Netflix may have just confirmed ad-supported tier is coming soon

midian182

Posts: 8,152   +97
Staff member
What just happened? Having once said it had no plans to ever go down the ad-supported-tier route, Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos has now confirmed it will be offering such a plan as part of its service. According to reports, the streaming giant aims to roll out the new, cheaper options before the year is out.

"We've left a big customer segment off the table, which is people who say: 'Hey, Netflix is too expensive for me and I don't mind advertising,'" Sarandos said at the Cannes Lions advertising festival, via The Hollywood Reporter. "We [are] adding an ad tier; we're not adding ads to Netflix as you know it today. We're adding an ad tier for folks who say, 'Hey, I want a lower price and I'll watch ads.'"

After rival streamer Disney+ announced in March that it would be introducing a cheaper, ad-supported tier to its US service later this year, Netflix Chief Financial Officer Spencer Neumann said his company wouldn't be doing the same as it didn't "make sense." He did add, however, "never say never."

Netflix softened its stance following the release of a Q1 financial report that showed it had lost subscribers (200,000 globally) for the first time in a decade. The company said at the time that it was "quite open" to offering lower prices with advertising, and could "figure it out over the next year or two." Now, Sarandos has confirmed that the trier is coming, with The New York Times reporting that it will be here before the end of the year.

Sarandos said Netflix was talking to companies about partnerships to help with its advertising business but wouldn't reveal who they were. According to The Wall Street Journal, Google and NBCUniversal are the top contenders.

Hulu, HBO Max, Paramount Plus and Peacock already have ad-supported tiers. With Disney+ joining the club later this year and Netflix tightening its belt through staff layoffs, it's little surprise to see the top streamer do the same. How much the tier will cost and how many ads will be shown per hour is still unknown, but with consumers cutting out luxuries as the cost of living rises, this will likely prove a smart move on Netflix's part.

Permalink to story.

 

Morphine Child

Posts: 156   +304
10 seconds ad before episode start? Why not. 10 seconds ad at episode end? Why not.

3.5 minute monstrosity showed down our throats 6 times during one episode? No thank you.

Ads as a concept are fine if done right, people just don't want to be terrorised by them, or search for content between them.
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 7,961   +7,006
IMO, the streaming services have brought this on themselves. They failed to recognize that what drove, speaking mostly for myself, some people to streaming is the asinine prices that we were being charged by cable/satellite providers for tons of channels (aka crap of any kind) that we never watched.

Instead, what the streaming services think they saw, at least IMO, is that streaming was the new fad and that if they offered their content via streaming, people would rush right out to sign up for every service that offered streaming.

What they failed to realize, IMO, is that they were going back to essentially the same model that existed in the cable and satellite market that drove people away from those models. Now, we have tons of streamers offering tons of stuff that people don't want to watch, much less pay for.

Maybe this is off-topic, but my thoughts are that some of these services will fail and we will end up back at the point where a few services will offer the content from the services that have failed.

I wonder whether the corp execs will ever realize that unbridled growth, in any business, is unrealistic, and come to their senses to finally figure out that more people are interested in buy value and not tons of crap they will never watch.

Personally, I hate ads. Services like Disney+ could reap much more profit if they distributed their content on physical media - yet Disney+ seems to think that its better to try to force people to subscribe to their service rather than distribute it on physical media. To solve that, for me, what I will do with Disney+ is wait until there is a reasonable, for me, amount of material on the service, subscribe to the services at a non-ad tier, watch everything I want to watch in a month or two, then drop the subscription until such a time comes when the amount of material on the service is back at a reasonable, for me, amount.

If you ask me, the people who run these services are f'in nuts if they think that I will continue paying for an ad-supported tier after I have watched everything I want to watch at that time.
 

Neatfeatguy

Posts: 933   +1,620
Got some channels I watch from time to time (thankfully I don't pay for them, I just get to leech) and I don't mind an ad here or there, but some of these channels run a show for 5-8 minutes and then run up to 8 ads (sometimes it's just 1 or 2, but more often than naught it's 6+) and each one can be 30 seconds. I get so fed up with how many ads and how long they last I just stop watching and walk away to find something else to do.

Then you have the the stupid "interactive" ads some channels do.....as my daughter would say, "They can die."
 

