Every Time Netflix Enters a New Market, BitTorrent Traffic Goes Down…

Which also means, every time someone like Spotify enters a new market, BitTorrent traffic also declines.  Actually, that also goes for other forms of piracy, including P2P, and there’s research to back that up.

netflixshipmentcomesin

Sounds pretty simple: affordable, legal alternatives reduce piracy, but that isn’t necessarily the case for iTunes.  Now, there’s more evidence that streaming deters.  Just recently, Netflix chief content officer Ted Sarandos had this to say about his company’s impact on BitTorrent sharing levels in fresh markets.  “One of the things is we get ISPs to publicize their connection speeds,” Sarandos toldStuff.tv.

“And when we launch in a territory the BitTorrent traffic drops as the Netflix traffic grows.”

The music industry is further along on this piracy shift, especially with massive migrations to YouTube.  But the far more difficult question, specifically from the artist and content owner perspective, is whether any of this matters financially.  Spotify – or YouTube, or Rdio, or Rhapsody, or Muve Music – may be legitimate, but the overall payouts are still peanuts (and close to zero).  Just like BitTorrent, and just like P2P.

Incidentally, lack of availability remains a huge problem on the TV side, as record-setting torrenting around Game of Thrones proves.  But on the music side, content gaps are far fewer, which means streaming access – freemium, paid, or even online radio – has now become a superior substitute to the downsides of torrenting or swapping (unless you love porn pop-ups and sketchy spyware).

But why do fans steal so much?  Executives like Sarandos often frame these developments in moralistic terms, though it’s unclear if the average user, well, gives a crap about theft and artist welfare in the end.  Sarandos disagrees: “So I think people do want a great experience and they want access – people are mostly honest.”

Written while listening to a panel at Musexpo in Los Angeles (if you’re here, say hi!) 

68 Responses

  1. GGG

    I think the reasons people steal so much are fairly simple:
    1) It’s easy and the risk of getting caught/being punished is slim. The best ways of enforcing this opens up a can of worms about online privacy, IP tracking, etc, however. Double-edged sword.
    2) You’re not really stealing a ‘thing.’ You’re stealing a digital file. As much as people on the artist side may disagree, it’s moot. From the pirate perspective, it is vastly different than stealing a CD.
    3) Many people don’t know how much time/money/effort goes into recording. Kicker here is time/effort/money doesn’t automatically equal good. Just because you made art doesn’t mean anyone else will think it has value.
    4) We live in an extremely fickle music culture, and people want to keep up to date so they don’t feel left out. The vast majority of people don’t have hundreds of dollars to spend on music every week, or hell, even every month.
    5) Going off that, when you combine YouTube, Spotify, Bandcamp, etc, streaming probably passes illegal downloads, so it is picking up steam. But I think people just like to have their personally curated library on them to browse, not have to think of everything they want all the time.

    Reply
    • HansH

      I guess Youtube streaming alone already passes illegal downloads. And don’t forget you can build you own library within your favorite streaming service.

      Reply
    • Yves Villeneuve

      1) No can of worms here. Internet traffic is similar to road traffic. An IP address is similar to a license plate. Authorities have the right to investigate suspicious activity or those having a concealed IP address or license plate. Politicians and lawyers have yet to recognize this.
      2) Which is correct? The thinking process of an honest artist/label or that of a thief. The artist point of view that a stolen copy is likely a “material” lost sale is not moot. It is the pirate’s belief there is a difference between a stolen CD or a stolen digital file that is moot. I don’t sympathize with the viewpoint of a thief.
      4) The vast majority of the population would still spend less than $120 per year even if piracy was fully controlled. Music is unlikely as significant as you might think it is.
      5) The biggest reason there is currently a slide in piracy is because pirates have already downloaded what they wanted. They may also feel guilty for it thus turning to legal methods in the face of anti-piracy encouragement from the music industry. Most people are content with curated programming from their favourite radio station… They are not interested in spending time making playlists from an access subscription when the download/cloud model is much cheaper for them and entirely suits their needs.

