Netflix CEO Jokes That Investors May Be Trying To Poison Him

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
It's nice to see Netflix's CEO joking on his Facebook page about investors trying to poison him. Why should investors be mad? It's not like share prices are half what they were just two months ago. Wait...what?

In a posting on his Facebook wall, Hastings writes, "In Wyoming with 10 investors at a ranch/retreat. I think I might need a food taster. I can hardly blame them." Interesting that he chose to post this on Facebook, the company whose head-scratching design overhaul may have ultimately overshadowed Hasting's Qwikster announcement.
Click to expand...
 
He thinks he is being cool trying to play the subtle martyr card, but this sort of thing is not acceptable for a CEO of a major corporation. Act like an adult for Christs sake.
 
I hope Netflix crashes and burns. When I canceled my subscription, I was asked "I'm sorry to hear that Mr. SoandSo. Is there any particular reason for canceling today?" I told them, "Yeah, your new pricing schema stinks to holy hell and back."
 
Pricing scheme is a little out of whack, but not that huge a deal. The whole Qwikster thing though is completely retarded. Two queues, two bills and ratings don't carry over from one to the other??
 
meh... people are pissed right now, and they lost subscribers... it won't hold up, and the man is a genius in the planning...

Biggest complaint, service went from 8.99 to 15.99, people who aren't savvy will now look, oh hey cool my netflix just went back down to 7.99!

A year from now when this is forgotten it will be right back to how it was before to new subscribers who really don't pay attention to this wacky world of internet thing.

Neat all I can rent dvd's for 7.99 a month. That's much cheaper then going to the vid store.

Oh wow my new tv can do this netflix thing... neat it's only 7.99 a month for all I can watch? sure sign me up.

Peoples memories are short... and as soon as this passes in peoples minds because the next niche thing to bash on and complain about comes around, they will be right back on track.
 
Hastings is showing himself to be a putz. Things were better before he started talking publically.
 
his public image is in the ditch and he is making jokes? Dude shut your self in your office for like a year, than peak out to see if you can come out and play.
 
If the investors actually cared, maybe they should do it. Netflix is starting to be run like HP. Whatever crack they are feeding these CEO's at their yacht club is making them completely retarded.
 
djgizmo said:
WTF ever. Hardest job comes with more than worth it pay.
Click to expand...

Not just anyone can be a CEO. This guy has to bust ass day in and day out at his investor retreats. He's earning every penny of his pay by shouldering all the responsibility for his companies success or defeat. In fact, give this guy a raise. None of the underclass could make decisions like this on a daily basis.
 
I'm finding it harder to justify keeping either Netflix service. I was watching Sanctuary last month and I find out that they didn't renew the license, so now I need to get the physical discs to finish watching it.

They seem to do everything possible to keep you on both services.
 
Hamish Campbell said:
Not just anyone can be a CEO. This guy has to bust ass day in and day out at his investor retreats. He's earning every penny of his pay by shouldering all the responsibility for his companies success or defeat. In fact, give this guy a raise. None of the underclass could make decisions like this on a daily basis.
Click to expand...

So your point is that uneducated people could fuck up a company just as well? Why even have a CEO, we should all vote on company policy. Then we can have s'mores!
 
Sufu said:
Pricing scheme is a little out of whack, but not that huge a deal. The whole Qwikster thing though is completely retarded. Two queues, two bills and ratings don't carry over from one to the other??
Click to expand...

While the split will be inconvenient for customers it's likely going to be a huge plus for Netflix itself.

Consider a few points:

1) Studios have started demanding a fee per streaming account for access to their library so reducing those with streaming to those paying full price makes perfect sense as they ultimately will pay for fewer customers.

2) After the split when Netflix negotiates with a studio for their library the studio no longer can lump any profits from the dvd delivery side into the mix as the companies profits, and this will ultimately result in lower rates per customer.

3) Potentially once it's split off they could sell of the dvd delivery portion of the business with no ill effects on the streaming side.

4) If dvd delivery tanks, as Netflix has been predicting, having it seperated will keep if from dragging the streaming side of the business down with it, or vice versa if it goes the other way.

So overall it should mean paying a smaller amount for a smaller number of customers will giving them more options and better protecting each side of the business from any potential downturns in the other.

