Obsolete? Netflix introduces "streaming-only" options for customers

Netflix online streaming fans who could care less about renting DVD’s by mail can now save some money on Netflix’s newly-announced Streaming Only service plan, available now for $7.99 per month.  New and former customers can now also obtain a one month free trial of Netflix’s online and traditional plans, up from the former two week free sample.

The new streaming plan comes after moderate success offering online video to Canadian customers.  Netflix has been slowly transforming itself into a streaming-media company, as costs to package, ship, and process DVD’s by mail continues to rise.  About 20 percent of Netflix’s catalog is available for instant viewing on a computer screen, smartphone, or larger living room TV (with the help of a set top box, Netflix-equipped DVD player, or videogame console).

For customers who prefer getting physical DVD’s (or just want the 80 percent of Netflix’s catalog not available online), some bad news.  The company is raising rates beginning tomorrow.  The rate increase amounts to $1 for every DVD a plan allows to be checked out at the same time.  For the company’s popular 3-out plan, the monthly rate rises $3, from $16.99 to $19.99 per month, plus applicable tax.

Most Netflix streaming fans subscribe to the company’s 1-out plan, the lowest price option that includes unlimited streaming.  That plan rises in price by one dollar to $9.99 per month (plus tax).  If the rent-by-mail option is of little interest, consider downgrading to the streaming only plan and save two dollars a month.

It will be a long time before Netflix can offer its entire catalog online.  Larger studios with close ties to cable companies are lengthening the window before certain titles can become available for instant viewing.  Three of the six major Hollywood studios will not offer movies through Netflix’s online viewing service until HBO’s contract to show the movies expires.  For many titles, that means at least seven years after the movies are released on DVD.

Netflix's New Rates

[flv width=”512″ height=”308″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WSJ Netflix 11-29-10.flv[/flv]

The Wall Street Journal’s Digital Network discussed the implications of Netflix’s new streaming plan and the potential impact of the rate increase for traditional DVD rental customers.  (4 minutes)

Comcast wants to be paid twice for carrying Netflix online video content to its customers: once from customers themselves and a second time from Level 3 Communications, Inc., the company providing much of Netflix’s streamed video traffic.

“On Nov. 19 Comcast informed Level 3 that, for the first time, it will demand a recurring fee from Level 3 to transmit Internet online movies and other content to Comcast’s customers who request such content,” said Level 3’s chief legal officer, Thomas Stortz, in a statement. “By taking this action, Comcast is effectively putting up a toll booth at the borders of its broadband Internet access network, enabling it to unilaterally decide how much to charge for content which competes with its own cable TV and Xfinity delivered content.”

The backbone and content distribution company accused Comcast of threatening the open Internet and of abusing its market position as America’s largest cable broadband provider.  Comcast disageed, calling Level 3’s position “duplicitous” and accused the company of sending far more traffic from its content partners than the cable giant sends in the other direction.

Joe Waz, senior vice president of External Affairs and Public Policy Counsel at Comcast posted a response on the company’s blog claiming Level 3 was trying to have it both ways, running a lucrative content delivery business for clients like Netflix while also acting as a major Internet backbone provider.  Waz claims Level 3 is purposely confusing the fair exchange of backbone traffic with the commercial content delivery business it also runs:

Comcast has long established and mutually acceptable commercial arrangements with Level 3′s Content Delivery Network (CDN) competitors in delivering the same types of traffic to our customers. Comcast offered Level 3 the same terms it offers to Level 3′s CDN competitors for the same traffic. But Level 3 is trying to gain an unfair business advantage over its CDN competitors by claiming it’s entitled to be treated differently and trying to force Comcast to give Level 3 unlimited and highly imbalanced traffic and shift all the cost onto Comcast and its customers.

To quantify this, what Level 3 wants is to pressure Comcast into accepting more than a twofold increase in the amount of traffic Level 3 delivers onto Comcast’s network — for free. In other words, Level 3 wants to compete with other CDNs, but pass all the costs of that business onto Comcast and Comcast’s customers, instead of Level 3 and its customers.