      Reply
      • GGG

        1) Yes, there is. NIN, for example, just put up a video which was taken off vimeo, so they threw it up on PirateBay. So it’s perfectly legal content being torrented. The can of worms is not simple web traffic going to torrent sites, it’s that IP providers would have to look at the actual, specific file you are downloading. Which I’m not even sure if that’s possible, don’t know enough about how much they track. But this would give companies the ability to track essentially every click you make online. We’re already almost there, but in the meantime it’s still incredibly fucked up to give people that power. Sort of like how Orbitz steered Mac users to higher prices than PC users. There’s a point where you can’t allow that much data availibility to be used against consumers.
        2) Correct is irrelevant. I’m simply pointing out the fundamental idea.
        3) Well, you can’t really talk about piracy and the gen population as the same thing. The majority of pirates are people that DO consume (stealing or buying or streaming) a lot of music. Who do you think pirates more, the avg Pitchfork reader or the avg Rolling Stone reader? I guarantee it’s the former. Those people probably also DO spend at least $120 on music, so they download to save themselves a lot more. Again, simple point, not a justification.
        4) There is new music/movies/TV, etc coming out every day. People have already downloaded everything…what? That’s just ridiculous. And yes, there could possibly be a guilt factor. But just like the smoking culture was reversed but there’s still plenty of smokers, a reversal of anti-piracy culture will never fully fix the problem. I think streaming will absolutely help it, as this article shows. As for the curation, not really sure what you’re arguing here. Yea…music on your device, that’s not streaming, is curated by you by being on your device in the first place. I’m not talking about playlists, I’m talking about someone wanting to have the Beatles catalogue or whatever on their iPhone.

        Reply
        • Yves Villeneuve

          1) Authorities have the right to inspect suspicious packages I.e. digital files, even if they turn out to be legal. The Pirate Bay is not known to be a hub of legal content, so authorities have every legal right to inspect every digital file especially if the file name contains the name of infringed content. Again, you are grasping at straws… No can of worms here.
          4) Sure but spending $120 per year is not the norm.
          5) Sure people are still downloading current releases but most of them have downloaded catalog and deep catalog music, which vastly outnumber current releases. Catalog and deep catalog represent a significant portion of label revenues. Unfortunetely you dismissed the relevance of catalog and deep catalog. Not sure what you mean by curated. People primarily discover music via radio and friends while access subscription is near the bottom of the list. If they simply want the Beatles catalog they can pay a one time fee and stream it from their media player as often as they wish…no need to $10 per month for 80 years to do this.

          Reply
          • GGG

            I’m not grasping at anything. Why do you think this exact issue has come up and been shot down so much recently in the US? And don’t use your stupid argument about politicians being scared by pirates and pedophiles. You really think pirates have more lobbying power than ISPs, media companies, and communications companies? Please.
            For pirates, I bet you it is or would be, hence the pirating. Someone who on avg buys like 2 albums and 5 singles a year isn’t going to bother pirating. They’ll spend their $25 over 12 months and not care. Someone who regularly listens to a ton of new releases is not going to want to budget in buying a few new releases a week. It gets to be too much money. This is why streaming works and will continue to grow. People just want a ton of media at their fingertips, and there’s just too much of it to afford old pricing models. Does it suck for the creators at this point? Yes. Is it a sort of entitled consumer mindset? Yes.
            And I didn’t dismiss back catalogue. Differentiating between that and new releases is pointless. It’s media being pirated. Now who’s grasping at straws? Every single music website refreshes their content numerous times a day. So that’s numerous, old and new, bands being talked about by hundreds of tastemaking (to varying extents) music sites and thousands of random blogs every day. There’s plenty of content to be downloaded. Always. They will obviously flucuate depending on current relevence, but the PirateBay’s Top 100 is always almost entirely albums from the last year or two and/or artists continually in the spotlight.
            I’m not talking about discovering music in regard to curation. I mean you choose what you store on your device. Your library is curated by you by what you buy/steal/copy and add to it, as opposed to just having the entire Spotify library, ie the history of recording music all just there. Now, someone pointed out above that you can make a library on streaming services, but until streaming is more prevelent I think many people still like the idea of having their library. So yes, like you said, just buy the Beatles catalogue and be done with it. Except in relation to this discussion, I was saying people steal it for that exact reason. That was the point. Though, I think this is one thing that can change, as I said, by personal streaming libraries becoming more utilized.