Bl00dyMinded

Posts: 492   +756
10 seconds ad before episode start? Why not. 10 seconds ad at episode end? Why not.

3.5 minute monstrosity showed down our throats 6 times during one episode? No thank you.

Ads as a concept are fine if done right, people just don't want to be terrorised by them, or search for content between them.
The worst is Hulu with ads in between the whole episode That's annoying. I agree don't mind an ad before or after. But during, come on... I'm already paying for the service as it is.
 

mcclurken

Posts: 21   +54
TechSpot Elite
IMO if we give them an inch they will take a mile, eventually. I've never even been tempted to sign up to Hulu because they show ads AND you have to pay for it. I'm an advertisement hater, at least the TV and radio variety, and I know most people don't share quite the same view, but for me if you're charging me money you don't get to show me ads. If I get it for free I accept that the product has to be paid for somehow and then it just comes down to how obnoxious the ads are. If you charge me and also show me ads I won't be a customer at that point. I've yet to hear about some program that I want to see bad enough to break these principals. It could happen, but it hasn't yet.

Exception: Some YouTube creators put a lot of effort and humor into their inset ads and I will watch some of those and even laugh. Sometimes I even....wait for it...BUY what they're selling! That's opposed to regular mainstream commercials that make me feel something on a continuum of sad-used-stupid-depressed-annoyed-doomed. Maybe because I watched Idiocracy a long time ago? It's all just some variation of 'BRAWNDO - It's got what plants crave!".
 

PEnnn

Posts: 868   +1,044
So, streaming services are essentially now just like those pathetic channels that people ran away from....... to avoid the stupid ads!!
 

emmzo

Posts: 674   +917
IMO, the streaming services have brought this on themselves. They failed to recognize that what drove, speaking mostly for myself, some people to streaming is the asinine prices that we were being charged by cable/satellite providers for tons of channels (aka crap of any kind) that we never watched.

Instead, what the streaming services think they saw, at least IMO, is that streaming was the new fad and that if they offered their content via streaming, people would rush right out to sign up for every service that offered streaming.

What they failed to realize, IMO, is that they were going back to essentially the same model that existed in the cable and satellite market that drove people away from those models. Now, we have tons of streamers offering tons of stuff that people don't want to watch, much less pay for.

Maybe this is off-topic, but my thoughts are that some of these services will fail and we will end up back at the point where a few services will offer the content from the services that have failed.

I wonder whether the corp execs will ever realize that unbridled growth, in any business, is unrealistic, and come to their senses to finally figure out that more people are interested in buy value and not tons of crap they will never watch.

Personally, I hate ads. Services like Disney+ could reap much more profit if they distributed their content on physical media - yet Disney+ seems to think that its better to try to force people to subscribe to their service rather than distribute it on physical media. To solve that, for me, what I will do with Disney+ is wait until there is a reasonable, for me, amount of material on the service, subscribe to the services at a non-ad tier, watch everything I want to watch in a month or two, then drop the subscription until such a time comes when the amount of material on the service is back at a reasonable, for me, amount.

If you ask me, the people who run these services are f'in nuts if they think that I will continue paying for an ad-supported tier after I have watched everything I want to watch at that time.
I got Disney+ recently and there`s a fair amount of content provided one mostly likes Star Wars and Marvel. Also Pixar and a ton of animations. They also have National Geographic, which I, personally, could watch for days on end. There was even a promotion, eight months price for a year. Considering you have 10 devices to stream, all 4k and regular price half than that of Netflix, obviously, no ads or don`t share your account nonsense, it`s totally worth, imo. Quantity is not everything. I watch two, maybe three Netflix shows and a handful of movies a month. I coudn`t care less for a million shows.
 

mgwerner

Posts: 183   +261
IMO if we give them an inch they will take a mile, eventually. I've never even been tempted to sign up to Hulu because they show ads AND you have to pay for it. I'm an advertisement hater, at least the TV and radio variety, and I know most people don't share quite the same view, but for me if you're charging me money you don't get to show me ads. If I get it for free I accept that the product has to be paid for somehow and then it just comes down to how obnoxious the ads are. If you charge me and also show me ads I won't be a customer at that point. I've yet to hear about some program that I want to see bad enough to break these principals. It could happen, but it hasn't yet.