Level 3′s position is simply duplicitous. When another network provider tried to pass traffic onto Level 3 this way, Level 3 said this is not the way settlement-free peering works in the Internet world. When traffic is way out of balance, Level 3 said, it will insist on a commercially negotiated solution.

But Level 3 claims Comcast threatened to pull the plug if they didn’t agree to the cable company’s demands, which would have cut off Comcast customers from a wide range on content.  The company agreed to pay Comcast under protest, and took the issue public just as attention has become re-focused on Net Neutrality at the Federal Communications Commission.

The dispute increasingly resembles cable TV carriage fights where programmers threaten to yank programming if their terms are not met.  Had Comcast delivered on its alleged threat to cut ties to Level 3, widespread disruptions of content delivery could have been the result, starting with a blockade against Netflix streaming video.  That would leave Comcast broadband customers paying for a hobbled Internet experience, missing popular websites because of Comcast’s roadblocks wherever Level 3 traffic was involved.

It’s a classic case of a Net Neutrality violation, with money being the motivating factor.  Pro-consumer public policy groups immediately pounced on the news.

“Comcast’s request of payment in exchange for content transmission is yet another example of why citizens need strong, effective network neutrality rules that include a ban on such ‘paid prioritization’ practices,” said Andrew Jay Schwartzman, senior vice president and policy director of Media Access Project. “It is also yet another clear demonstration of why Comcast should not be permitted to acquire NBC Universal, given its clear tendency to exercise control in the video marketplace.”

“On its face, this is the sort of toll booth between residential subscribers and the content of their choice that a Net Neutrality rule is supposed to prohibit,” said Harold Feld, legal director of Public Knowledge. “In addition, this is exactly the sort of anticompetitive harm that opponents of Comcast’s merger with NBC-Universal have warned would happen — that Comcast would leverage its network to harm distribution of competitive video services, while raising prices on its own customers.”

Although Netflix and officials at the Federal Communications Commission both refused comment, analysts predict consumers will ultimately pay the price for Comcast’s newest fees in the form of higher prices for online content.  Comcast does not impose these fees on its own TV Everywhere online video service, Xfinity Fancast.  Waiving expensive content delivery fees for “preferred content partners” could leave independent competitors like Netflix vulnerable to the whims of the broadband providers charging extra to deliver traffic to paying customers.

The FCC is rumored to be considering enacting some broadband reforms before new Republican members of Congress take their seats in January.

(Thanks to several of our readers, including Terry and ‘PreventCaps’ for sending word.)

[flv]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Bloomberg Comcast Internet Toll Booth 11-30-10.flv[/flv]

Bloomberg News briefly covered the dispute in this morning’s Business Briefs segment.  (1 minute)

Although the cable trade press reports it is business as usual at most of the nation’s largest cable companies, news that several companies are losing more cable-TV subscribers than they are adding is creating concern in boardrooms and on Wall Street.  Although the power of the perennial “rate increase” has kept revenues up, cable operators like Time Warner Cable are beginning to realize they can’t just keep raising rates expecting customers to sit still for it.

For more than 30 years, cable operators have assumed (correctly) that raising rates far in excess of inflation will bring about a lot of grumbling from upset subscribers, but few will actually resort to cutting the cord and going back to free TV (or books).  But as many cable households now routinely pay “triple-play” bills well in excess of $200 a month, that is finally starting to change:

• For many households, the switch to digital TV and an increasing number of sub-channels has proved adequate to meet the needs of many viewers, so long as they receive a decent picture and at least a handful of digital sub-channels;
• Online access to at least some cable programming, movies, and television shows on-demand has solved the problem of having too few viewing options.  If nothing of interest is running on local channels, a quick visit to Netflix or Hulu can satisfy most viewers;
• Many increasingly prefer spending their free time online instead of parked in front of the television;
• The realities of the current economy and tightened middle class budgets make many cable packages simply unaffordable, even if customers wanted them.

