Peter Kafka

Recent Posts by Peter Kafka

Yes, Facebook Could Compete With Netflix. And Everyone Else, Too.

Dear mythical investor:

I’m confused.

Yesterday you owned Netflix shares. Today you sold them, prompted by the news that Hollywood had begun renting movies on Facebook, using the social network’s payment platform.

That can’t possibly be true, right? Because if you were a Netflix investor, surely you knew that the company competes with every big player in tech, right? From Apple on down? Including companies that haven’t announced they’re competing with Netflix just quite yet?

Okay, then. At least we’re clear about this now.

And here’s the thing: Facebook, with its 600 million users and its own currency system, can compete with all kinds of companies–not just the ones selling Web video. So if Netflix investors are skittish today, they might have a lot of company down the road.

For the record: Warner Bros. says today’s Dark Knight rental is simply a test. And Facebook won’t say anything specific about rentals at all, just that it’s “looking forward to seeing the new and interesting ways that developers and partners use credits to offer virtual and digital goods in the future.”

And to be fair, if either party were really gung-ho about this, they’d make a bigger splash. Instead, Time Warner’s film studio is starting out by offering a three-year-old movie that its target audience has already watched over and over again.*

I can make other Facebook-won’t-kill-Netflix arguments for you, too, if that makes you feel better:

  • The current set-up really competes with retailers who sell or rent movies, not the Netflix subscription model. Hard to imagine someone giving up an $8 a month Netflix all-you-can-eat account because they can rent a single movie for $3. But it is easy to imagine someone renting a movie on Facebook instead of iTunes or Amazon.
  • The current set-up–individual studios distributing movies via individual fan pages–won’t compete with Netflix, for now, either. If Facebook and the studios are going to be serious about this, they’ll need a centralized storefront.
  • Did we mention that this is a single movie from a single studio? The Netflix digital catalog has some 20,000 titles. And subscribers who pay for the DVD option get more than 100,000 titles.

But Warner Bros. will certainly be trying more of these, says digital distribution head Thomas Gewecke. “We think it’s a very powerful proposition to make our movies commercially available where our fans are,” he said this afternoon.

Hard to imagine other studios not reaching the same conclusion. And–this is where things get really interesting–hard to imagine other content-makers not trying the same thing.

Facebook won’t let people buy physical items with Facebook Credits–just digital goods. And if I understand the company correctly, it won’t even let you download the goods you buy. You’ve got to consume them on the site itself.

I don’t know how that restriction syncs with Warner’s announced plan to sell downloads, but I don’t see that being a long-term issue, either.  I can’t think of a reason why Facebook wouldn’t let a select group of vendors sell downloads if they wanted to. (And we’re supposedly moving to a cloud-based, rental/subscription consumption model anyway, where ownership is supposed to be less important.)

So think about everything else you could sell via Facebook Credits, if you wanted to: TV shows, of course. But also e-books, e-magazines and e-newspapers. And music. And software and games. Does this sound familiar?

It should to Steve Jobs, who moved $1.1 billion worth of virtual goods through Apple’s iTunes store last quarter.

Good thing his investors aren’t as skittish as Netflix CEO Reed Hastings’s. At least not today.


comments so far. Add yours.

  • Anonymous

    another chance to grab a slightly cheap amount of NFLX stock.

    Netflix has been doing this for years. Facebook is about being a social platform and they’re great at it. They’ve tried competing in other areas where you’d think they’d make more sense, like for example Social Checking, one year later, FourSquare doubled their user base.

    El que mucho abarca, poco aprieta.

  • Anonymous

    Wow, that makes a whole lot of sense dude. Wow.

    http://www.privacy-tools.cz.tc

  • Anonymous

    I think it’s interesting that Facebook didn’t do a deal with Netflix straight up. It appears instead that they’re going to build their own ties to hollywood and square off. The big story is that it would appear that potential alliance is probably never going to happen. Competition in digital media is going to erode final price. Hollywood is trying to route around Netflix but will wind up giving movies away even cheaper by unleashing another intermediary.

  • Anonymous

    lets see facebook is a bigger one trick pony than google, trying hard to encroach on all areas. They are going to fail miserably. And twitter and foursquare are still growing quite fast.

  • Anonymous

    FaceBook movie rentals could be as successful as Google TV! After all, if there is one thing Facebook is good at, it’s movie rentals.

    Definitely this doesn’t compete with Netflix. If you look at Apple TV, it has both iTunes and Netflix, and they are very complimentary.

    And being in the Web browser is going to stifle Facebook’s movie rentals from the start. I rent movies on an iPad or Apple TV. Even Netflix and Hulu are 1000 times better on iPad than in a browser.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=692271649 Luis Eduardo Gutierrez

    Facebook could totally be the next Google.

  • Anonymous

    The difference between Facebook Movie and Google TV is that Google, in error, tried to compete the tangible good marketspace instead of the digital marketspace, where they are very good. Facebook perhaps watched this and adopted the Amazon strategy – no physical inventory whenever possible. As long as Facebook can maintain itself as a tube or tunnel for content, there is no reason they couldn’t eventually make this work. No one says that in the future all this content we consume will come from one place. It will probably come from lots of places, and maybe Facebook will be one of them, and to do that they have to tear off a bit from Netflix. note – Netflix is overpriced and has been for months.

