Connect with us

Analysis

Shine comes off the streaming dream as Netflix subscriptions slow

Published

on


Netflix’s results in the first quarter sent investors one clear message: the pandemic streaming boom is over.

“We had those 10 years where we’re growing smooth as silk, and [it’s] just a little bit wobbly right now,” founder Reed Hastings told analysts after the company reported sharply slower sign-ups in the first three months of the year. Worse yet, Netflix warned that in the US, its largest market, subscribers would be “roughly flat” through the first half of 2021.

Part of this is explained by the unique circumstances of the pandemic, with homebound viewers giving Netflix its best year ever in 2020, sealing its lead over fierce competition from Disney, Amazon, Apple and other large companies vying for a slice of the streaming economy.

Worldwide, the market for subscription streaming services is still growing; there are now more than half a billion subscribers for Amazon, Netflix and Disney alone. The proliferation of rival services has led some observers to question their long-term strength.

In more mature markets such as the US, Netflix is facing more fierce competition for time and money, whether it is going out, or other viewing options such as YouTube and free, ad-funded streamers such as NBC’s Peacock.

According to TVision, the US-based audience measurement company, time spent watching TV has steadily increased since October overall, having declined from its peak in April. Yet Netflix’s share of viewing has fallen. It found that the streaming service’s share has declined 5 percentage points to 23 per cent in the past two quarters while smaller rivals have made minor gains. However, it remains comfortably number one.

Chart showing time spent watching Netflix has fallen

While this pandemic impact has distorted growth at Netflix and other streaming services, a more concerning conundrum also appeared in the company’s quarterly results. Netflix executives said a weaker content slate, with some programming delayed due to Covid delays, had translated to fewer subscribers.

“A lot of the projects we had hoped to come out earlier did get pushed because of the production delays,” said Ted Sarandos, co-chief executive, who promised investors the company would get back to a “steadier state” in the second half of the year with the return of hits such as The Witcher.

Netflix now boasts 208m paying customers, and has transitioned from the disrupter to the incumbent in a new entertainment business defined by streaming. Its valuation has soared to $225bn.

But even at such scale, recent earnings results suggest that Netflix must keep spending big on programming to juice its subscriber count, raising fundamental questions about whether streaming is a good business, with profit margins that will steadily improve as the pioneers of subscription streaming ease off on investment and raise prices.

“Even for Netflix, it turns out that fresh, new original content is a critical factor in driving . . . subscriber additions,” said Michael Nathanson, a senior media analyst at MoffettNathanson.

“That simple observation goes to the heart of our debate on streaming and whether or not current valuations are consistent with the long-term dynamics of the business model,” he added.

Media groups are splashing out tens of billions a year on television shows and movies as they fight for a share of the streaming market. Netflix said it was on track to spend more than $17bn on content this year, while Amazon, Disney and Warner Media, the owner of HBO Max, are ratcheting up investment in original shows to supplement their archives.

Chart showing that Netflix leads the way in content spend

Not all spending translates into popularity or success, though. Hits, whether expensive or cheap to make, are the big underlying force driving the subscription streaming economy. And as Hollywood knows, they are extremely difficult to predict.

Here the approaches taken by the different streaming services are markedly different. HBO has one of the smallest libraries in the streaming battle — Amazon’s catalogue of mainly licensed movies and programmes is 13 times larger.

However HBO excels in churning out critically acclaimed shows, as measured by a weighted rating of review websites calculated by Ampere Analysis. Netflix and Amazon’s libraries offer more quantity over consistent quality.

Chart showing number of films and TV shows by streamer platform and their critical rating

“We believe the core product proposition of Netflix is ‘something new and different every day’, as opposed to ‘specific hit show XYZ,’” said Todd Juenger, analyst at Bernstein. But he added that subscriber growth could undoubtedly be “hit boosted”. “The more one believes that to be true, the more optimistic one would likely be about [the second half of 2021],” he said.