          • Yves Villeneuve

            You are like talking to a brick wall.
            No, I never ever said politicians were afraid of pirates and paedophiles.
            The fact is politicians have not clued in that Internet traffic is similar to road traffic, hence there are no issues that you mention. It’s very black and white but politicians need to be better communicators so that the tech industry do not distort the truth or that ignorant individuals such as yourself do not fall victim to propaganda.
            Not pointless differentiating back catalog from current releases, you are just too hard-headed to figure it out. Let me put it to you simply. The back catalog consists of several million titles versus a thousand titles for the top 100 albums. The reason the back catalog is already stolen is because pirates know the titles they want to steal. They don’t limit their stealing to one song per week, as they do their back catalog stealing all at once then update their library with current titles as they are released. So yes, there is a reduction in piracy because the back catalog is mostly already stolen, as there is no need to steal it more than once.
            Have a good evening. You may want to lay off the Cannabis if you are a user.

          • GGG

            You’ve used the paedophiles line numerous times, don’t try and deny it.
            It’s aboslutely not black and white. If you or anyone wants the ability for ISPs to fight piracy, there needs to be explicit, loophole free laws that are there for the sole purpose of fighting piracy. I would be fine with that. The problem is there is always all sorts of random ambiguous language that would let companies run amuck with your data and every click you make. With free reign to monitor even more than they already do, companies and ISPs will make our online privacy completely obsolete, as opposed to almost obsolete like it already is. That’s not good.
            The amount of pirates that stopped pirating when they got all the classic rock they want is probably so neglible to not even matter.
            Let me put this to you simply. Piracy is about access. People want it. Limited money and/or cheapness = limited access. Piracy granted people with those problems access. Now that streaming is coming along, we have free and/or cheap access. Trying to tout your reasoning is silly. Streaming can do more good for the anti-piracy crowd than anything, but it’s still fairly new here. You can’t just switch something culture normalized on and off. You have to work out of it.
            As for the cannibas, been a few days, so I’m sober for the moment. Though, maybe you should try it. Might allow you to write a song that doesn’t have the exact same melody and rhythm as literally every other song you’ve written.

          • Yves Villeneuve

            I never said politicians were afraid of pirates and paedophiles. If you don’t have evidence then shut the fuck up… I don’t mean that lightly.
            Can’t you read? I said politicians have not clued in yet, so yes some laws need to be changed. Your points are rather moot if politicians treated Internet traffic like road traffic.
            You’re an idiot if you believe Classic Rock is insignificant and is the only genre in the back catalog.
            Piracy is about conveniently taking something without paying for it with little risk of retribution.
            I believe you do take drugs with the mentality you express yourself in this forum. No surprise, and that’s not a compliment. You obviously are not that musically inclined if you believe I use the same melody for every song. My rhythm is intentional, please refer to my website home page where I state, “The Simple Poetic Rock Sounds Of Yves Villeneuve”. If you want to hear something different I recommend you listen to a different artist or genre…I am not trying to emulate anyone else. Keep your drugs… I don’t need them.

          • Casey

            1. That’s the thing. They don’t. DMCA doesn’t give them that right. They have rights to monitor some things when national security is at play under the patriot act and some other laws. But downloading from the Piratebay isn’t one of those cases.

            Even if they did have the right, it’s not that easy to sniff. Log files don’t simply say “xxx is transferring yyy.mp3.” An increasing amount of people use VPNs now days anyway, which are encrypted. Making sniffing irrelevant.

