Business Insider Agrees with Kiosk.net’s Megamark on “Rolling Roadshow”
A recent article in USA Today by Gloria Goodale of the Christian Science Monitor uses Netflix’s screening of Clint Eastwood’s “Escape from Alcatraz” at the long-defunct island prison as a starting point for a discussion of how Netflix has changed consumer behavior. The article goes on to discuss, however, how Netflix will soon be facing challenges from newer distribution models like video downloading.
Branding expert Morris Reid accounts for the recent dip in Netflix stock (which was the result of the company’s failure to meet analysts’ predictions for the last quarter) by pointing out that “the biggest challenge for Netflix is distraction” from its primary role as a content-delivery firm. Sponsoring film festivals or concerts is better suited for the Netflix brand, and while the Roadshow stops may have been unique, they are a “waste of time and money.”
These sentiments are mainly in agreement with those expressed several weeks ago by Kiosk.net contributor Megamark, who makes the further point that dragging people out of the house may ultimately be contrary to Netflix’s mission. I agree with this when in comes to popular classics, all of which were seen in droves by theater-goers, but when it comes to sponsoring things like indie film festivals (as suggested by Reid), Netflix would be well served to simply have its name connected with that of Sundance, etc. After all, these sorts of films are simply not available to most viewers in a theatre-setting, thereby making Netflix the only option.
In any case, this seems to be Netflix’s strategy, as it has actively sought to become the go-to content provider for the indie movie biz.
September 1st, 2006 at 2:14 pm
I think that the roadshow was a streak of genius. Every stop along the way brought Netflix a glowing review in the local papers and for the last 4 months, they’ve gotten nothing but free press from the event. Assuming that the whole thing even cost $1,000,000 (which I doubt, but who knows), if these local papers and non-stop buzz even add 5,000 new customers it’s worth a million per year in extra revenue. Considering that they got 5,000 people alone to show up for the Field of Dreams showing, I suspect that they will end up more then making their money back on the free publicity.
I’ve seen other companies resort to different publicity stunts, but how many of them still have people talking about it 4 months after announcing them?
September 1st, 2006 at 3:03 pm
Thanks for your post.
Well, the ’stunt’ in this case just ended and I’m not sure how many people outside the Netflix world (i.e. non-subscribers) have ever talked about, nor how long those that have will continue to do so. And from what I’ve seen, the Field of Dreams screening looked as if it would be the marquee event of the tour, in which case 5,000 people (more than half of which are assuredly already subscribers) is pretty weak.
Don’t get me wrong—the idea is a good one (I would have went to any of these screenings if I could have) entertainment wise. I’m just not sure how much money it will generate. But maybe it will boosten the customer-friendly image that Netflix values so much and, even by word of mouth, ultimately be a money-maker in unforeseen or unmeasureable ways.
September 1st, 2006 at 4:58 pm
Yes, thanks for your comment.
I guess my concern is that it’s (somewhat) easy to entertain people free-of-charge, but quite difficult to get them to understand your brand.
Even if Netflix has good success with signing up customers at the events, which would be a nice direct-sales add-on to the marketing effort, I’d speculate that those sign-ups are people who care more for the theater-like or communal experience that the promo offers than actullay getting and paying for DVD movie rentals on a regular basis.
If Netflix repeats this promotion next year, then I might be willing to concede that you are right. Maybe.