TV show or movie as pushing 'the gay agenda'.
What IS IT with you arseholes? It's called representing real life and no more pushes a gay agenda than a man and a woman kissing pushes a heterosexual agenda...
No wonder you posted that as an anonymous coward.
Dear Mr. Anon,
As someone comfortable with my own sexuality, I've not noticed any of the events that seem to freak you out.
HAVE there been gay people (shock horror) kissing or holding hands etc. on any TV I've watched?
Probably. It just doesn't hit the radar. I'm not threatened by it. As I told a gay friend when he came out: "Cool! That means I don't have to worry about you being competition when we are out on the pull!" (it was MANY years ago)
It's a long established fact that those most vocal in homophobia are unsure themselves, and feel bad about it, presumably due to family/worker/peer pressure etc.
So, we sense your internal conflict, but you should celebrate who you are, despite what your family/co-workers/friends say.
Streaming as a business: Arrange content (the only non-trivial step). Hire some servers (e.g. Amazon) and a CDN (e.g. Akamai). Copy and paste some code. A new streaming business (at scale) could be live within a month. They've certainly been proliferating at a furious rate.
'Content is king' applies. Much of Disney's archive is getting stale. Netflix has a growing library of original and popular series. Netflix already knows that 'Content is king', and they know that streaming technology is not a valuable USP. Netflix is a content creation company now. Streaming is just infrastructure. They could outsource the IT 100%.
Netflix has reached the point where it plays by the usual.rules, no more double digit growth as is. They need exclusive, live content to keep growing, but sports are really expensive. They will eventually do it (games on phone, tablet, PC and TV is the ideal for consumers) but the pricing model is not easy to do for a company that says £X gets you everything we have. They have to start demarcating their customers (other than by legally enforced geography) and that won't sit well initially. But Netflix seem to be progressing to the point of being bigger than Disney, star wars be damned, pretty soon.
"...live content to keep growing..."
A live Netflix News Channel would assist their customers in cutting the cable. One needs news coverage. Of course, this might invoke new 'broadcasting' requirements.
When is BBC TV going to stream to the world all their channels live, and shows On Demand, for a fee? Bring in a few billion dollars per year from foreign subscribers, and they could reduce their UK license fee. Seems such a waste to lock it up and let the content rot. BBC TV should be a vast export, bringing in a fortune.
Re: When is BBC TV going to stream to the world all their channels live...
Same reason a lot of stuff doesn't get done: Licensing of Rights. It's fairly straightforward for them to get basic production rights for broadcast within the UK. It gets really messy trying to spread beyond. Plus, there's the ever popular operating charter. It's part of why they have BBC Worldwide...
Are we talking about the same Netflix? Their streaming content pretty much blows unless you are into watching TV shows. They have a few original titles that are decent (Supernatural comes to mind), but when it comes to new movies, you either get the DVD from their alternate arm if you're lucky, or rent it on Amazon Prime.
What are Netflix's prospects for managing to ever grow enough to justify their current valuation? They'd need over a billion subscribers for that to happen, or somehow cut their costs as a percentage of revenue by an unprecedented amount.
At least an investor buying Netflix can hope that hype causes the price to become even more inflated, and sell for a profit at that point. By acquiring them, Disney needs them to actually generate enough profit to equal the NPV of the acquisition price. It would rank as one of the all time stupid acquisitions.
The way this should work reminds me of a scene in The Godfather, where Moe Green (Netflix) tells off the movie studios (Michael Corleone). "You don't buy me out. I buy you out!"
The problem with Netflix isn't Netflix, it's stupid content owners who inhibit streaming according to some misguided whims. We've talked this problem to death; no need to repeat it here. In a perfect world, Netflix would be buying Disney and all its content, not the other way around. And buying other studios as well. If they won't wise up, buy them up.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