          • Yves Villeneuve

            As I said, politicians haven’t clued in yet. Laws need to be changed. It can be done. Don’t forget, Internet traffic is similar to road traffic. Politicians can make concealing an IP address illegal such as concealing a license plate is illegal. Your points are rather moot, in this case.

          • Casey

            It’s similar as in they are both networks. A license plate is not really comparable to an IP address however. IP addresses change constantly and will often times be shared by more than one user if the ISP doesn’t have enough addresses for everyone to have their own. If it is a very small ISP, they may have to place dozens of people behind a single address.

            Outlawing hiding IP addresses would essentially outlaw VPNs. Outlawing VPNs would be devestating. Millions of people rely on VPNs to connect to their businesses and to protect their data on public networks.

          • Yves Villeneuve

            IP addresses can be traced to a general location (usually a building) at the very least. Don’t see how this would negatively affect an investigation. An investigator with a warrant can search a general location or building, online or in person. A car can have several occupants, but we don’t know which is the perpetrator until after an investigation.
            Don’t see how protecting the identity of a worker accessing a public network is needed. Don’t use or store on a public network if you value your privacy. If you want your bedroom behaviour private then don’t display in public.

          • Econ

            Authorities have the right to inspect suspicious packages I.e. digital files, even if they turn out to be legal.
            Only if they have a specific warrant.

        • Visitor

          Good list. Agree with everything except #4. Many people don’t like to spend $100 even annually.

          Reply
    • dim

      3) tired of hearing you & other freetards saying the “artists feeling entitled to make money” and “just because you spend time on it doesn’t mean it’s good” — you are missing the point: if someone wants it enough to download it, it’s “good” enough to own, and should be paid for. we’re talking about things people are downloading onto their computer, because they want it, not praise from a critic.

      Reply
      • GGG

        First of all, if you want to make a good argument, you should probably stop using ‘freetard.’ Or you and steveh can go hang out with the other 12 year olds.
        Secondly, I didn’t use the word entitlement at all, so don’t quote shit I didn’t say and/or lump me in with it. My point was not about entitlement, it was about people not valueing music. And with a music culture that can be all over the place, don’t expect a lot of people to like your music. Something people like YOU argue every day!
        Third, you are wrong. People don’t exclusively download things they want, in the “I would buy this” sense. People download all the time to ‘test’ music. For example every single album leak, since those won’t be up streaming yet. Are they going to buy it after if they like it? Most likely not since they already have it, so it sucks for the artist. But the point is still there. Plenty of people download plenty of music they end up not caring about.
        This is the problem with this whole debate. Some of you don’t even know how the other side operates. Maybe if you took time to actually understand (not accept…understand) the pirate mentality and how it related to culture, we could actually find a better solution. Or could have twelve years ago instead of suing 8 year olds. Instead you just call everyone who doesn’t lose their mind over piracy a “freetard.” Great strategy.

        Reply
        • econ

          “it’s “good” enough to own, and should be paid for.”

          But at what price? If you over price it, people will say “fuck it, I’ll find a way to get it cheaper/free”. Asking the government to protect your idiotic pricing strategy is where the entitlement mindset comes in.

          Reply
  2. GGG

    1) Yes, there is. NIN, for example, just put up a video which was taken off vimeo, so they threw it up on PirateBay. So it’s perfectly legal content being torrented. The can of worms is not simple web traffic going to torrent sites, it’s that IP providers would have to look at the actual, specific file you are downloading. Which I’m not even sure if that’s possible, don’t know enough about how much they track. But this would give companies the ability to track essentially every click you make online. We’re already almost there, but in the meantime it’s still incredibly fucked up to give people that power. Sort of like how Orbitz steered Mac users to higher prices than PC users. There’s a point where you can’t allow that much data availibility to be used against consumers.
    2) Correct is irrelevant. I’m simply pointing out the fundamental idea.
    3) Well, you can’t really talk about piracy and the gen population as the same thing. The majority of pirates are people that DO consume (stealing or buying or streaming) a lot of music. Who do you think pirates more, the avg Pitchfork reader or the avg Rolling Stone reader? I guarantee it’s the former. Those people probably also DO spend at least $120 on music, so they download to save themselves a lot more. Again, simple point, not a justification.
    4) There is new music/movies/TV, etc coming out every day. People have already downloaded everything…what? That’s just ridiculous. And yes, there could possibly be a guilt factor. But just like the smoking culture was reversed but there’s still plenty of smokers, a reversal of anti-piracy culture will never fully fix the problem. I think streaming will absolutely help it, as this article shows. As for the curation, not really sure what you’re arguing here. Yea…music on your device, that’s not streaming, is curated by you by being on your device in the first place. I’m not talking about playlists, I’m talking about someone wanting to have the Beatles catalogue or whatever on their iPhone.