Exception: Some YouTube creators put a lot of effort and humor into their inset ads and I will watch some of those and even laugh. Sometimes I even....wait for it...BUY what they're selling! That's opposed to regular mainstream commercials that make me feel something on a continuum of sad-used-stupid-depressed-annoyed-doomed. Maybe because I watched Idiocracy a long time ago? It's all just some variation of 'BRAWNDO - It's got what plants crave!".
When I was first exposed to cable in the 70s, that was the entire point - you pay a subscription fee and get no ads. In the 80s that business model changed to a subscription fee and a few ads prior to the feature, a la PBS now. That is where I parted ways, I was not going to pay to see ads. 15 years later torrents became a thing, and I rediscovered some great programming that I would have missed if I had ignored the ads. The ads are crap - I am never going to buy a multi-racial Cadillac nor go on a plague cruise, so I am not taking anything away from the producers by torrenting their show. I am, however, expressing my displeasure of the forced interracial crap and the expensive alcohol-induced disease trips on a ship. For me, that's fine, but I know it is not for everyone.
 

Mister_K

Posts: 2,173   +867
10 seconds ad before episode start? Why not. 10 seconds ad at episode end? Why not.

3.5 minute monstrosity showed down our throats 6 times during one episode? No thank you.

Ads as a concept are fine if done right, people just don't want to be terrorised by them, or search for content between them.

I would wager up to 15-30 seconds (10 second ads are a bit too quick). If you are watching a sub 30 minute show, 15 seconds each end. Anything over that 30 seconds at the start/end. Watching a movie? Ad a 30second break in the middle.
 
A cheaper Ad tier is fine with me long as I don't see any ads on the most expensive Netflix 4k tier. I pay $20 a month for that tier and I'm fine with it. I pay extra on Hulu and Paramount+ as well not to see ads. If you are paying the premium price on these three you deserve an ad free viewing experience. So let them have their ad tier just stay away from my premium tiers cause I'm paying for the privilege of the ad free experience.
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 7,961   +7,006
I got Disney+ recently and there`s a fair amount of content provided one mostly likes Star Wars and Marvel. Also Pixar and a ton of animations. They also have National Geographic, which I, personally, could watch for days on end. There was even a promotion, eight months price for a year. Considering you have 10 devices to stream, all 4k and regular price half than that of Netflix, obviously, no ads or don`t share your account nonsense, it`s totally worth, imo. Quantity is not everything. I watch two, maybe three Netflix shows and a handful of movies a month. I coudn`t care less for a million shows.
Each of us is different. As for NatGeo like content, I get that over-the-air from my local PBS station with programs like Nature and Nova. My wife and I have about two years worth of Nova recorded that we are slowly watching. We also like to watch Masterpiece Theater.

Also, we do not have children, therefore, there is little draw for us to subscribe to Disney+ on a regular basis.

Also, Disney+ is not offering the best of audio. Netflix has DD+, when I briefly subscribed to Disney+ they did not have DD+.

In the long run, Disney+ is not worth it for my wife and I to be regular subscribers. We find much more content on Netflix that is to our liking and makes it worth it to us to subscribe.

Like I said, everyone is different.
 

ZedRM

Posts: 1,172   +812
@ Netflix

Here's the deal. No one wants to watch ads. It's why I killed my account years ago. I PAY for access to entertainment. I do NOT pay to be shown ads. It's why I have not and will not pay for Cable/Satellite. If you're going to do an ads based tier, what's going to happen? Are you going to show MORE ads on top of the crap you already show? That's a craptastic business plan!

Here's an idea: Have two tiers of subscriptions.

Plan A, paid access that is completely ad free.
Plan B, ad supported access.

Put simply, if I'm paying you money, you DON'T get to show me ads. If you show me ads, you DON'T get any of my money. Full stop, end of ph*#king discussion.
 

Edster

Posts: 124   +108
@ Netflix

Here's the deal. No one wants to watch ads. It's why I killed my account years ago. I PAY for access to entertainment. I do NOT pay to be shown ads. It's why I have not and will not pay for Cable/Satellite. If you're going to do an ads based tier, what's going to happen? Are you going to show MORE ads on top of the crap you already show? That's a craptastic business plan!

