Update: Netflix reversed the decision, and is keeping Profiles. Good news!
Important starting point for this post: I’m a Netflix customer since November 2000, nearly eight years. Netflix celebrated its 10th anniversary two months ago.
Wednesday’s email announcing the September 1 demise of Profiles landed with a thud, in this household and far beyond. Separate queues and recommendations for my wife and me increased the value of Netflix’s service enormously. Prior to the introduction of Profiles, queue juggling was one more thing to think about in a world that doesn’t need one more thing. The only reason given for the change?
While it may be disappointing to see this feature go away, this change will help us to continue to improve the Netflix website for all our customers.
Hmmm… all customers except me, and everyone else who uses the feature. However few we are (rumors are “only 1%” of Netflix customers use Profiles), Netflix is not improving anything with this move. And, frankly, in a paid service that thrives on personalized recommendations, being selfish is part of the point: why would I care about “all” customers? This isn’t water conservation or a tragegy of the commons issue.
In a TiVo world, Netflix is a supreme luxury. I have only so much time to spend in front of the (bigger) screen. With the various Season Passes running, we never lack for something to watch when we want to lean back. Choosing to watch a Netflix movie is a conscious choice, and one we’ve made less and less often over the years. By dumping a feature which I consider core to the service, Netflix encouraged me to calculate just how invested I am in my subscription.
The scorecard? Nearly 400 movies rated. Not a large number, but an interesting corpus to me all the same. I’d like this data to be portable, though I’m not focused on the issue.
Side note: proving “all politics are local,” Dave Winer — who probably doesn’t need/use Profiles — hasn’t commented on this issue, despite being an otherwise vocal, engaged Netflix customer. He should be selfish about what he wants, just as I am.
The problem is Netflix’s decision that it doesn’t want to support our diverse needs.
Returning to the scorecard… I should ignore the sunk cost of past subscription fees. Still, I’ve spent $1,239.18 (!!) at Netflix. I’ve never done the math before. This Profiles decision prompted my fact-finding, and that’s not a good thing for Netflix. Can you say recurring revenue?
I’m not quite at the point of canceling my $150/year in Netflix payments, but I’m paying close attention. The deadline on Profiles is September 1, so let’s see if this buffer period allows Netflix a way to change course.
It’s unfair to expect, but I have a mild hope that JR Conlin, newest Netflix employee, can contribute to what’s sure to be an ongoing internal Netflix discussion on this move. At the very least, Netflix needs to stand up and explain their decision more directly.
It’s possible that Netflix may be trying to fire its Profiles customers. If they are, it would be wise for them to pick up a copy of “The Right Way to Manage Unprofitable Customers” in the April issue of the Harvard Business Review, a small investment with large returns. The lead sentence from the abstract?
Problem customers can cost your business lots of money, but quickly ejecting them may not be the best way to relieve the burden.
Netflix? We’re listening.
