Is global net neutrality NOW really at risk ?

[Synobun]

Correct, they can use their existing infrastructure to service foreigners... but the costs in one market affect their other markets.

My quote mentions this.

Not every American company has local (to you) data centers, and even if they did it might not matter.

If Netflix is required to pay a king's ransom for its primary market, its other markets will suffer in order to mitigate losses. This will be true of any major American company that offers an online service that would be negatively impacted by the loss of net neutrality.

 

[warpus]

It's unlikely it isn't going to affect their bottom line at all, though. And the only reason I brought up new infrastructure was because it came up in the post I was responding to

 

[Ryika]

Netflix and similar services are mostly popular because for what they offer they're reasonably cheap. If they were to increase their prices by any significant amount, a portion of their customers would undoubtedly switch to a service that does not raise its prices or, in the unlikely case that all of them do, switch to piracy, because piracy is always free (until it's not). I doubt they'd raise prices at all, even in America, because if they could without losing more money from customers that abandon them than they do by keeping their customers, they'd already have done it.

The real thing that I think will affect Europeans are services that are not subscription-based, because if you have to run more adds for example it makes perfect sense to spread them out to all customers to decrease the annoyance that the individual has to endure.

 

[Synobun]

I doubt they'd raise prices at all, even in America, because if they could without losing more money from customers that abandon them than they do by keeping their customers, they'd already have done it.

Netflix has increased its price several times.

Spoiler :

http://www.businessinsider.com/netf...fore-without-losing-subscribers-chart-2017-10

 

[Silurian]

So why do you think that if Netflix puts up prices in Europe to pay for loses in the USA it will not lose market share in Europe.

 

[Zelig]

If Netflix is required to pay a king's ransom for its primary market, its other markets will suffer in order to mitigate losses.

That doesn't make any sense. There's no point in serving any specific country if that country isn't profitable on its own.

 

[Synobun]

So why do you think that if Netflix puts up prices in Europe to pay for loses in the USA it will not lose market share in Europe.

Never said that so I can't answer you.

That doesn't make any sense. There's no point in serving any specific country if that country isn't profitable on its own.

Didn't say anything about a country no longer being profitable, either. It's fairly standard for corporations to avoid losing profits, especially when they rely on increasing revenue to fund development as much as Netflix has. Netflix, and most any other company, isn't going to simply take a significant cut in profits on the chin and move on with their day.

 

[Zelig]

Didn't say anything about a country no longer being profitable, either. It's fairly standard for corporations to avoid losing profits, especially when they rely on increasing revenue to fund development as much as Netflix has. Netflix, and most any other company, isn't going to simply take a significant cut in profits on the chin and move on with their day.

None of that is an argument for how increased marginal costs for Netflix in Switzerland affect the supply and demand equation for Netflix in Ecuador.

That's what you need to show.

 

[Silurian]

Never said that so I can't answer you.

Didn't say anything about a country no longer being profitable, either. It's fairly standard for corporations to avoid losing profits, especially when they rely on increasing revenue to fund development as much as Netflix has. Netflix, and most any other company, isn't going to simply take a significant cut in profits on the chin and move on with their day.

You seem to have foregotten about this post.

You are wrong. American companies provide a great deal of online service to foreign countries. Not every American company has local (to you) data centers, and even if they did it might not matter. Any American service that is also offered worldwide would inevitably impact the global service because of what happens in America.

Example: If American ISPs force Netflix to pay a ransom for reasonable access, Netflix will either put the burden of that cost solely on American subscribers or spread that cost across all subscribers worldwide.

It is hilariously ridiculous that you feel frightened by people mobilizing to prevent something bad.

If netflix Europe is more expensive than France telecom, BT etc at suppling films it will lose market share.
People will not stay with netflix so it can help out its US division.

 

[Synobun]

None of that is an argument for how increased marginal costs for Netflix in Switzerland affect the supply and demand equation for Netflix in Ecuador.

That's what you need to show.

I don't really need to show anything. Half or more of Netflix's revenue and use comes from the United States. Obviously what happens in the United States for a United States-based company with a United States-majority consumer base will influence the United States-based company's alternative markets.

If netflix Europe is more expensive than France telecom, BT etc at suppling films it will lose market share.
People will not stay with netflix so it can help out its US division.

This does not contradict anything I have said.

 

[Silurian]

This does not contradict anything I have said.

Yes it does.

If a company, even a US one, puts up prices faster than the competition it will lose market share.
Then its income will go down.

If netflix spreads its US costs onto European consumers its prices will rise faster than the competition.

 

[Synobun]

Yes it does.

If a company, even a US one, puts up prices faster than the competition it will lose market share.
Then its income will go down.

If netflix spreads its US costs onto European consumers its prices will rise faster than the competition.