    Reply
    • Visitor

      Yeah you are right. Internet traffic is similar to road traffic in that police can’t search your car without a warrant either.

      Reply
  3. HansH

    Great article. But why this line?
    Spotify – or YouTube, or Rdio, or Rhapsody, or Muve Music – may be legitimate, but the overall payouts are still peanuts (and close to zero). Just like BitTorrent, and just like P2P.
    Overall payouts are definitly not close to zero! BitTorrent and P2P are.
    For some artists payouts are maybe close to zero but that can be explained.

    Reply
    • GGG

      You disagree those are reasons people steal music? What are the reasons then?

      Reply
    • GGG

      continued from up top:
      The more I argue with you the more I sort of feel bad because I think you’re clearly a little slow. You keep changing points and/or arguing things that aren’t even worth debating.
      If you think enforcing any issue online is black and white, you are a naive moron who has an absurdly myopic view of life in general, let alone the internet. If you don’t think that’s the case, and you now say “some laws need to be changed” then yes, we agree and you were arguing dumb shit for no reason.
      You are an idiot if that’s really remotely close to what you believe I said about classic rock or back catalogue. I would explain it to you but I don’t think it’s worth it at this point.
      Yes, that’s almost exaclty what I’ve said like multiple times now….
      Your vocal melodies are so similar I can listen to 20 seconds of a song then move on to the next and it sounds like the same song. Not to mention the composition is basically the same thing every song, too. And yea, you’ve definitely got the ‘simple’ and ‘sounds’ parts of that down, not sure about the ‘poetic’ part, though. As for listening to other music, I will. I can’t even make it throught half an iTunes preview let alone want to spend money on this crap.
      And don’t get mad. I’m just being “very critical when I….review.”

      Reply
      • Yves Villeneuve

        Hey, I’m not mad. Consider yourself a member of the 47%. You are confusing vocal style with vocal melody but I don’t expect you to know the difference. Your mind tends to be filled with smoke.
        At least you have subtly confirmed my suspicions: you are partially supporting your lifestyle by earning as a drug pusher… No thanks.
        Anything else you said is pure BS, I don’t need to go over it.

        Reply
        • GGG

          I’m not confusing anything. If you think your melodies are anything more than nominally different in the vast majority of your songs, then I really don’t know what to tell you. Ignorance is bliss, I suppose.
          And seriously, try a different drum beat. Your lyrics are not remotely as profound as you think they are to carry composition that repetitive, boring, and unimaginative.

          Reply
          • Yves Villeneuve

            I am not going to argue with you on your critique except to say you don’t understand vocal style or that melody is not always found in the vocals. If you feel strongly about your critique then make it official on iTunes. I could care less. Honestly, I don’t think you have the guts to add it there.
            Btw, what would you know about my lyrics unless you downloaded my entire catalog?

          • Yves Villeneuve

            My guess is that you did download my entire catalog and you probably already added your rating and review.

          • GGG

            Haha, trust me, I would never spend $10 on that mediocre of music. Hell, I wouldn’t even pirate it!
            And to the point I forgot to address; I work in music in NYC. I hear more terrible to medicore lyricists in one week than you can imagine. The combined probably 6 minutes of your music I’ve listened to via 30 second previews is enough to show me your attempt to being profound through cliche, overdone philosophizing fails time and time again.

