[ansy]

Netflix bought House of Cards back in March bidding against HBO and AMC [1]. Less than a week later CBS, parent company of Showtime, announced it would pull Showtime content from Netflix even though the contract wasn't going to expire until the summer [2]. No negotiation or warning to Netflix, just "FYI, we're out, thanks." HBO just flat out refuses to license any of its content to Netflix or anyone else for that matter.

And it's not like Netflix isn't willing to pay. Netflix paid $30 million per movie for exclusive early access with Dreamworks. Previously HBO held the contract for only $20 million per movie [3].

Media companies are just telling Netflix to flat out screw off or at best pay a ridiculous sum that nobody else would be expected to pay. Each one has a different threshold. HBO has zero tolerance. Starz had quite a bit up to a point. But eventually they all put on the brakes to keep Netflix in check.

[1] http://arstechnica.com/media/news/2011/03/netflix-locks-down...

[2] http://www.bgr.com/2011/03/23/cbs-will-remove-some-showtime-...

[3] http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/26/business/media/netflix-sec...

[keithwinstein]

Time Warner is trying to sign people up for their subscription service (HBO) -- is it really in their interest to license their content to a competing subscription service?

[bluedanieru]

It's in their interest to get as many people to pay for their content as they can, and one would think that multiple channels of distribution would be a means to that end.

It's obvious why they don't want to, of course. If they control distribution, the theory goes, they can charge basically whatever they want. And of course they can control legal distribution quite easily, but that's not enough, is it?