Again, this does not contradict anything I have said. I have never made the claim that Europeans are shackled to Netflix and its price increases, nor have I made the argument that consumers can't or won't unsubscribe as a result of price increases.

 

[Evie]

The impact will also be on smaller sites. I help run a major fansite in another fandom entirely, and the general assessment is that we're not sure at all we can survive the traffic and related advertising income hit we could potentially take if we get throttled (and we don't have independent means of avoiding throttling). . America is 55% or so of our traffic, and probably account for more of our advertising revenue. We might need to severely cut down on content to reduce bandwidth use, to make up for that fiasco - which in turn will cut down on our traffic elsewhere. A death spiral is entirely possible. And the 45% of non-American users will feel it.

And we're one of the better off sites on our networks ; others are likely to hurt even harder.

The delusion that this is a local, America-only issue is more nationalistic/regionalistic claptrap than realistic assessment.

 

[Silurian]

Again, this does not contradict anything I have said. I have never made the claim that Europeans are shackled to Netflix and its price increases, nor have I made the argument that consumers can't or won't unsubscribe as a result of price increases.

So you are claiming that the management are stupid then since you are suggesting that the will rise prices in Europe to cover costs in the US annd will not realise that when they do that they will lose market share.

 

[Zelig]

Obviously what happens in the United States for a United States-based company with a United States-majority consumer base will influence the United States-based company's alternative markets.

No, there's no obvious reason to believe that.

Netflix's production costs aren't getting affected, which would be relevant for international markets, just their per-user costs in America.

 

[Synobun]

So you are claiming that the management are stupid then since you are suggesting that the will rise prices in Europe to cover costs in the US annd will not realise that when they do that they will lose market share.

No, I am claiming that a business will raise prices to recoup losses where and when possible. This is a concept that essentially every business in the world adheres to.

No, not obvious. There's no reason to believe that.

I respect your right to be wrong.

 

[Evie]

Even if Netflix's rivals become competitive if Netflix raise its prices...that implies they are not competitive against Netflix now - that what they offer is either costlier or lower quality than Netflix, or in some other ways less desirable.

If so, US implementation of a non-neutral internet still impacts you, since it forces you to switch to what is (presently) a less desirable option. You're still losing out.

 

[Silurian]

No, I am claiming that a business will raise prices to recoup losses where and when possible. This is a concept that essentially every business in the world adheres to.

Example: If American ISPs force Netflix to pay a ransom for reasonable access, Netflix will either put the burden of that cost solely on American subscribers or spread that cost across all subscribers worldwide.

So do you still think that netflix will put up prices in Europe to pay for increased costs in the US which will mean it will lose market share and hence lose money in the medium to long term.

It is more likely to cut costs in the US by such means as not buying product that is unprofitable in Europe whilst maintaining the future value of its European operations.

 

[Zelig]

I respect your right to be wrong.

You're the one making the claim. Put up some logical argument to support it.

No, I am claiming that a business will raise prices to recoup losses where and when possible. This is a concept that essentially every business in the world adheres to.

There's no connection between cost to sell a widget in America and pricing of widgets in Bulgaria. "Raise prices to recoup losses" is a trendy sounding idiom, it's not an economic argument.

Again, the supply/demand equation in Peru is not affected by increased per-user marginal costs in America.

Every business maximizes their profit all the time. Lowering profitability in a specific jurisdiction doesn't change the the path to maximizing profit in a different one.

Even if Netflix's rivals become competitive if Netflix raise its prices...that implies they are not competitive against Netflix now - that what they offer is either costlier or lower quality than Netflix, or in some other ways less desirable.

If so, US implementation of a non-neutral internet still impacts you, since it forces you to switch to what is (presently) a less desirable option. You're still losing out.

No, the point is that Netflix isn't going to raise its prices for non-Americans because of the decreased profitability of delivering video to Americans.

 

[Synobun]

You're the one making the claim. Put up some logical argument to support it.

I did. I even provided numbers. It isn't my problem if you reject common business practice and common sense. I'm really not proposing a groundbreaking theory here.

There's no connection between cost to sell a widget in America and pricing of widgets in Bulgaria.

The price of and obstacles to creating product in a primary market absolutely do influence that business in a tertiary market. Netflix may provide a product to most countries on the planet but their actual service and their investments aren't nearly as decentralized. What happens in the US impacts at least 55% of their business.

So do you still think that netflix will put up prices in Europe to pay for increased costs in the US which will mean it will lose market share and hence lose money in the medium to long term.

It is more likely to cut costs in the US by such means as not buying product that is unprofitable in Europe whilst maintaining the future value of its European operations.

I can't answer your question because you're putting the horse before the cart. The first half of your question, before you use the word which, is a good premise. What comes after that is pure conjecture on your part. I've already answered the first half's premise in my post where I said they can put that burden of cost solely on the US subscribers or spread it amongst their full subscriber base (which surprisingly enough does include Europeans).