          • Yves Villeneuve

            Sorry, but you can’t tell that just from the preview. Nice try. Whatever drugs your pushing, I’m not buying.

          • GGG

            Sorry, I can. I highly doubt you turn into some incredibly adept lyricist right after the previews end.
            You are from the typical school of ‘attach random adjectives to words and string together varying degrees of non-sequitors and think you’re fucking Bob Dylan making some deep statement.’
            Also, the drug insult attempt is hilarious. Should I get off your lawn and turn down my damn rap music, too?

          • Yves Villeneuve

            Like I said, whatever drugs your pushing, I’m still not buying.
            It takes courage to give recognition to music you are afraid is successful. Please stay very critical, it serves my purpose whether you are aware of it or not.

          • GGG

            You really need to rethink what ‘courage’ is. Me talking about your shitty music on any website, whether it’s here, iTunes or the frontpage of Rolling Stone does not take courage.

          • Yves Villeneuve

            I recommend you post your comment further to the left. There is no way I can read it even if Paul moves the margins. My browser won’t read it for some odd unknown reason.

          • GGG

            I understand both those things. And really, your argument defending repetitive melody shouldn’t be to draw attention to any other part of your music, because the guitars and drums and composition in general are even worse offenders.
            It takes guts to anonymously review an album on iTunes…? hahaha. Whether this is a thinly veiled attempt to goad me into giving your music some recognition of existence on there, or an attempt to make fun of me, you failed miserably on either account.

          • Yves Villeneuve

            Well that’s just your opinion. Like I said, consider yourself a member of the 47%.
            It takes guts to give recognition to music you are afraid is successful.
            I noticed you avoided my lyrics question: how would you know about them unless you downloaded my entire catalog? Why are you so intent in giving a critique on DMN but not on iTunes? iTunes wouldn’t accept your rating or review so you resorted to DMN?

          • GGG

            I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you posted this before you saw my lyric reply, though it’s hard to know with your…fundamental lack of awareness…
            I guarantee this page on DMN has gotten more hits in 2 days than your iTunes store has in it’s entire life, so you should be thanking me for talking about it here.

          • Visitor

            What’s your evidence? A guarantee from a drug pusher is meaningless to me.

          • GGG

            My evidence is your music is fucking horrible, nobody has rated your years-old albums, and all your popularity bars are at zero. For someone who once touted their 30K MySpace fans, apparently not very many of them buy your stuff. At least not on iTunes.

          • Yves Villeneuve

            Sorry to burst your bubble, but you are not in possession of evidence. What makes you think there are no ratings, reviews or sales? Because ITunes is not showing anything? Prove me wrong and add your review on iTunes and see if it gets published. It takes courage to give recognition to music you are afraid is successful. It also takes courage to search and find the truth.
            You can go on and on about how bad my music here is on DMN, but it doesn’t prove anything except your lack of courage to find out the truth about my music. I also don’t take critiques of drug pushers seriously when I deal with Addiction in my song “He Is The Baddest Friend In Town”.
            I dare you to add your review on iTunes. What are you afraid of? Is it giving me recognition fearing the success of my music? Fess up, criminal.

          • Yves Villeneuve

            Although it’s stated at my website, you’ve been there many times as per your indications, my albums are musical concept albums, but you may have forgotten that. The drum beat, and the rest of my personal style will not deviate much from my norm in future music I create.

          • GGG

            For the cut off post, you could just hit reply and the post shows up under the text box. But I guess thinking someone like you, whose technological ineptitude is on par with my grandma, could figure something so simple out is my own fault. For the record here’s what that post says: “You really need to rethink what ‘courage’ is. Me talking about your shitty music on any website, whether it’s here, iTunes or the frontpage of Rolling Stone does not take courage.”
            For your last post; I am in possession of evidence from my own bands. My poorest selling artist, who have very few fans outside NYC/their families, has sold a paltry 37 full albums and 24 singles on iTunes. Low numbers, and that all registers in the bars. They also have 2 reviews. Why would your music not have those things? If they do, but you hide them, why would you hide them? You really need to think logically before making some lame excuse.
            I’m not afraid of posting a terrible review about your crummy music. I’ve done it here about 5 times now….The only thing keeping me from doing it on iTunes at this point, is I don’t want to give you the satisfaction of 1) making me do anything and 2) making it so it looks like someone actually gave a shit about your embarassingly bad “art.”