Time Warner Cable has recognized the growing strain on their video side of the business and has initiated some strong marketing efforts to hold onto customers who are one rate increase away from canceling.

This fall, the cable company unveiled its $33 per service promotion, charging that price for each component of their triple-play package for a year.  While Time Warner has more aggressively priced individual services in the past for new customers, this one is unique because it is open to existing customers as well.  Customers speaking to Time Warner’s retention agents are being offered this package in an effort to keep customers hooked up to the company’s video, broadband, and phone services.  Currently, many markets also include a free year of Showtime or at least six months of DVR service, and a year of Road Runner Turbo.  In highly competitive markets, informal promotions can bring even lower prices or extra add-ons.

A few weeks ago, the cable company unveiled online video streaming of ESPN Networks for existing cable subscribers, and an online remote DVR-programming application that lets subscribers set up recordings while away from home.

Now the company is further bolstering its video packages:

1. As part of its long term agreement with Disney, ABC and ESPN, this week Time Warner Cable added over 300 hours of new On Demand programming content from ABC, Disney and ESPN. In addition, the company will launch Primetime HD On Demand tomorrow, which will also be available to Digital Cable customers at no additional cost.  The new channel Primetime HD On Demand will carry primetime programming from ABC, NBC and CBS in High Definition. Subscribers will have over 100 hours of the networks’ popular primetime programs including NBC’s 30 Rock and The Office; ABC’s Grey’s Anatomy and Desperate Housewives; and CBS’ Medium and CSI.
2. Time Warner Cable Look Back will bolster the existing “Start Over” feature by archiving up to three days of programming on more than two dozen different networks and cable channels.  Now, if you missed a favorite show that aired the evening before, you can watch it on demand.  As with “Start Over,” Time Warner has disabled fast-forwarding, so no zipping through commercials is allowed.  But the service comes free of charge, and includes an impressive lineup of participating networks including ABC, NBC, Fox Cable Networks, Discovery Networks, and Scripps’ Food Network, Cooking Channel, HGTV, and DIY.
3. HBO Max and Go Max, part of TV Everywhere, will reach more than 50 million Time Warner Cable customers by the end of the month.  These services deliver online on-demand access to movies, series, and specials airing on HBO and Cinemax and will be available to customers paying for the premium channels at no additional charge.  More than 70 million customers will have access by the second quarter of 2011.
4. Time Warner Cable CEO Glenn Britt told investors on a conference call held last week that the cable company is aggressively pursuing renewal agreements with programmers that allow the cable company to begin offering smaller, budget priced packages of cable-TV programming.  While it won’t be the a-la-carte option many consumers crave, cable programming packages could begin to resemble what home satellite dish customers used to receive — a core package of two dozen channels with theme or network-based add-on “programming packs” for additional fees.  For example, customers looking for reality or educational programming might buy a “Home and Garden” package consisting of Food TV, HGTV, The Weather Channel, Discovery and The Learning Channel.  Movie fans might get a package of Encore, AMC, Turner Classic Movies, Fox Movies and MGM.  “We have negotiated some additional flexibility beyond what we had a few years ago that will allow us to begin to offer some smaller packages at lower prices. Probably not all the way where we’d like to be. But we’re moving in the right direction,” Britt told investors.

The cable company’s friendly former owner — Time Warner, Inc.,  has also helped man the barricades against cable’s competitors.  For Netflix and Redbox customers: longer waiting times for access to the latest Time Warner movies are likely.  The current delay of 28 days could be extended, according to CEO Jeff Bewkes.

“So far the 28-day window has clearly been a success versus no delay,” Bewkes told investors. “The question of whether we ought to go longer is very much under scrutiny. It may well be a good idea.”

Even local movie theaters face some potential competition, as Time Warner considers introducing a premium pay-per-view option that would allow cable customers to watch movies currently in theaters at home.  But they’ll pay a heavy price to watch — reportedly between $30-50 per title, and the cable operator will insert anti-recording technology into the signal to prevent digital recordings.

