Netflix?
Feb 28, 2006 at 5:39 AM Post #31 of 51
Quote:

Originally Posted by mtkversion
A lot of people just get the movies, burn copies, then return them to get more ... that's usually the people who get throttled.


They delay receipts/shipments based on rental frequency, so I'm not sure how you'd know those people are usually the ones affected. I do none of those things, I'll assume the other poster in this thread doesn't either, and both of us have gotten throttled.
 
Feb 28, 2006 at 6:24 AM Post #32 of 51
Netflix is a great subscription service. I have had it for over a year now and my family enjoys it a lot. I have really built up my movie collection because of this service and I find that they stock very niche films that I usually can not find elsewhere. This is one subscription service that I am happy to pay each month. The others include XM Satellite Radio and YourMusic.
 
Feb 28, 2006 at 6:36 AM Post #33 of 51
LOL @Throttling.

I recently tried to get a "Long Wait" movie faster by deleting everything in my Qeue and Only having that one movie in my qeue.

Long story short, I throttled myself.
After a week of waiting and no movie, I deleted the long wait movie and added a bunch of other movies to my qeue.
tongue.gif


-Ed
 
Feb 28, 2006 at 8:17 AM Post #34 of 51
The problem with Netflix and throttling for me is that they lied and claimed they never had such a system in place for years. It wasn't until they were sued last year I believe that they finally admitted to it. I usually rent two to three movies a week, and that already gets me throttled (delaying acknowledgement of return and delaying shipping each a day; lowering the availability of certain movies).
 
Feb 28, 2006 at 9:06 AM Post #35 of 51
Netflix is decent. The throttling is bothersome ethically because of the disconnect between PR and policy but it isn't too bad practically. About the only problem I've ever had is scratched discs... And that can be quite irritating indeed... Though I think that they are better about them than they used to be.
 
Feb 28, 2006 at 6:13 PM Post #37 of 51
Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Guidry
I'm not kidding. I'm not a lawyer, so I can't tell you whether or not the practic of throttling violates the customer agreement, but I know cheapskate when I see it. People attempting to get more out of a service than they paid for fair and square is being a cheapskate. Looking for a work around so they don't have to pay fair market price for something. I have no problem with NetFlix putting a stop to it.


In my recollection Netflix added that crap about throttleing in their agreement after legal battles and lawsuits. No matter how you slice it people doing that were NOT violating anything according to Netflix's advertisments and agreements of previous.

My only real beef with netflix other than that is their scratched disc policy. Sure it seems nice to click a button and get a replacement sent, but I've actually had the same scratched up movie sent to me after I returned it. Not the greatest practice ever.
 
Feb 28, 2006 at 8:31 PM Post #38 of 51
Yeah, it used to be that netflix didn't send a replacement until they received the damaged one. Now, the replacement is sent immediately when you report it so that should solve that problem.
 
Feb 28, 2006 at 11:13 PM Post #40 of 51
Cheapskate free riders make EVERYBODY'S service cost more. If a person is getting say 20% more videos per month than NetFlix can deliver and break even for the fee they pay, who pays for those extra 20%? You do.

Sticking it to 'the man' doesn't sound so cute and funny now, does it?
 
Mar 1, 2006 at 12:49 AM Post #41 of 51
Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Guidry
Cheapskate free riders make EVERYBODY'S service cost more. If a person is getting say 20% more videos per month than NetFlix can deliver and break even for the fee they pay, who pays for those extra 20%? You do.

Sticking it to 'the man' doesn't sound so cute and funny now, does it?


I don't remember anyone talking about "sticking it to the man", and how cute and funny it was.

I don't really get why paying for an unlimited service and then renting according to your desires makes you cheap or how you're getting something for free, but to each their own.
 
Mar 1, 2006 at 4:47 AM Post #42 of 51
Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Guidry
Cheapskate free riders make EVERYBODY'S service cost more. If a person is getting say 20% more videos per month than NetFlix can deliver and break even for the fee they pay, who pays for those extra 20%? You do.

Sticking it to 'the man' doesn't sound so cute and funny now, does it?


So we should establish some kind of an average that all users should obey so that costs are equitably distributed? And then enforce the group will in order to maintain the sancitity of the cost structure? Allright.

That said, I think the objection isn't so much to policy. (We all know about the problem of the commons, blah blah) It is that Netflix had to be forced to admit it... And that it contradicts the clear thrust of their advertising... People just wish the company was straight about what their are doing. That seems pretty reasonable to me.

And I don't personally trust these simplistic notions that savings/costs distribute in an unbiased or communitive fashion. That seems like a massively oversimplified understanding of the market.
 
Mar 1, 2006 at 1:38 PM Post #43 of 51
Now I'm kinda curious whether people who go to all-you-can-eat buffets and eat more food than average or choose the more expensive foods (the Mirage buffet has prime rib and king crab) are cheapskates. Hmm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top