▲ | rgblambda 6 days ago | |||||||
Netflix found that while it was a nice advertising tool to boast about the broadness of its catalogue, most customers rarely ordered the more niche stuff so it wasn't particularly profitable. | ||||||||
▲ | devilbunny 6 days ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
> most customers rarely ordered the more niche stuff I'm sure that's true, but the flip side is that the niche stuff is what pulls in the hardcore film buffs. And guess who those of us who aren't big film buffs turn to when picking films and services? The hardcore film buffs we know. They may not generate a ton of revenue if you look only at "how many people request obscure movie X", but having those movies pulls in the people who will, in turn, influence others. | ||||||||
| ||||||||
▲ | 0cf8612b2e1e 6 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||
That’s what happens when you have a big library. The usage is going to be some 80:20 rule. A small slice drives the numbers. Yet it is nice to be able to consume some long tail content. Without the DVD catalog, access to the long tail has disappeared from mainstream providers. | ||||||||
▲ | layer8 6 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||
We don’t have that problem with books for the most part, why do we have it with TV shows and movies? | ||||||||
| ||||||||
▲ | JKCalhoun 6 days ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
That may be true. But for those in "the long tail" Netflix could have been the only game in town. Amazon was that way for me. I went to record (music) stores to buy my music in the 1990's. I started buying music from Amazon in 1996 because they had the stuff I couldn't find in the record stores. |