Search results

By 2009 Netflix had all but trounced its traditional bricks-and-mortar competitors in the video rental industry. Since its founding in the late 1990s, the company had changed the face of the industry and threatened the existence of such entrenched giants as Blockbuster, in large part because of its easy-to-understand subscription model, policy of no late fees, and use of analytics to leverage customer data to provide a superior customer experience and grow its e-commerce media platform. Netflix's investment in data collection, IT systems, and advanced analytics such as proprietary data mining techniques and algorithms for customer and product matching played a crucial role in both its strategy and success. However, the explosive growth of the digital media market presents a serious challenge for Netflix's business going forward. How will its analytics, customer data, and customer interaction models play a role in the future of the digital media space? Will it be able to stand up to competition from more seasoned players in the digital market, such as Amazon and Apple? What position must Netflix take in order to successfully compete in this digital arena?

To examine the benefits and risks of investment in analytical technology as a means for mining customer data for business insights. Students will develop a strategy position for Netflix's investment in technology and its digital media business. Students must also consider how new corporate partnerships and changes to the customer channel model will allow the company to prosper in the highly competitive digital space.

Jim Keyes, CEO of Dallas-based Blockbuster Inc., was facing the biggest challenge of his career. In March 2010 Keyes was meeting with Hollywood studios in an effort to negotiate better terms for the $1 billion worth of merchandise Blockbuster had purchased the year before. In recent years, Blockbuster's share of the video rental market had been sharply decreasing in the face of competitors such as the low-cost, convenient Redbox vending machines and mail-order and video-on-demand service Netflix. While Blockbuster's market capitalization had dropped 47 percent to $62 million in 2009, Netflix's had shot up 55 percent to $3.9 billion that year. The only hope for Blockbuster, as Keyes saw it, was to shift its business model from primarily brick-and-mortar physical DVD rentals to increased digital and mail-order video delivery. In Keyes's favor, the studios were more than willing to provide him with that help. Hollywood wanted to see Blockbuster win the video-rental wars. Consumers still made frequent purchases of DVDs at its store—purchases which were much more profitable for studios than the rentals that remained Blockbuster's primary business. Blockbuster had made efforts at making its business model more nimble, but the results had been disappointing, and its debt continued to skyrocket. By the end of 2009, the company's debt had climbed to $856 million, its share of the $6.5 billion video rental business had fallen to 27 percent, and its revenues had tumbled 23 percent to $4.1 billion.

The objective of this case is to discuss how different business models and supply chain structures impact the financials of the firms in the DVD rental business. In particular, the goal is to convey that the characteristics of the movie (recent/big hit or old/eclectic) affect whether it is best rented from a centralized or decentralized model. In addition, as streaming gains market share, the impact will be different for movie types and business models.