Facebook being in "competition" with Netflix is a bit of a stretch. We're talking Warner's infrastructure serving Warner's IP using Facebook's payment platform.
You might as well say Facebook is competing with EA with games like FarmVille.
If it's not streaming, it isn't competing with Netflix.
I have to assume they're competing with Apple's claim of 100-200 million "iTunes-linked credit cards." Since we've seen that Apple's monopoly isn't in volume, but in customers willing to pay, Facebook's consumer-used credit system is the most logical partner.
It seems that the payment processing and virality would be the two draws of doing it this way. 30 facebook credits is $3. And I guess if I watch it, it tells all my friends?
It's an interesting test, and I can see people building real apps like a Netflix competitor on top of facebook's infrastructure. I can't imagine it will work as a facebook app - the way the Dark Knight is built.
yes except facebook started out specializing as a way to connect with your friends which they've become very successful with. And now they are diverting from that goal which doesn't quite jive with the other companies specializing in those fields. Video gamers will still play EA games, photographers will still use flickr or whatever, movie buffs will still use netflix. I think facebook should stay within its social realm and OFFER specialty companies a way to use facebook to enhance those companies' services instead of trying to do everything.
The same way we want Microsoft to stick with making operating systems, Apple to stick with laptops and music, google to stick with email and search, netflix to stick with movies, etc. I think facebook movies may very well flop just like google buzz did in light of a company that specialized in it (twitter).
I was also going to say that I could see how microtransaction movies would be easier to manage than a netflix subscription. But I would argue that netflix is a one time payment with unlimited movies which is actually easier to manage than a lot of microtransactions.
The overall experience of watching movies or videos through Facebook is pretty awful. Facebook does a few things very well, video and media beyond photos isn't one of them.
The difference is the use of facebook credits. This makes it really attractive for the user since a user can earn credits on FB without having to pay for them. So this also gives all those apps that give out free credits a boost too.
11 comments
[ 0.22 ms ] story [ 35.5 ms ] threadIt also wasn't easy to actually find and came with this odd warning "offer not valid in all states".
I wouldn't be worried (yet) if I was Netflix.
You might as well say Facebook is competing with EA with games like FarmVille.
I have to assume they're competing with Apple's claim of 100-200 million "iTunes-linked credit cards." Since we've seen that Apple's monopoly isn't in volume, but in customers willing to pay, Facebook's consumer-used credit system is the most logical partner.
It's an interesting test, and I can see people building real apps like a Netflix competitor on top of facebook's infrastructure. I can't imagine it will work as a facebook app - the way the Dark Knight is built.
The same way we want Microsoft to stick with making operating systems, Apple to stick with laptops and music, google to stick with email and search, netflix to stick with movies, etc. I think facebook movies may very well flop just like google buzz did in light of a company that specialized in it (twitter).
I was also going to say that I could see how microtransaction movies would be easier to manage than a netflix subscription. But I would argue that netflix is a one time payment with unlimited movies which is actually easier to manage than a lot of microtransactions.