Additional reporting by Chris Campbell and Patrick Mathurin



Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Analysis

Musk well-positioned to steer cryptocurrency’s future direction of travel

Published

on

By


When Elon Musk revealed three months ago that Tesla had bought $1.5bn worth of bitcoin, fans of the digital currency claimed the move would hasten its wider adoption as a tool of corporate finance.

On Wednesday, however, Musk withdrew his personal endorsement, swearing off accepting the cryptocurrency as payment for Tesla’s cars and undermining the company’s justification for using it as a destination to park its spare cash.

As usual, Musk’s comments provided immediate fuel for crypto traders as well as ammunition for the warring crypto tribes on Twitter. But it was harder to tell whether his announcement would have any effect on wider perceptions of the currency, or what role Musk’s views will play in the next phase of crypto adoption.

“He’s always saying things every two days and isn’t consistent,” said John Coffee, a professor at Columbia Law School. Tesla’s pretensions to pushing bitcoin into the mainstream of corporate use always sounded secondary to its interest in pure financial speculation, Coffee added. “I think his first investment was much more of a currency investment than anything else.”

Whatever lies behind Musk’s on-again, off-again love affair with bitcoin, his effect on market prices has been hard to ignore. The currency’s price jumped 15 per cent on the day that Tesla’s investment was revealed, and fell 6 per cent in the 24 hours after this week’s announcement.

The latest drop came just days after Musk jokingly denounced dogecoin — another cryptocurrency that he had heavily promoted — as “a hustle” on US television, sending its value down 15 per cent.

“Without question, he’s become the single most important factor in crypto,” said JP Thieriot, chief executive of crypto exchange Uphold. That influence extends beyond Musk’s ability to move prices and helps shape how people think about digital currencies, Thieriot suggested.

Even Musk, however, can’t force cryptocurrencies into mainstream commercial use. He said this week that Tesla had backed away from accepting payment in the currency because of the environmental effects of the energy-intensive “mining” that goes into validating transactions — a well-known issue he has ignored in the past. 

Many crypto experts said that Musk’s change of heart appeared to reflect an acceptance that bitcoin was not suitable for payments. Other companies that had accepted bitcoin as a form of payment in the past, including Dell and Microsoft, also later dropped it.

“I don’t think a lot of people want to spend their bitcoin,” said Wilson Withiam, an analyst at crypto research group Messari. “If there was actual money behind it, would [Tesla] have actually done that?”

Musk’s change of heart extended beyond the issue of payments. He also swore his electric carmaker off becoming an active participant in the bitcoin market, saying that it “will not be selling any bitcoin”.

The commitment came two weeks after Tesla surprised Wall Street with a $101m profit from selling part of its holdings, raising worries that the company’s performance would increasingly be tied to crypto trading.

The pledge not to sell may have reassured some investors, but it also effectively undermined Tesla’s case for using the currency as part of its everyday corporate treasury operations.

Weekly newsletter

For the latest news and views on fintech from the FT’s network of correspondents around the world, sign up to our weekly newsletter #fintechFT

Sign up here with one click

Zach Kirkhorn, Tesla’s chief financial officer, told Wall Street two weeks ago that the liquidity of the bitcoin market justified Tesla holding the cryptocurrency, since it meant the company could buy and sell actively.

That flexibility was particularly important, he said, as Tesla faced greater cash demands to finance plants in Texas and Germany while also dealing with extreme financial stresses in its supply chain caused by the global semiconductor shortage.

“Being able to access our cash very quickly is super important to us right now,” Kirkhorn said. With one tweet that promised to lock in the company’s crypto investment, Musk has torpedoed that rationale.

Some bitcoin backers said that Musk had still helped prepare the way for the wider adoption of bitcoin by corporate treasurers by encouraging other companies to view it as a valid holding — even if there have been almost no examples of others announcing they were buying the currency.

His initial enthusiasm for bitcoin had generated interest — including among treasurers — that was likely to continue well beyond his recent turnround, said Rayne Steinberg, chief executive of digital asset management group Arca. “People were talking about it, it entered the zeitgeist.”