Will these new services ultimately stop the bleeding from departing cable customers?  For most it’s a matter of dollars and sense.

[flv width=”640″ height=”500″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Cutting Cable’s Cord 11-9-10.flv[/flv]

The media has gotten aggressive about talking to viewers about how they can get rid of their cable-TV subscription and save plenty.  (10 minutes)

Thomas Clancy Jr., 35, in Long Beach, N.Y., canceled the family’s Cablevision subscription this spring. He said he has been happy with Netflix and other Internet video services since then, even though there isn’t a lot of live sports to be had online.

“The amount of sports that I watched certainly didn’t justify a hundred-dollar-a-month expense for all this stuff. I mean, that’s twelve hundred dollars a year,” Clancy told the Associated Press. “Twelve hundred dollars is … near a vacation.”

Customers like Clancy are comfortable with technology and well-versed on how to hook up Internet video and integrate it with the family’s TV sets.  For customers like him, online video will increasingly be an attractive alternative to high cable TV bills.

For some western New Yorkers, Wegmans' Redbox kiosk is their new "cable company."

For homes with less tech-savvy subscribers who have watched their wages fall over the past decade even as cable rates keep increasing, economic realities driven home by the Great Recession are making the decision for them.

“The price of cable TV has risen to the point where it’s simply not affordable to lots of lower-income homes. And right now there are an awful lot of lower-income homes,” Craig Moffett, a Wall Street analyst who favors the cable industry said. “The evidence suggests that what we’re seeing is a poverty problem rather than a technology phenomenon.”

For these customers, including many in the middle class, each time cable companies like Time Warner increase cable rates, they drop a service or two.

“First it was Showtime, the Movie Channel, and Starz!,” writes Stop the Cap! reader Joanne in Penfield, N.Y., a suburb of Rochester. “Then when they raised the rates again on the premium channels, we dropped them all — bye bye HBO and Cinemax.”

“When Time Warner sends us their rate increase notice right after Christmas as they’ve done for years, we’re dropping digital cable and returning our cable boxes,” she writes.  “If they keep it up, we’ll drop cable altogether — something we might have done earlier if we had some competition around here.”

“I don’t care how much they claim it’s a ‘great value,'” Joanne says. “My husband got laid off from his job at Xerox in 2009 and was just let go from his new job at Carestream.  I already work myself and we have three kids, and our health insurance premiums are skyrocketing at the end of the year.  We haven’t had a real raise in five years, so that made the decision for us.”

Joanne now rents movies from Redbox just inside the local Wegmans grocery store and has a $9 monthly subscription with Netflix, mostly for online streaming.

“It’s more than made up for the $40+ a month we used to spend on premium channels with Time Warner,” she said.

[flv width=”640″ height=”500″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WISN Milwaukee Time Warner Cable Offers Start Over For WISN 12 ABC Programs 11-9-10.flv[/flv]

WISN-TV in Milwaukee introduces viewers to Time Warner Cable’s newest on-demand features.  (1 minute)

Netflix accounts for 20 percent of all broadband activity in the United States during prime time evening hours.  As expected, “Internet experts” that are really little more than paid lobbyists for the broadband industry have started to feed the media scare stories about the great Internet traffic crisis soon to befall the Internet.

Just a few years ago, it was peer-to-peer traffic responsible for Internet “brownouts,” but now Netflix offers an even better, more convenient scapegoat — especially for the broadband providers that compete with it.

Fortune magazine provides a handy dandy needle to pop the balloon of BS from the broadband industry bully boys:

Just for fun, try to guess the year in which the following warnings about the Internet’s impending meltdown were issued:

No. 1: “Over the coming six to 12 months, computer users around the planet are likely to experience the Internet equivalent of the Great Blackout, or at least frequent brownouts, as our information infrastructure staggers and struggles under the heavy onslaught of new users and new demands.”

No. 2: “Internet access infrastructure, specifically in North America, will likely cease to be adequate for supporting demand within the next three to five years.”

