Skip to main content

Netflix built a TV empire without ads. Here’s why it’s time to consider them

I hate ads. 

The smug couple in the diamond commercial. The quippy insurance guy trying to convince us his company cares. Even the fun ones like Geico’s rotating carnival of mascots wear on me quickly after the fifth, sixth, or twelfth time they’re shoved in my face. 

Like a lot of people, it was the ads (along with the ballooning prices), that chased me off cable. And I count ponying up for the premium versions of streaming services like Spotify and Hulu among the most worthwhile purchases I make every month. As I get older, I’ve even bailed from the constant interruptions of rock radio to the public jazz station. 

Not everyone is as deeply affected by the repetition and mediocrity of advertising as I am, though. In fact, a new study from TDG research shows a significant percentage of Netflix subscribers (17 percent, or around 10 million users) would at least consider the unholiest of betrayals in the streaming world: An ad-based Netflix subscription. 

And you know what? It’s actually a great idea. No, really. Hear me out.

The great (streaming) war

I’m not saying Netflix should open the floodgates and totally sully its serene sanctum with cereal ads and soft-lens close-ups of elderly couples bathing in the woods. But when the coming streaming wars break out in earnest, a cheaper, ad-based Netflix tier — alongside the pricier ad-free choices — may be a great option for a lot of people.

Sure, there’s been no shortage of healthy competition up to now from on-demand services like HBO Now, Hulu, and Amazon, but it’s nothing like what we’re about to see. 

You’ve likely heard of Disney+, the streaming upstart that drops this fall with the vast majority of Disney’s record-breaking properties (Star Wars, Marvel, Pixar, etc.) and brand new shows starring some of its big-screen stars. But perhaps you haven’t heard the starting price: $7 per month. That fee includes 4K HDR streaming, an impressive-looking interface, and hundreds of hours of compelling movies and TV shows, and still beats Netflix’s Standard Definition tier by $2 per month. Meanwhile, Netflix’s hot-shot version with 4K, HDR, and (highly limited) Dolby Atmos audio costs more than twice that price.

Image used with permission by copyright holder

Consider that $7 an opening bid. There’s virtually no way the price stays that low for long, not without Disney taking major losses. But it’s enough to make just about any tangential Disney fan ask where to sign, and it could cut hard into Netflix subs in the near term.

And Disney+ is just the beginning. 

We just learned the name of WarnerMedia’s new streamer, HBO Max, and really, the name says it all. It’s true that parent company AT&T has created multiple streaming services before and failed miserably. But if HBO Max comes in with HBO programming and a slew of Warner’s other properties (including Friends) at the price being tossed around — about $16-17 per month — it’ll be hard to say no. 

Most serious TV fans already shell out $15 monthly for HBO’s streaming service or cable add-on — at least when Game of Thrones (may it rest in poorly-resolved peace) or the next big series starts up. If you could get a variety of DC films and TV shows, Harry Potter’s “Wizarding World,” CW fare, Turner shows (from the likes of CNN, TBS, TNT, etc.) or other Warner Bros. properties thrown in for $2 more per month, would you really say no?

Image used with permission by copyright holder

To a lesser extent, there’s also Apple TV+, which may not have Disney or HBO’s cache, but has some serious stars, including Steve Carell, Jennifer Aniston, Reese Witherspoon, and even Oprah, many of whom were dragged out on stage for Apple’s “Showtime” Event.

Then there’s the aforementioned Amazon and Hulu (which will be getting other major properties from Disney), as well as Showtime, Starz, Cinemax, CBS All Access, etc., etc., etc. Even NBCU has an ad-based streamer coming for $10-per-month (or free with cable) which will eventually host The Office. 

All of these services are looking to make their own splash, and one by one, they’re pulling some of their best content from big red and striking serious bargains in a play to get your money. May I remind you, you only have so much of that stuff? If you want to sample the widest array of programming, compromises will need to be made.