Here's an idea: Have two tiers of subscriptions.

Plan A, paid access that is completely ad free.
Plan B, ad supported access.

Put simply, if I'm paying you money, you DON'T get to show me ads. If you show me ads, you DON'T get any of my money. Full stop, end of ph*#king discussion.

You mean, you killed your accounts ages ago because of ads when Netflix haven't have ads yet in their subscription? Made no sense. And their plan is a cheaper but ad supported, rather than fully free or full price. Is a choice really. Personally, is not the end of the world to watch an ad or two at the start or at the end of every episode if I am paying for half the price or less. Ads is only an issue when they are intrusive and constant. Personally, I will stick with the full access no ads.

The problem with Netflix is that their success is the platform, not the content. Now that other content creators have upped their Streaming game, Netflix now have to rely on their content to compete. Unlike say in the music industry, the TV and movie streaming industry just fragmented back to how it was, eliminating one of the key advantage of Netflix.
 

Neatfeatguy

Posts: 933   +1,620
You mean, you killed your accounts ages ago because of ads when Netflix haven't have ads yet in their subscription? Made no sense. And their plan is a cheaper but ad supported, rather than fully free or full price. Is a choice really. Personally, is not the end of the world to watch an ad or two at the start or at the end of every episode if I am paying for half the price or less. Ads is only an issue when they are intrusive and constant. Personally, I will stick with the full access no ads.

The problem with Netflix is that their success is the platform, not the content. Now that other content creators have upped their Streaming game, Netflix now have to rely on their content to compete. Unlike say in the music industry, the TV and movie streaming industry just fragmented back to how it was, eliminating one of the key advantage of Netflix.
Sounds like he was referring to paying for ads from cable/satellite, not Netflix. I think his post wasn't constructed the best and it lead you to believe he was referencing Netflix.
 
Last edited:

captaincranky

Posts: 18,841   +7,756
Sounds like he was referring to paying for ads from cable/satellite, not Netflix. I think he's post wasn't constructed the best and it lead you to believe he was referencing Netflix.
This raises the question, "when is an ad not an ad". 30 years ago, I had cable with a couple of "premium channels". They showed movie only content every two hours. Whereas, the average "feature length movie", runs about ninety minutes. In the interim time, they showed preview after preview of upcoming movies. Movies, I might add, you had seen ten times already. So, IMO, these were "ads", and rather annoying ads at that.
 

captaincranky

Posts: 18,841   +7,756
FWIW, and to whom it may concern, the sh!t is really going to hit the fan, if Netflix gobbles up Roku. Since you'll be paying for "ad supported content", which at present, is free, on the Roku channel
 

Ravey

Posts: 360   +163
I'm not paying for the privilege of watching ads! I want to get a free service in exchange for adverts OR a paid service without.. NOT BOTH

They could base the model on Spotify.. Add a free tier but remove the watch whatever you want when you want.. I.e remove the ability to binge watch... only one episode of each show per day! (this would actually have some serious benefits to people struggling with tv addiction)
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 7,961   +7,006
@ Netflix

Here's the deal. No one wants to watch ads. It's why I killed my account years ago. I PAY for access to entertainment. I do NOT pay to be shown ads. It's why I have not and will not pay for Cable/Satellite. If you're going to do an ads based tier, what's going to happen? Are you going to show MORE ads on top of the crap you already show? That's a craptastic business plan!

Here's an idea: Have two tiers of subscriptions.

Plan A, paid access that is completely ad free.
Plan B, ad supported access.

Put simply, if I'm paying you money, you DON'T get to show me ads. If you show me ads, you DON'T get any of my money. Full stop, end of ph*#king discussion.
I think a few people have not accurately read the article.

From the article:
Having once said it had no plans to ever go down the ad-supported-tier route, Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos has now confirmed it will be offering such a plan as part of its service.

To me, the phrase "as part of its service" implies that there will be a lesser cost ad supported tier (yes, I know, no one wants to pay to watch ads myself included), and there will be a higher cost tier that has no ads, much like Hulu, and others, offer. It remains to be seen if this is actually the case, but I bet it is.

As I said in my post above, the JAs in streaming brought this on themselves. Sooner or later, they might actually figure out what their customers want and serve what their customers want and not the sh!t the JAs in streaming think their customers want.