No. 3: “Will Netflix Destroy the Internet?  American broadband capacity might not be able to keep up.”

The answers: 1997, 2007 and this week—and that’s just a small sampling from the past 20 years. Such predictions of the Internet’s breakdown are always premised on  the arrival of a scary new device or application that will send lots of digital bits over the Net.  Back in 1995, when Internet sage Bob Metcalfe tried to explain why he foresaw “the Internet’s catastrophic collapse,” he cited a wave of new “Internet appliances,” in particular the dangerous Sony Playstation, which for the first time had Internet access!

[…]What the chicken littles often miss are the clever ways in which Netflix movies and other content get delivered.  Like most major companies that move lots of Internet traffic, Netflix contracts with companies whose job it is to deliver lots of bits, fast and cheap.  Netflix relies mainly on industry giant Akamai, which runs 77,000 servers with big hard drives that it has placed in every nook and cranny of the Internet.  When a college student downloads “Dexter Season 1” from Netflix there’s a good chance the show is already stored on campus on an Akamai box.

“That video is growing rapidly and going to be huge is true,”  says Akamai co-founder Tom Leighton. “But there’s tons of capacity out at the edges of the network….plenty of capacity in the last mile to your house.”  That capacity, he says, combined with smart delivery of Netflix content from nearby servers, means the Internet can handle Netflix just fine.  If all that traffic had to travel closer to the center of the Internet then many larger peering points would be overwhelmed, Leighton adds. (There’s reason to trust Leighton’s numbers on both counts: he’s also a professor of applied mathematics at MIT.)

[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/KOCO Oklahoma City Netflix Crashing The Internet 11-4-10.flv[/flv]

Check out KOCO-TV Oklahoma City’s “Internet Panic” story, delivering the broadband industry’s talking points about Internet traffic jams in just 30 seconds.  (1 minute)

Peer to peer traffic no longer represents the largest single source (by application) of broadband traffic on the Internet.  Cisco’s Visual Networking Study now finds online video streamed from websites like Hulu and Netflix to account for more than one-quarter of all broadband traffic, displacing file swapping from the number one position.

File sharing activity has routinely been used by providers dreaming of Internet Overcharging as an excuse to introduce usage limits and throttled speeds for their broadband customers.  Peer to peer software allows customers to exchange pieces of files back and forth until everyone manages to secure their own copy.  Cable operators, in particular, have complained this network traffic saturates their shared broadband lines because customers upload far more data than they would without this software.  Up to 44 percent of all upstream traffic from residential accounts comes from peer to peer traffic, according to Cisco.

Providers and their friends have started to give up on their scare stories of peer-to-peer “exafloods” and data tsunamis triggered from too many online users engaged in file swapping.  As we’ve argued for two years now, the glory days of growth in peer to peer are behind us for a variety of reasons:

1. Downloading copies of TV shows and movies, always popular on file sharing networks, has declined now that content producers are finally serving the growing market for on-demand video programming;
2. The growing popularity of downstream delivery direct to consumers has reduced wait times for downloading to near nothing — to the point where some users are abandoning peer-to-peer altogether;
3. An increasing amount of fake files filled with viruses and spyware has made peer to peer-sourced files from underground websites more risky;
4. Copyright enforcement and other legal actions have made file trading less palatable for some.

While peer-to-peer traffic is still growing along with other online usage, online video is growing far faster.

Now some want to move the goal post — blaming online video for “forcing their hand” to implement overcharging schemes.

Broadband Traffic by Application Category, 3rd Quarter – 2010

• The marked categories contain video.

Karl Bode at Broadband Reports writes that he found Sanford Bernstein analyst and cable stock fluffer Craig Moffett telling CNET that if customers cut the cord, cable broadband companies will simply turn around and begin metering broadband customers’ bandwidth. In fact, Karl adds, Moffett goes so far as to insist ISPs will have “no choice” in the matter as streaming services like Netflix gain popularity.

