[lostcolony]

Another interesting thing to see is the response by a lot of those inside the television content industry.

Many of the companies that produce content are retooling and reorganizing specifically to deliver that content over the internet. None of them want to use Netflix, instead wanting their own service, but the growth of such streaming services has emboldened them. They both see that it's possible to go directly to consumer, -and- that it will be necessary at some point in the future, as the increase in cord cutters means less money on the incumbent TV providers to pay them with in contract negotiations. They realize they either are looking at ever dwindling fees, and thus, dwindling business, or they have to be able to circumvent the existing distributors.

So it's not just that Netflix is managing to create great content; its mere existence is leading to much of the content that TV distributors currently have a stranglehold on to be distributed directly by the content company.

[Zekio]

Sadly in some countries such as Denmark, there are some TV licensing fees you can't stop paying, because you can access the content online... Even if you never intend to use it.

[thomasahle]

Just the national broadcasting though, which is not much different from how you pay for highways, even if you don't have a car.

[tomjen3]

Dane here. I pay about half of what the biggest channel package costs in mandatory license fees every month, and it is a very poor offering.

Netflix is only 80kr, or about 12 dollars, whereas I pay almost 30 dollars for the tv fees. I watched about 10 minutes of broadcast tv last year but many hours of netflix. I don't get why I should be forced to pay for something that doesn't produce any value for me.