From a business prospective this makes perfect sense and while it will cause a little short term painI believe that in the long run it's going to be a huge benifit for netflix
 
Absolutely hilarious that people are criticizing him.

Netflix increased their prices 60%, and lost at most about 6% of customers. Even with he increased costs for licensing that drove the change, Netflix is probably making out like a bandit.

As someone who doesn't use Netflix, I find it hilarious that people are criticizing the sound business decisions the company has made.
 
Hamish Campbell said:
Not just anyone can be a CEO. This guy has to bust ass day in and day out at his investor retreats. He's earning every penny of his pay by shouldering all the responsibility for his companies success or defeat. In fact, give this guy a raise. None of the underclass could make decisions like this on a daily basis.
Click to expand...

I guess not...since, ya know, he actually STARTED and nurtured the company to a successful business model and wasn't handed a company to ruin (like every ****** in America feels entitled to). :rolleyes:
 
Pariel said:
Absolutely hilarious that people are criticizing him.

Netflix increased their prices 60%, and lost at most about 6% of customers. Even with he increased costs for licensing that drove the change, Netflix is probably making out like a bandit.

As someone who doesn't use Netflix, I find it hilarious that people are criticizing the sound business decisions the company has made.
Click to expand...

Does not matter. Stock dropped over 40% since July. That's a gigantic fubar.
 
SilverSliver said:
Does not matter. Stock dropped over 40% since July. That's a gigantic fubar.
Click to expand...

I don't understand the problem. If you don't like it sell. ...better yet, short sell. Nobody is forcing you to keep the stock. If it's a bad investment, what sane person would hold onto it?
 
PynkFloydd said:
I don't understand the problem. If you don't like it sell. ...better yet, short sell. Nobody is forcing you to keep the stock. If it's a bad investment, what sane person would hold onto it?
Click to expand...

That's not really the point. The CEO of a public company should be committed to the stock holders of that company. If he is not interested in that, then the company needs to stay private. Period.
 
SilverSliver said:
That's not really the point. The CEO of a public company should be committed to the stock holders of that company. If he is not interested in that, then the company needs to stay private. Period.
Click to expand...

Not really, his responsibility lies to the best interests of the company. Period. If the shareholders don't like it, that's what voting rights actually buys with stock.

In example, a recent "shareholder" told co-CEOs of RIM to liquidate the company's assets. Why would they do that? ...so that the share price could go up? That'd be utterly stupid.
 
SilverSliver said:
That's not really the point. The CEO of a public company should be committed to the stock holders of that company. If he is not interested in that, then the company needs to stay private. Period.
Click to expand...

Which I am sure he is, but there are short term and long term strategies and I think what Reed is telling the investors right now is that this short term pain will result in a huge long term gain.
 
Fundamentally, this change needed to happen at some point. And it needed to be done under the right leadership. IMHO, it's a bit early and there's a baboon at the wheel.

I think it's accurate to say that the majority (not all) of the shareholders and customers are unhappy with this guy. He acknowledges being arrogant, he acknowledges that investors are so angry they want him to die (even if he's trying to be funny), and he allowed a ridiculous split to happen with little or no warning (qwikster - really? and you didn't even get the twitter handle??). He just seems like a PR nightmare.

How can investors have confidence in the company's future with a CEO like this? This is why the stock is plummeting - it's not about discs vs streaming. The whole qwikster thing sounds like an onion article. It seems like even Netflix had no idea that the sites were going to split until a week ago. Good companies take the time to beta test ideas, sites, and products (hello apple, google, and microsoft). Where is the press conference? They either knew it's a bad idea or they knew they were kicking the disc users to the curb - and they couldn't announce it with a straight face, so they're hiding behind emails and blog posts.
 
There was interesting bit during the F8 conference (http://f8.facebook.com) today, with Netflix integration to FB to occur soon (In the US as it is already avail in 44 other countries already) and that the Zuckmeister was telling Reed is that he expects Netflix to grow at twice the rate that they are looking to grow at by using social media aspects of FB.
 
RiPpLeeFFecT said:
I'm finding it harder to justify keeping either Netflix service. I was watching Sanctuary last month and I find out that they didn't renew the license, so now I need to get the physical discs to finish watching it.