Instead of simply raising prices on cable broadband, Moffett said it’s more likely that cable operators would move toward usage-based pricing. That way consumers who use more bandwidth to stream movies and TV shows end up paying more per month for service than people who may be getting their video from the traditional cable TV network. Time Warner has tested usage-based billing, but the company faced a huge backlash from consumers. Still, Moffett said that broadband service providers may have no choice as bandwidth-intensive video streaming services like Netflix become more popular.

CNET’s Marguerite Reardon calls that scenario a “heads we win; tails we win” situation, especially for cable companies.

Would you tell this man you are dropping your Comcast video package to watch everything online for free? (Neil Smit, president - Comcast's cable division)

Last quarter, some companies saw the number of subscribers actually drop for the first time ever.  Now Comcast reports in its latest earnings call the same thing is happening to them — losing 56,000 TV package subscribers during the third quarter.  Comcast surveyed some of their customers calling to fire their cable company.  Most of them are not switching to a pay TV competitor, said Neil Smit, president of Comcast’s cable division.  Comcast characterized them as “going to over the air free TV,” but would you tell your cable company you are dropping their video package to watch everything on their broadband service for free?  For a lot of cable customers, that would be tantamount to calling them up and saying you are now getting free HBO on your TV.

Both companies are still denying online video is cutting into their cable TV package business, but it’s an argument some stock analysts have begun to make as they watch cable profits struggling to hit targets.  Watching extra fat profits bleed away because “broadband piggies are watching all of their TV online for free” just won’t do for folks like Mr. Moffett, who will be among those leading the call to slap limits on broadband usage to protect industry profits.  Why leave good money on the table?

But before Moffett encourages cable companies to install coin slots and credit card readers on cable modems, he has another idea: jack up the prices of broadband higher than ever while cutting video pricing, making it pointless for customers to jump ship:

“Cable’s broadband dominance opens the door for renewed share gains in the adjacent video market,” Moffett said in his report. “Cable companies could simply increase their a la carte broadband prices (since in most markets, households have no other choice for sufficiently fast broadband) and simultaneously drop their video pricing, leaving the price of the bundle unchanged, to recapture video share.”

He pointed to an example of this in Albany, N.Y., where Time Warner Cable raised its broadband price by 10 percent for its Internet-only customers to a rate just $2 below its promotional bundled rate for both services. The Internet-only price increased to $54.95 from $49.95. The 12-month promotional rate for video and data was $56.95.

Of course, Albany has Verizon FiOS breathing down Time Warner’s neck.  In late October, Verizon announced it was launching its video FiOS service in Scotia, just outside of nearby Schenectady. Bethlehem, Colonie, Schenectady and Guilderland already have FiOS phone and Internet services available, so getting a TV franchise to deliver competition to Time Warner Cable isn’t a big leap.

In Rochester (where Frontier Communications idea of video is a satellite dish), a similar promotional package from Time Warner runs $84.90 a month.

Highlights of the Cisco Report

• The average broadband connection generates 14.9 GB of Internet traffic per month, up from 11.4 GB per month last year, an increase of 31 percent;
• “Busy hour” traffic grew at a faster pace than average traffic, growing 41 percent since last year. Peak-hour Internet traffic is 72 percent higher than Internet traffic during an average hour. The ratio of the busy hour to the average hour increased from 1.59 to 1.72, globally;
• Peer-to-peer (P2P) file sharing is now 25 percent of global broadband traffic, down from 38 percent last year, a decrease of 34 percent. While still growing in absolute terms, P2P is growing more slowly than visual networking and other advanced applications;
• Peer-to-peer has been surpassed by online video as the largest category. The subset of video that includes streaming video, flash, and Internet TV represents 26 percent, compared to 25 percent for P2P;
• Over one-third of the top 50 sites by volume are video sites. There is a high degree of diversity among the video sites in the top 50, including video viewed on gaming consoles, Internet TV, short-form user-generated video, commercial video downloads, and video distributed via content delivery networks (CDNs). Video sites appeared more frequently than any other type of site in the top 50.