Some corporate treasury experts, however, said that Tesla’s flirtation with cryptocurrency holdings had done nothing to encourage wider adoption.

“It created conversation among treasurers, but I don’t think it changed anyone’s mind,” said Jerry Klein at Treasury Partners in New York. The overriding requirement for treasurers to preserve the value of their companies’ cash had completely ruled out cryptocurrencies, Klein added.

But if Musk’s dabbling in bitcoin failed to change the currency’s standing in the corporate world, his latest intervention has raised another prospect: that he could become a kingmaker for a future cryptocurrency to rival or even supersede bitcoin.

Using his celebrity to draw attention to bitcoin’s large energy consumption — and that many participants in the network are in China, relying on coal-fired power stations — could hasten the search for alternatives, according to supporters. Surveys of millennials and Gen Z, who are big buyers of cryptocurrencies, showed that they were also deeply concerned about climate change, said Thieriot at Uphold. “Eventually, those things have to converge,” he said.

Musk’s comments provoked an immediate scramble for attention among backers of cryptocurrencies that claim to have less adverse effects on the environment. Those included Bitcoin Zero — a carbon neutral version of bitcoin — and Cardano, one of several networks that use a so-called proof of stake mechanism to validate transactions, consuming less energy.

Most newer networks, however, have struggled to win attention and a share of crypto investment. Most of the displaced attention has focused on ether, the digital token used on the ethereum network. With a total value of $440bn, its tokens are worth almost half as much as bitcoin.

Ether is already used by some investors as a form of digital money, and its long-planned move to a proof of stake system could finally be completed within the next year, putting it in a strong position to win wider support, said Withiam, the analyst at Messari.

Musk did not show his hand about which cryptocurrency will win his favour as he turns away from bitcoin, saying only that it would be a token that consumes less than 1 per cent as much energy. His open-ended comment is bound to leave crypto investors guessing — and guarantee that all eyes stay fixed on his tweets for the next clue to his thinking.

Climate Capital

Where climate change meets business, markets and politics. Explore the FT’s coverage here 



Source link

Continue Reading

Analysis

UK’s voter ID plan ‘an expensive distraction’

Published

on

By


When the Queen announced in parliament this week that the British government was planning legislation that would require voters to carry photographic identification, her words stirred up worries nine miles to the east, in the London borough of Newham.

Junaid Ali, organiser of the Hope for Humanity Food Bank, which operates from a rundown shopfront in the deprived, multicultural West Ham area of the borough, said families using the service on Tuesday told him they would struggle to find the documents voters are expected to need.

“A lot of the families do not have identification,” Ali said.

Such stories — allied with the near-absence of in-person voter fraud — have raised suspicions that the proposed legislation is an attempt to make it harder for some sections of Britain’s electorate to vote.

A study commissioned by the Cabinet Office and published on March 31 found that 9 per cent of UK adults lacked photographic identification that was still valid and had a recognisable photograph.

Ali said many people reliant on the food bank were citizens of Commonwealth countries such as Pakistan — who have the right to vote in the UK — but that many spent long periods without identity documents while the Home Office processed their visa and immigration applications.

“For asylum-seeker families, the ID is held by the Home Office,” Ali said.

A man hands over ID at a polling station in New Hampshire, US
In the US there have been accusations that new voter ID laws in the likes of Georgia and Florida are part of an attempt to stop black and other minority groups from voting © Suzanne Kreiter/The Boston Globe/Getty Images

The UK government’s move received backing from former US president Donald Trump on Tuesday who said the UK measures were “exactly” what the US should do. There have been widespread accusations that new voter identification laws across a swath of Republican-controlled states — including Georgia and Florida — are part of an attempt to stop black and other minority groups in America from voting.

Jessica Garland, director of policy and research for Britain’s Electoral Reform Society, the election-rights pressure group, queried why a crackdown on in-person voter impersonation was a priority for the government when it was a rarely recorded offence.

“There’s no evidence that there’s a problem that the policy is trying to solve,” Garland said. “We really think this could be quite an expensive distraction.”