They seem to do everything possible to keep you on both services.
Click to expand...

Uninformed people like you are the reason why this is so blown out of proportion. Netflix WANTS to stream movies to you, it's a lot cheaper for them. It's the studios that refuse to allow a show to be streamed until it has been on DVD for x number of decades.
 
wizdum said:
Uninformed people like you are the reason why this is so blown out of proportion. Netflix WANTS to stream movies to you, it's a lot cheaper for them. It's the studios that refuse to allow a show to be streamed until it has been on DVD for x number of decades.
Click to expand...

If they want to they don't seem to show it, raising your prices (thereby signalling to partners you believe you will have a larger revenue stream in the future while simultaneously refusing to pay said partners more for service, doesn't work.
 
—Video and Netflix: Just like music companies, video companies are realizing that they can find new business models by helping people discover more video content, Zuckerberg said. He brought Reed Hastings of Netflix (NSDQ: NFLX) up on stage to talk about his experiences noting how friends and colleagues discussed the shows they were watching on Facebook. Hastings said a social version of Netflix is available around the world, but not yet available in the U.S. because of what he called an outdated privacy law. Stay tuned for a Netflix blog post with more details on how Netflix will integrate with Facebook in the U.S.

http://paidcontent.org/article/419-f8-highlights-from-mark-zuckerbergs-keynote-address/
 
cthulhuiscool said:
If they want to they don't seem to show it, raising your prices (thereby signalling to partners you believe you will have a larger revenue stream in the future while simultaneously refusing to pay said partners more for service, doesn't work.
Click to expand...

http://money.cnn.com/2011/07/08/technology/netflix_starz_contract/index.htm

Pachter predicts Netflix's streaming content licensing costs will rise from $180 million in 2010 to a whopping $1.98 billion in 2012.
Click to expand...

Yeah, this is all just a money grab by Netflix. Can I have some of your koolaid?

Netflix was getting starz content for $0.15 per customer, while Dish, DirectTV, TWC, and Comcast were paying $4 per customer. The studios didn't think that people would give up Starz on cable for Netflix's streaming service.
 
Just goes to show you who invests in these types of tech companies without thinking.

Investors in Wyoming on a ranch... hmm, more than probably, clueless to technology, old "ranchers" who were looking for the best deal percentage any nerd gave them, and the netflix guy definitely SUCKERED them in :D
 
wizdum said:
http://money.cnn.com/2011/07/08/technology/netflix_starz_contract/index.htm



Yeah, this is all just a money grab by Netflix. Can I have some of your koolaid?

Netflix was getting starz content for $0.15 per customer, while Dish, DirectTV, TWC, and Comcast were paying $4 per customer. The studios didn't think that people would give up Starz on cable for Netflix's streaming service.
Click to expand...

Great points on said facts (that most people don't figure) :D
hah thanks... that's inasne, really... 15 cents compared to $4,whoa
 
Maybe $300 share prices two months ago were inflated, a mirage?

Doesn't he get credit for that? I'm sure some people sold.
 
Dman2280 said:
Just goes to show you who invests in these types of tech companies without thinking.

Investors in Wyoming on a ranch... hmm, more than probably, clueless to technology, old "ranchers" who were looking for the best deal percentage any nerd gave them, and the netflix guy definitely SUCKERED them in :D
Click to expand...

That depends when they bought. It was $46.85 on Sept 23, 2009.
 
I don't get the belly aching about the price hike. It was pretty much a given with the rising costs and the price to acquire new titles. Plus with the post office facing a serious chance of reducing service / charging substantially more for bulk mail, I don't see the price hike as anything but acceptable. Should they have been more honest about their reasons for increasing prices? Yes, but this a problem with almost all corporations big or small, they seem to forget that people appreciate honesty.

Now as far as splitting off the DVD service to a new site, that is just about the dumbest decision since HP merged with Compaq and put Carly Fiorina in charge. There is no reason they couldn't offer the DVD and streaming service off the same site. Add to that, they chose a name that makes me think of a failed dot com startup. Thankfully, I am not a shareholder, but if I was I would be very upset with these recent boneheaded decisions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top