... share buybacks.
2007 = 67,076,000
2008 = 60,961,000
2009 = 56,560,000
2010 = 52,xxx,xxx
True earning growth (through increase subscription) is being masked by close to $800 million worth of buybacks.
The only winners are stock option holders (insiders).
SCAM CLIMAX.............AND BUST IS THE FUTURE
I DECLARE WORLDCOM OR ENRON BUST NEXT=NETFLIX
“Broadband companies could ignore neutrality and restrict the flow of NetFlix bits to protect their own video business, or surcharge NetFlix to be able to stream to our subscribers”
As arguments for Net Neutrality go, that says it all.
Unfortunately, it looks like the fix is in, since Congress has pretty much b!+ch-slapped the FCC on re-classifying broadband.
Sans Net Neutrality, the costs of implementing a vertical diversification strategy like streaming would likely have been prohibitively expensive for NetFlix.
Who’s managing the pipe?the broadband is only so broad, and the occasional dropouts you experience now as a result will only get worse as everything migrates to telco/cable and Bandwidth caps is destructive to Netflix Business model.
That’s the problem with companies who are solely dependent on others. If companies like Time Warner or Comcast wanted to drive Netflix out of business, they could do it in a heartbeat.
Time Warner and Comcast provide the bandwidth along with the cable service. If their OnDemand or PPV prices were to drop to $2 for new releases and $1 for older releases or even cheaper, people wouldn’t have the need for a Netflix or any other subscription service.
For me, don’t really need Netflix. I have a new Red Box Kiosk just down the street and rentals are $1.50 for a BLURAY!!
RED BOX AND NCR+BLOCKBUSTER KIOSK ARE THE FUTURE AND STREAMING CONTENT OWNERS ELIMINATE MIDDLE SERVICE PROVIDER TO PRESERVE THEIR PROFITS......................
FUTURE IS HBO/ESPN/STUDIOS not NETFLIX in streaming
Netflix is undoubtedly a bubble scam and Reed Hastings admits it in his presentation. Just segmenting a market and focusing on what looks like an underserved segment does not give you a right to make money….the DVD by mail logistics and recommendation engine are their real differentiation but with streaming taking over as they admit their market power is dying by the day. I hate this criminal Hastings , how he robbed shareholder cash to create a bubble for insider loot machine, and he just described his company’s demise in the presentation too. Streaming is actually Bust warrant for Netflix Business model
The gradual progression away from physical DVDs to streaming content is also a shift in negotiating power to the content providers. The price point for a sale of a DVD is capped by the retail price, and Netflix can reuse the same DVD as many times as it wants, making it very profitable. It’s clear that non-physical, all digital content will not follow the same “first purchase doctrine” rules. Content providers demand a fee per each and every usage which will cut deeply into Netflix’s revenue model.
The blind spot in Reed’s model is the fact that he offers a service – not a product (the product belongs to the movie studios – Netflix is just a delivery method). This service is dependent upon the pipe into a person’s home. Too little bandwidth and the person won’t take advantage of the streaming upon which the future of Netflix is dependent.Also Bandwidth cap by ISP's kills streaming model for Netflix.
On the flip side – in a FTTH situation the person who runs the fiber will own the home. Nobody is going to run a fiber to a home that already has one. Netflix needs to partner with these broadband providers whenever possible – yet I see no planning on Reed’s end to engage these people.
An independent telco, municipality or other entity who runs FTTH has no incentive to work with Netflix. If Amazon or WalMart created or improved their Affiliate programs then these broadband providers would have incentive to work against Netflix. Drop Netflix and join Amazon’s service and get your first month of Amazon’s streaming service free plus $10 off your IPTV bill. Sign up for WalMart’s streaming service and get your first month free plus a $20 WalMart gift card. You get the idea.
If a similar service to Netflix arrives and this new service has put these partnerships in place – then that new service will eat Netflix’s lunch in the broadband providers service area. That new service could even come from BlockBuster. How ironic would that be?
I’m working on a couple of IPTV deployments and right now and Netflix will be part of those plans but a partnership with a new Netflix-type service provider that pays commissions to the operator or provides a widget on the TV could easily make Netflix obsolete.
WHY ANALYST CRIMINALS NOT MENTIONING ANY FACTS?
TCV:CRIMINALS DUMPED IT ALL ..ALONG WITH INSIDER THUGS FREE LOOT
you old info that criminals dumped in flee mode;
WHOLE SHORT SQUEEZE SCAM GAME PLAN PLAYERS
THESE CROOKS:TECHNOLOGY CROSSOVER... 6/30/2010
3,699,865 (1,822,322) (33.00%) $379,421
AND BY NOW THEY ARE ALL OUT...................
FIDELITY/MET LIFE...THESE KING OF CROOKS HOLDING IN USA WORKING CLASS PENSIONS AND LIFE INSURANCE POLICIES
CRIMINAL GANGS CREATE SCAM BUBBLES AND FLEE WITH DUMPS
HASTINGS GREED WILL LAND HIM IN JAIL NEXT
Buybacks: The Bad
I get nervous when companies buy back stock at the same time insiders are selling and the stock price is rising. One such example is Netflix (Nasdaq: NFLX). In the past year (July 2009 to July 2010), insiders have sold $132 million of stock and made no purchases. Furthermore, the company is increasing the amount it is willing to spend on buybacks.
In 2009, Netflix bought back a record $324 million in stock. It even took on debt to finance these higher-priced repurchases. While Netflix's business and stock have performed exceptionally well over the past few years, it appears management might be being a bit reckless with its recent share repurchases.
Buybacks: The Ugly
The most egregious buyback situations usually show up in the related-party transactions, as listed in the annual report. Here's a past example from Fidelity National (NYSE: FNF):
In August 2007, FNF's chairman of the board, William P. Foley II, planned to sell 1,000,000 shares of FNF stock on the open market. Because the company was actively purchasing shares of treasury stock on the open market at the same time, the company agreed to purchase 1 million shares from Foley on Aug. 8, 2007, for $22.1 million, or $22.09 per share, the market price at the time of the purchase.
Fidelity National currently sits at just under $15 per share. I don't know about you, but I don't want an insider sitting on both sides of that decision. Is he serving his fiduciary obligation to shareholders or serving his best interests? It seems like an inherent built-in conflict to me. As it turns out, it seems like Mr. Foley the individual got the best of Mr. Foley the CEO on this one.
While buybacks are always pitched to investors as a wonderful opportunity to "return capital to shareholders," it's not always the case. They are only wonderful if the company has excess capital and is repurchasing shares at a discount to their intrinsic value.
SCAM FREE LOOT
BUY BACK FOR SHAREHOLDERS BUT WHO?USA WORKING CLASS PENSIONS LOOT
zippo in 2013
pink sheets 2012
hastings gang will be nailed
Lion broadcasting @war against SEC/Corporate?Wall street Criminal thugs
pumpers:pink sheet future on this scam
all RIMM predictions proven
This scam will be pink sheets and than ZIPPO
CRIME SCENE:REED HASTINGS will be paraded on CNBS TV in 2011 for his crimes