[111_1_111]

Netflix has already peaked.

For some reason people think of them as the new hot thing, but the reality is they have been around for longer than Google. With competition in the streaming video market only getting hotter, I can't see them going anywhere but down. Any one of Amazon Video, Hulu, Disney, or HBO could unseat them.

The growth expectations implicit in their 200+ P/E ratio seem way out of sync with their actual potential. If I owned Netflix stock I'd be selling it all now.

[Retric]

Hulu is an absolute failure compared to Netflix with 14.5% paid subscribers and even the absolute free tier gets under 1/2 of Netflix's viewership.

HBO go is struggling and heavily dependent on dwindling cable subscribers to keep HBO viable.

Amazon video is similarly subsidized by Amazon. Treated more as a loss leader than a profit center with ~1/3 million of Netflix's subscribers even though it's included with an Amazon prime subscription.

Netflix does not have total dominance, but with a solid track record of original content and a massive subscriber base they are becoming harder to beat over time.

[JauntTrooper]

Does Hulu have a free tier anymore? I thought they discontinued it.

HBO seems to be doing fairly well. They have ~5 million online subscribers, up from 2 million in Feb. 2017. That's small potatoes vs. Netflix's 117+ million subscribers, but it's a nice growth rate for a premium product. We don't have cable and are happy subscribers to both HBO and Netflix.

It's funny you don't even mention Apple. We used to buy seasons of TV shows off of Apple when they weren't available elsewhere, but don't anymore because we can't watch them on our Roku (at least I don't think we can).

[dralley]

HBO is fairly profitable and Netflix isn't. That is a pretty important data point when comparing the two IMO.

[Retric]

Netflix has had steady profits over the last several years. It's sub 10%, but that's particularly relevant when it's both growing and investing in new content.

HBO's has higher profit margins, but lower revenue. Further, being tied to Time Warner complicates the issue, without cable HBO would fail. So it's in a race to add subscribers fast enough to keep up with cord cutters.

[technofiend]

Hulu is a non-starter for me for the same reason I'm cancelling Google's Youtube TV: mandatory commercials. Netflix, Amazon Prime with the Starz and HBO uplifts yields more programming than you can reasonably consume and is cheaper than cable. People like me will keep Netflix in business as long as they try to keep some kind of compelling content available.

[Retric]

Hulu without commercials costs 12$/month: https://www.hulu.com/nocommercials

It's really a content issue for me as last few times I checked they had nothing worth watching that I have not already seen.

[technofiend]

Even with the upcharge there are simply less commercials on hulu, not zero. So says their FAQ - https://help.hulu.com/s/article/included-in-no-commercials-p...

A small number of shows are not included in our No Commercials Add-on. You can still watch these shows, however, they will play with a short commercial before and after each episode.

While the list of shows may change, they are currently: Grey’s Anatomy, Once Upon a Time, Marvel’s Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., Scandal, Grimm, New Girl, and How To Get Away With Murder.

And then on top of that it's a wasteland content-wise as you stated.

[Retric]

Fair enough.

It's not eye bleed territory, but it would piss me off if I had any interest in watching those shows and paying for a 'commercial free' experience.

[acalderaro]

Are you intentionally ignoring the critically acclaimed pipeline of shows/movies Netflix has produced, or are you just ignorant to their actual success.

They aren't _just_ a platform for content producers. They are producers of content. Competitors need to outprice them, our perform them, and outproduce them.

[Gargoyle]

They're really just hitting their stride in content production. There's plenty of room for them to grow making stuff for their global distribution platform. They're in 190 countries and can exploit their productions worldwide.

Having said that, 200+ p/e is still insane.

[on_and_off]

Anecdotally I feel that Netflix has peaked in terms of content too.

They are producing more and more shows I am less and less interested in.

Meanwhile they still have a rolling library of titles instead of an ever expanding one.

[codingdave]

> ignorant to their actual success.

I'll bite - I'm totally ignorant of their success. What metrics are you using to define that success, and where are you getting the data?

[ci5er]

Well, that's just your opinion, man. 200:1 P/E is kind of an outrageous thing...

[newscracker]

Just P/E by itself does not say anything. Amazon was at around -3000 or more at some point and people were still buying it and pushing it up (this continues to happen even now, with Amazon's P/E being around 297 as of this very moment whereas Netflix is about 209). Even the P/E projections for the next two years look significantly favorable with Netflix than with Amazon.

The businesses are very different, but P/E as such is just one measure of market sentiment on a stock.

[sergiotapia]

Their content peaked years ago. Used to be that the "Netflix" badge of content meant this was quality. Now it doesn't really mean anything.

[psyc]

I feel this way, but when I examine it I don’t think it’s true. I believe they’re still releasing OitNB and HoC caliber shows at about the same rate, but now there’s so much filler in addition that it seems the days of quality are past.

What would make Netflix truly amazing, but apparently is not possible, would be if their DVD catalog was available to stream.

[CaptSpify]

The problem is that companies like Disney have already out-produced them. Disney has decades of quality material ready to go

[IntronExon]

For very narrow values of quality, sure. I also hope to hell that the fragmentation or content distribution doesn’t continue unabated. Someone else posted the phrase earlier today, “Death by a thousand cuts,” and they’re right.

Hulu. Netflix. Amazon. CBS. Disney. FX. YouTube Red. Crunchyroll. And on and on.

It’s only vaguely workable when compared to the totslly unworkable price of American cable tv.

[adamnemecek]

Sure but I want to watch things I haven’t seen before

[empath75]

I think Disney is going to find that it’s harder to build a massive online service than it looks and Netflix will become an attractive merger target if they ever falter too badly.

[oligopoly]

Have to agree. The content is stale everywhere else than in US. Disney and others are pushing their own services. Netflix's own shows are hit or miss and can't realistically rely solely on them for those growth expectations. Over time people are less likely to subscribe for long periods of time and only tune in periodically for that netflix exclusive. Those bargain bin movies aint going to cut it for most people.

[fullshark]

I agree with this. Disney is the real threat imo. Their IP seems really sticky and unbeatable. Netflix is basically in a race to establish beloved IP before Disney gets into the fray because the basic stories all these films/shows tell are not really all that different, but people way pay through the nose to get Star Wars / Toy Story etc.

[newscracker]

Competition wise, I think Amazon would be the bigger threat, because that company does not hesitate to lose money almost all the time while Wall Street continues to cheer it on. Netflix on the other hand, does get some unfavorable treatment as far as its stock is concerned.