16 thoughts on “Future of TV According to Netflix’s Reed Hastings”

  1. I love what Reed is saying, I disagree that there will be “…no channels”…I’m confident there will be channels but everything will be on-demand, except news, live sports and concerts.

    1. Marq

      I have heard similar suggestions from other technology industry insiders as well and many of them believe that the future is totally on-demand and if there are channels they will be like apps.

      1. Hi,

        Any thoughts on what these apps would contain?

        Apps for tv-shows/movies makes good sense, but in a “click-and-watch” world channels are just feeds that filter the on-demand content.

        For filtering I expect industry ‘feeds’ to meet strong competition from user generated feeds, recommendation engines and playlist generators – so in my opinion the traditional channels will become a lot less important.


  2. Hi,

    How many fast food stores are, how many clothes shops?

    While he didn’t seem to say much original or meaningful, he’s definitively naive if he doesn’t appreciate the value of channels.
    They are the brands for our tv, the people who we leave it to to select what meets stocked (in the main), and most importantly, the people capable and willing to take the financial risk, and invest in the first bulk of costs to produce the content that Reed Hastings can get across the physical network for only a cent or so.

    Yours kindly,

    Shakir Razak

    1. Correction:

      To select what is stocked (in the main),

      In addition, the rise of the 3-screen combo, further suggests a lean-up/back experience (2 screens in the eyeline) takes more effort and is less appealing on-demand than broadcast.

      Kind regards,

      Shamir Razak

  3. I love Netflix and they’ve made some brilliant moves, but from a UI and UX perspective it seems to me that they are falling behind (I wrote a bit about it here – http://bit.ly/iJRbOb ).

    I’m happy to pay $8.00 a month for the service (which is a stretch given the lack of content available in Canada), but if they made some simple improvements I think they could increase their value proposition to so much more).

  4. Thanks for this post Om.

    The idea that we are moving towards and want a completely on-demand world of media distribution (and everything else) seems wildly obvious.

    The genius here is that Reed is actually making it happen. He is taking the idea and changing the media world to make it a reality. I thank him for this.

  5. My wife is like why is everything on Food network a repeat? I have seen all these Ace of Cakes episodes but surely I have not seen all 5 seasons. Why can’t I just sort by unwatched and view it on demand? Cable and broadcast TV is dead, just like Blockbuster they just don’t know it yet. Interesting what he says about not producing content, I think this is just to avoid blinking bright in the radars until it is too late to stop them. Once Netflix, Apple or Google can bid and win a major event like prime NFL games or English Premier League the game is over.

  6. Super insights here and if anybody is worth listening to it has to be him given his vision and where he has taken Netflix recently. I think we have all been dying for proper on demand TV for a long time now but it just isn’t there. I end up buying box sets just so as I can watch things in my own leisure but I’d happily flick the TV on and pay a couple of bucks for some latest episodes but I want them right now when I want them at a push of a button

  7. I agree with Reed that in the very near future consumers will expect an on-demand experience. We are seeing that expectation peppered today — most notably from iPad apps.

    I look at my 2.5 year old son as the future consumer. He grabs my iPad and begins accessing his applications. He enjoys being able to watch whatever videos he wants when he wants too. He rarely watches traditional TV programming.

  8. Certainly a great visionary & a great business man.

    Still I am very surprised by some of his statements,
    “he’s critical of certain ISP practices such as pay-per-gigabyte”

    Well Netflix pays CDN providers (Limelight & Level 3) on a a pay-per-gigabyte basis so why the CEO consider this a wrong business practice?
    Certainly what Netflix does want to do (and they are right) is to pay twice, one time the CDN & 1 time the ISP.
    The core issue is that the CDN get paid by Netflix on a $ per gigabyte basis to shuffle the content on their network and then hand it over to the ISP who bears the load of delivering the content to the final user.
    CDN is paid on a $ per gigabyte basis while the ISP is paid on a $ per subscriber basis. That is the core issue here.
    Global CDN are questionable Middle Men when it comes to Premium video delivery.
    ISP should build their own CDN, distributed deep inside their network and get paid by Netflix on a $ per gigabyte. Maybe Netflix would need to use an intelligent routing solution to select the right CDN/ISP but this could certainly be provided by Amazon as part of their value added services on Amazon S3.
    This is a much cleaner model that would totally alleviate the current issues and ensure consumers get better services at no additional cost.
    Moreover, this would be the end of the Bandwidth issue. Everybody wins (But Limelight and Level3).


    Certainly what Netflix does NOT want to do (and they are right) is to pay twice, one time the CDN & 1 time the ISP.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.