          • Yves Villeneuve

            Sounds very much to me you are the one giving lame excuses for not giving a review on iTunes. Still not buying whatever drugs your selling.

          • GGG

            If not wanting to do something a pathetic hack wants me to do is a lame excuse, then I guess I am extremely lame. Congrats, you win!

          • GGG

            You also never answered my question. If your songs have purchases and your albums have reviews, why would you or iTunes hide them?

          • Yves Villeneuve

            You ever hear of private strategy? This is why I won’t tell you. Just like I won’t tell you the reason a very critical review works in my favor. This information is undisclosed while remaining unconfirmed to any open speculation.

          • GGG

            MAYBE you can hide/filter reviews some way, I’ve never looked into it. So I won’t give you that, but I’ll admit ignorance towards it.
            However, the popularity bars are purely on iTunes’ end. And seeing as your 37 second track has color, it would indicate it is not turned off.
            Nice try.

          • Yves Villeneuve

            And why would a 37-second spoken word, the first track of the entire catalog show a sale? For me to know, and you to find out.

          • GGG

            Because popularity bars also register preview plays and searches. So enough people on this site probably see your comments and get curious. They hear that and don’t even have to listen to more to know the rest will be terrible.
            And fine, this will be my last post on this page, too. I’ll leave knowing your constant meaningless insult of me being a drug pusher (which doesn’t offend me 1 since I don’t “push” drugs and 2 because it’s such a hilariously stupid attempt to insult me) is just a poor way to cover up the fact you are delusional, a horrible “artist,” sell very few records, and have THE single worst online marketing plan I’ve ever seen. Even worse than people who don’t even have one. I award you no point and may god have mercy on your soul.

          • Yves Villeneuve

            Anyways, I’m done talking to a drug pusher. Whatever drugs you’re pushing, I’m not buying. Even though I won’t follow your advice, I’ll remember where it came from.

  4. G

    Providing great legal offers actually reduces piracy…. what a news.

    Reply
  5. Bandit

    First, has anyone here actually tried netflix? The selection stinks.
    Second, are we to believe all the postive things the netflix CCO has to say about netflix without some real numbers to back them up?

    Reply
    • GGG

      Netflix for TV shows is pretty fantastic.
      Netflix for movies is pretty terrible.

      Reply
    • Paul Resnikoff
      Paul Resnikoff

      Really awesome point, but riddle me this: why does Netflix have so many subscribers, even with all of its content problems? I’m a subscriber, I routinely hit walls on amazing series (ie, the last season isn’t available).
      Movie selection is… not great!
      So why do I and millions of other stick around? Why are there more people subscribing to Netflix than HBO?
      And how many more would come to the table if the selection was actually good!?

      Reply
      • GGG

        Because it’s cheap as hell for what it is and for how much good stuff is on, despite the fact it could certainly be much better. Watching one season of Breaking Band on demand alone is worth $8 to people. So find a new series/season every month that entertains you however many hours you need, it’s worth it.
        If the content was better, not only would MILLIONS more join, you could bump the price up significantly and people would still pay (as long as the content improvement kept up with price, of course.)

        Reply
      • Bandit

        I subscribe for the kids stuff. Their movies remind me of that photo of the .99 cent dvds at walmart.
        I have three daughters that are just getting into Adventure Time. Apparently netflix recently completed a deal with cartoon network (who by the way are very slow at releasing complete seasons on DVD and very good at whacking the moles on youtube.)
        I would never subscribe based solely on the content for the over 12 demo.

        Reply
  6. Visitor

    By the way, you are free to add your rating and review on iTunes, anonymously. Why keep it for DMN readers only?

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Verify Your Humanity *