Surviving the tide

For Netflix’s part, while the streamer isn’t going anywhere anytime soon, its revenue structure is based around spending gobs of money on content creation and acquisition (as much as $15 billion per year) and expanding globally, all in an effort to acquire new subscribers. Netflix needs to grow to survive. The service already boasted 139 million subs at last count, aiming for 200 million in 2020. The good news is, its biggest competition will come from within the U.S. borders for starters, letting it scoop up overseas subscribers. But Disney and Apple are both primed to go global thanks to universal brand appeal, and they won’t be alone. 

Netflix has successfully reinvented itself several times over since the early days. The company moved from a DVD rental service to a streamer; from domestic streamer to global powerhouse; from a purveyor of second-run series and movies to one of the largest and most prolific content creators on earth. In other words, anything we can think of or predict, Netflix CEO Reed Hastings and his team of prognosticators have already considered it. After all, you can only raise prices so high in this new market, and insiders have long been predicting an ad-based tier. I reached out to Netflix to see if that’s something they’re considering, but they’ve been notoriously tight-lipped about any major changes to their subscriptions.

netflix-envelopes
Image used with permission by copyright holder

Still, it’s the company’s obvious next move. It would offer a large amount of revenue, sure, but it could also allow for faster growth from a more cautious consumer pool at a time when there have never been more choices. For Netflix, at least in the short term, an ad-based add-on is a safe way to survive the onslaught of competitors staring it dead in the face. 

Once the dust clears, it won’t take long for the competition to raise prices, creating a more even field — there just isn’t enough money in subscriptions to keep them so low. Only time will tell which will live, which will die, which will add commercials, and which will conglomerate into something that looks more like an online version of the cable/satellite subscriptions of old. 

In the meantime, while streaming may be a buyer’s market for some time, most of us can’t afford to choose them all. And a cheaper Netflix tier could be a great way to spread the wealth, so to speak.

In fact, come to think of it, maybe ads aren’t so terrible after all.

Ryan Waniata
Former Digital Trends Contributor
Ryan Waniata is a multi-year veteran of the digital media industry, a lover of all things tech, audio, and TV, and a…
Netflix is now streaming one of the scariest TV shows ever. Here’s why you should watch it
A man looks frightened in The Terror.

Netflix has added another horror treasure to its digital library with AMC's supernatural anthology series The Terror. Each season of this show features a standalone story in the vein of American Horror Story. But unlike the latter show, The Terror presents a more grounded and less stylized picture of horror by blending reality and folklore in a distinctive way.

After having won the Satellite Award for Best Genre Series, The Terror has proven itself a modern horror classic just waiting to be seen by more audiences. Here's why they should check out this acclaimed anthology this August.
It's a classical approach to horror

Read more
One of 2024’s most acclaimed shows is now on Netflix. Here’s why you should watch it
Three people stand on a roof in Interview with the Vampire.

You know how some shows are huge on social media but they don't seem to have such a large footprint in the outside world? Well, AMC's Interview with the Vampire is one such show. Based on Anne Rice's famous book series and primarily set in the 1910s, the show follows the charismatic yet cunning vampire Lestat de Lioncourt (Sam Reid), who seduces and eventually turns the affluent Black man Louis de Pointe du Lac (Jacob Anderson). As in the novel, the story is framed as an interview Louis gives to a journalist in 1973.

The show is the second major adaptation of Rice's novel after the 1994 Neil Jordan version starring Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt. However, it's an infinitely superior adaptation, showcasing the complex and changing dynamic between the two tortured vampires. Interview with the Vampire doesn't have the mass audience it deserves, but things will soon change, as the show is coming to Netflix this August, where it will hopefully find a larger audience. If you're still on the fence about whether to watch it, here are four reasons why you shouldn't miss this terrific Gothic romance.
The lead actors are amazing

Read more
Netflix is testing a redesigned TV app to make browsing easier
A screengrab of the Netflix redesign test.

In what would be the first major redesign in 10 years, Netflix has begun testing out a new look and some new features on its TV app that are aimed at making the home page simpler and more streamlined.

The company recently told The Verge that the redesign is aimed at aiding content discovery and helping subscribers decide what to watch. “We often see members doing gymnastics with their eyes as they’re scanning the home experience,” Pat Flemming, Netflix’s senior director of product, told The Verge. “We really wanted members to have an easier time figuring out if a title is right for them.”

Read more