Despite vocal opposition to the proposals, the government has so far refused to back down, perhaps raising the prospect of another embarrassing U-turn further down the line.

“Having photographic identification is ensuring a problem doesn’t arise,” Jacob Rees-Mogg told MPs on Thursday. “This country has an electoral system of which people can be proud and of which people can have confidence. We mustn’t allow that confidence to slip.”

The arguments surrounding voter identification have been familiar to Angela Wilkins, leader of the Labour party group on Bromley council, in south-east London, ever since the council hosted one of the pilots for the voter ID scheme at local elections in 2018.

Chart showing that in the 2017 election voters without driving licences or passports were more likely to vote Labour than Conservative

The Electoral Commission, the UK elections watchdog, said after the pilot that the majority of voters had been able to meet the requirements, although some were turned away. It added there was no evidence the requirement significantly deterred people from voting.

Wilkins, however, said she believed the commission had underestimated how many people were put off.

“A lot of people didn’t even attempt to go and vote because they knew they couldn’t because they hadn’t got the right ID,” Wilkins said.

It is unclear, meanwhile, how far the proposed legislation would address issues raised by the UK’s biggest election fraud scandal of recent years, in the 2014 local elections in Tower Hamlets, a London borough that neighbours Newham.

That case — which led to the removal of Lutfur Rahman as the borough’s mayor — related mainly to false registrations of people with no right to vote and a range of other issues, including the exercise of unlawful religious influence over voters’ decisions by Muslim religious leaders.

Former mayor of Tower Hamlets Lutfur Rahman, centre
Former mayor of Tower Hamlets Lutfur Rahman, centre in blue tie, was removed from his post after an election fraud in 2014 © London News Pictures/Shutterstock

The Tower Hamlets case took place while prime minister Boris Johnson was mayor of London. Johnson closely followed the case and after the ruling against Rahman in 2015 said: “I’m very glad that justice has taken its course and the cloud has been lifted from Tower Hamlets.”

But Johnson is also a longtime sceptic of ID cards. Writing in the Telegraph newspaper in 2004 as a Conservative MP, he said: “If I am ever asked, on the streets of London, or in any other venue, public or private, to produce my ID card as evidence that I am who I say . . . I will take that card out of my wallet and physically eat it.”

Garland said the fraud in Tower Hamlets had been caught and there had not been another similar case since.

“To introduce this measure for an entirely different kind of fraud . . . seems like the wrong lesson to be drawn from that,” she said.

It is not clear, either, whether the legislation will follow a key recommendation from the Electoral Commission — that councils should offer a free, official form of photo identification for those lacking other forms. Voters in Northern Ireland — where photographic identification has been needed since 2003, and whose experience the government has cited as evidence the proposals can work — are offered such a card.

The plans are also likely to encounter some political opposition when introduced to parliament. Libertarian-minded Conservative MPs are unhappy with the proposals; one described them as “the very sort of thing we used to tear pieces out of Labour for”. But any rebellion is unlikely to undermine the government’s 80-seat majority.

Ruth Davidson, the former leader of the Scottish Conservative party, described the plans as “total bollocks”, adding they were “a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist”.

She told ITV: “I think that given where we are and the year we’ve had, we’ve got real problems to solve in this country, and the idea that this is some sort of legislative priority I think is for the birds.”

The House of Lords is also likely to seek to amend the legislation. Liberal Democrat and Labour peers are particularly unhappy with the proposals.

Garland said the introduction of a free, official form of ID would be the “absolute minimum” required to make any system fair.

In West Ham, however, Ali said the new plans had simply added to the suspicions of his food bank’s already marginalised users about the government’s intentions towards them.

“They have concerns that it might be another way to check the data of people,” Ali said. “They’re quite scared.”

Additional reporting: John Burn-Murdoch in London and Lauren Fedor in Washington



Source link

Continue Reading

Analysis

Future of retail

Published

on

By



FT reporters examine the future of retail after a year disrupted by the pandemic



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending