We're just days away from the debut of the Netflix original series House of Cards — the first of many original productions debuting on the service this year — and it's becoming clear the company has no intention of slowing down anytime soon. In a lengthy profile on the company, GQ talks to Netflix's chief content officer Ted Sarandos, who explains that he hopes for the company to generate a minimum of five original programs per year moving forward. Sarandos currently has $300 million in his budget for original programming, which has allowed Netflix to bring projects like Cards, Eli Roth's Hemlock Grove, and a new season of the cult classic Arrested Development to its customers.
Sarandos describes the company's pitch as being one that is particularly alluring to filmmakers and show creators. Netflix doesn't require TV pilots — a single, introductory episode intended as a proof-of-concept — for creatives to prove the viability of their wares, it commits to full seasons upfront, and it offers a real budget for show creators to play with (House of Cards itself had a $100 million budget). "The goal," says Sarandos, "is to become HBO faster than HBO can become us."
The company is clearly looking at 2013 to be a breakout year in terms of original content, and it's already bested its five-program goal: including the second season of Lilyhammer, Netflix will be offering up six exclusive original series in the US. Sarandos seems to see it as the opening salvo in a movement that won't just change the way people think about Netflix, but could very well alter how audiences think of television itself. "I really think we have the chance to radically change the depth of character connectivity," he tells GQ. "I mean, a meaningful shift. It's going to further blur the line between television and movies." If you're curious about television, home entertainment, or digital distribution, be sure to check out the complete GQ profile — you won't want to miss it.
Comments
‘The goal is to become HBO faster than HBO can become us’
Did he really say that? Sarandos is watching too many 90s cartoons.
By Emmanuel A. on 01.29.13 9:14pm
I think it’s an astute observation, and a correct prediction of future trends.
It won’t be long before HBO Go is offered to cord-cutters, and it’ll be original content that becomes the differentiator.
By ElementFire on 01.29.13 9:25pm
Just posted that below, but an additional observation: HBO won’t offer the GO product to non-cable subscribers anytime soon.
By orgasm on 01.29.13 9:26pm
Consumers can be idiots, but you should never ignore stupid people in large groups.
When even Joe the Florist says that he wishes he could watch HBO Go on his refurbished iPad Mini without having to buy a TV, you know there’s a problem with the current market forces.
By ElementFire on 01.29.13 9:29pm
Affiliate fees will keep most existing content producers (channels) like HBO from catering to individual subscribers. They already get tons of dough via affiliate fees and only have to deal with a handful of TV providers (cable, satellite, U-Verse, FiOS, etc.). Switching to an individual subscriber model is costly and unfamiliar territory for most of them. Netflix however is already set up for this and if they succeed, it’s the beginning of something awesome.
By panda tacos on 01.29.13 10:28pm
I must say, both of you make for good arguments.
Interested in how it’ll be developping anyway (for netflix and hbo)
By ParisianNexus on 01.29.13 11:54pm
If Netflix succeeds though it means HBO can adopt the same model with confidence.
By Nymbus on 01.30.13 12:43am
Indeed, the beginning of something VERY awesome.
By daveinpublic on 01.30.13 7:01pm
Never say never.
We already get HBO Go to non-cable subscribers in Finland, Sweden, Denmark, etc.
By jodyfanning on 01.30.13 3:12am
By cgilmore on 01.30.13 1:18pm
Thank you for that.
By rossthe8oss on 01.30.13 1:43pm
You are most welcome.
By cgilmore on 01.30.13 1:59pm
Netflix’s success does not mean HBO’s doom, since they are getting new content, not replacing old content. If House of Cards is successful, that doesn’t mean people don’t want to continue watching Game of Thrones.
HBO Go won’t be offered to cord cutters until a significant and measurable portion of the population stops paying for cable, and we are 1-2 decades away from that.
By dagamer34 on 01.29.13 9:28pm
I think the problem is, what happens when Netflix gets the next popular series (like Game of Thrones) and not HBO.
Hate it or love it, they are directly competing now.
By nomik2 on 01.29.13 10:23pm
Of course, if Netflix gets all the cool shows and raises its all-you-can-eat price ten years from now, we’ll just be back where we started. No a la carte programming.
By TheFascination on 01.30.13 12:35am
Yeah which is why I see this fight for original programming as a bad thing. These pipes need to quit trying to be media companies.
By Omen_20 on 01.30.13 10:02am
I don’t think it’s that bad as long as someone manages to compete with them. I see Hulu, HBO and some others eventually following suit. Or who knows someone new might jump in. Netflix is shaking the system from the ground up. Others may have to follow suit. You can’t argue that it isn’t much better to get approved for a whole season vs. having to make a pilot and than still wondering if 6 episodes in someone will say that you’re cancelled. Because of that commitment Netflix will have first pick of shows for now until other studios jump on the wagon. I really like the concept and think it will improve the quality of shows.
By dazorange on 01.30.13 4:29pm
If you can pay for a digital download token the day after it airs (currently not available for HBO shows), you have the full spectrum between on-demand and all-you-can-watch.
By ElementFire on 01.30.13 7:35pm
Cable costs me 60 dollars. Netflix started at around whatever dollars and years later it’s 7.99… In what world would ten years equal Netflix being 60 dollars?
By DigitalCriminal on 01.30.13 11:25pm
There becomes a point enter producing your own content is cheaper than licensing content (for early run, like HBO and Staz do now.) Also better content means they grow subscriber base and therefore revenue. They don’t necessarily need to raise prices.
HBO has always cost me aroud $10 per month for the last 30 years without going up and they have way better content now and is multi-channel as well now (they used to be just 1.)
So it really all depends how far Netflix goes I their goal to be you TV network(s.)
By RF9 on 02.01.13 4:06am
To pinch a line from one of my favourite HBO series, The Wire, “You come at the king, you best not miss.” HBO’s doorstep is littered with the corpses of pretenders. Starz tried to go toe-to-toe with Game of Thrones with their own, even more expensive ‘fantasy’ production, Camelot and completely shit the bed.
People don’t want faux-HBO, they want HBO and the broadcasting pedigree those three letters bring. If you want to succeed in this business, you need one or two differentiating shows, like a Mad Men or Breaking Bad instead of shamelessly apeing the market leader.
By Strand0410 on 02.03.13 11:37pm
I think you are seeing more and more pay for only the content they want (or turning to bittorrent)…. IE only paying for hbo while game of thrones is on. That’s how I subscribe to hbo these days and just did this for starz while the final season of Spartacus is on. What keeps me paying for Netflix year round is all the other content Netflix offers that nobody else even comes close to for $8/month.
It will be interesting to see how long hbo remains tied to a cable subscription but if Netflix stays on this growth pace they very well could usurp hbo. I have a feeling within the next 5 yrs you will be able to buy hbogo stand alone. If they are still tied to a cable subscription at that time I think it will be too late to stop Netflix.
By jagowar on 01.29.13 10:24pm
Thats a good point, plus since hbo keeps all its shows on ondemand/Go if you are patient and let the season play through before re-subscribing you can get the whole season (or seasons of multiple shows if you only subscribe 1 month a year) for the price of a single month.
Or even better, wait for a preview weekend and download the ondemand season to your dvr…and sometimes cable/sat companies even offer free months of premium channels for customer complaints (got 6 free months of premiums from directv for the whole viacom fiasco).
Sure you can always just pirate the content, but there are other (legal) ways of getting around the full time subscription.
By Warbert on 01.29.13 10:36pm
I didn’t think you could DVR on demand content.
By Socks_with_Holes on 01.30.13 8:08am
I have a handful of movies from Showtime that I DVRed from DirecTV on demand while I had SHO free. The Free SHO went away, but the content I recorded is still there and watchable, sucking up hard drive space.
By Mobius on 01.30.13 11:06am