  • http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/ PKafka

    As I think others have noted on this post, or the earlier one I wrote, Facebook’s app/credits system wouldn’t preclude Netflix from doing an iTunes-style app deal here, too. Though I wonder what Apple would think of that…

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_GPRJSTZN7YHLNB336IO6M4KW2E thinktwicebforetalking

    I like the article very much. What I don’t like is MarketWatch showing this article as a negative for NETFLIX. I should add that why didn’t Warner offer the same thing as well to NETFLIX. Reason: Hollywood dislikes everybody but itself. The movie industry wants to put a stop at NETFLIX and they do this type of thing with Facebook plus short-selling NFLX if they have to, up until they get the Ultraviolet platform running,
    It’s all a very dirty game but gaming after all is what we, investors, should expect rather than “investing” the old fashion one. Lending money to a company to finance new ventures or improve its offerings and services. I take note for the rest of my investment decisions even though I’ve made money with NETFLIX. Lesson: Go with the massive crowd but it must go crazy about something even if they don’t have money to live on, they’ll get iPads, iPhones, pay Verizon, ATT, and stay all day long looking at THEMSELVES in Facebook (the reason it’s working is because of isolated people and self-indulgent as well.)

  • http://twitter.com/nutcracker1000 Warren Evans

    The record companies and Facebook should get together and begin selling music on Facebook. If this happens they will regain the leverage that was lost to Apple.

  • http://twitter.com/nutcracker1000 Warren Evans

    The record companies and Facebook should get together and begin selling music on Facebook. If this happens they will regain the leverage that was lost to Apple.

  • http://twitter.com/sethhart sethhart

    why is it “easy to imagine someone renting a movie on Facebook instead of iTunes or Amazon?

    Why would someone go through FB if they any media console upon which they already rent? Besides novelty and trial, I dont see the value here for the user. Going through FB is an extra step.

    People are already tired of FB downloading their every move.

    Will be interesting to see how the Social TV partners of the world (Miso, Get Glue, the list goes on) work with this development.

  • http://twitter.com/ZacharyRD Zachary Reiss-Davis

    Good point; they key here is the comment “Hard to imagine someone giving up an $8 a month Netflix all-you-can-eat account because they can rent a single movie for $3. But it is easy to imagine someone renting a movie on Facebook instead of iTunes or Amazon.” – I see this as competing with Apple, not Netflix.

  • http://www.spotsift.com Peter Chang

    The reason why Netflix has come out on top has more to do with their online web application. I believe this is the fundamental reason why they they won against Blockbuster, Amazon and Walmart.

    I haven’t tried movies on Facebook but duplication this is not trivial. Their recommendation algorithm is as valuable as Google’s search rank algo imo.

    Yes, Facebook is huge but it doesn’t make them an automatic winner. After all what ever happened to the Facebook Marketplace? They have the right audience but you don’t see Craigslist and Ebay shutting down.

    I think the one real vulnerability that Netflix has is the move to streaming. Of course, this makes them vulnerable to any competitor. They also have the issue with limited streaming titles (due to the nature of having to reach an agreement with each studio) where maybe FB could have better leverage. I think Apple (via iTunes) is better suited to take on this monumental challenge.

  • http://twitter.com/DigitalMasala Sunil Gunderia

    Great article Peter. Very rationale and balanced versus the headline grabbing FB/WB deal sinks Netflix hyperbole blasted across the blogsphere.

    The availability of a film on facebook at this point in time is not about facebook becoming a film/video aggregator to compete with Netflix.

    Rather, as Peter points out that studios and other media companies are beginning to use facebook as a new point of sale.

    Thomas Geweke’s point regarding the powerful proposition that FB offers by bringing products and fans together in one place is significant. I believe we are at the start of a new era in social commerce where consumers will be able to transact directly within a community/fan site vs redirecting them to a separate ‘store’ site.

    Direct sales on FB will allow companies to measure their ROI on social media investments which has been difficult. WB and the other studios are increasingly investing in FB marketing (building fan sites and buying advertising) for the theatrical release of a film. Historically, the measurement of the success of their marketing investment have been indirect, e.g. the number of fans (i.e. those that ‘like’ the film). However, allowing renting/buying through facebook in the home entertainment window would enable the studios to establish a metric that directly links revenue generation to their investment.

    These are the very metrics that will enable studios to justify increased marketing on facebook vs other channels.

    Ultimately, this will result in more revenues and profit for facebook and I bet that is where they will focus versus taking on netflix.

  • Anonymous

    Just like in the dating space http://www.pointsincase.com/co.....ook-of-sex could compete with the ACTUAL facebook right?! Come on people, Netflix will always have the edge here.

  • Anonymous

    I don’t see why Warner Brothers had to get access to my entire facebook feed and all of the information I had EVER shared with my friends AND then have me pay 30 FB credits (or some such Disney Dollar crap).
    How does that make any sense? Why would I do it?

  • http://profiles.google.com/fridayfracas R. McAuliffe

    “we’re supposedly moving to a cloud-based, rental/subscription consumption model anyway, where ownership is supposed to be less important.”

    Streaming and downloading are methods of delivery of digital content, not legal indications of ownership or rental.

Google’s Cable TV Lineup: A Wishlist

February 22, 2012 at 3:29 pm PT

Hello, Goodbye. That Will Be $1.29.

February 22, 2012 at 6:30 am PT

Resonate Raises $22 Million for “Values” Ads

February 22, 2012 at 4:00 am PT

Sponsored Topic

Latest Video

View all videos »

Search »

Hon Hai has a workforce of over one million worldwide, and as human beings are also animals, to manage one million animals gives me a headache.

— Hon Hai chairman Terry Gou, who went on to say that he wants to learn from the director of Taipei Zoo regarding how animals should be managed