Q2 , Q3 A, B

SEE-US$110: ECONOPLHC ANT) POLICY FOUNDATIONS FOR STRATEGIC ANALYSIS Individual lt'l'ase Analysis The socalled "streaming wars" have changed how people all over the world access home entertainment, and have received massive press coverage= as the follow examples illustrate. Sgpt. llI 1019 Unlike the federal election campaign and the Democratic candidates= debates= the streaming wars have no end date in sight. They're just getting started and will go on and on for years. [The recent] announcement by Apple that it will launch AppleTU+ on Nov. 1 was longawaited. Apple has spent vast amounts of money hiring talent and making shows= but when or how we would see the content has been a mystery. The cost; at US$4.99 a month, undercuts NetEliL Amazon Prime video and lIZIisney+= with the latter also launching in November. This means big choices for the consumer. But it mainly means that NetElix will nally have tough competition. How tough? NetEliJr is tougher than all the rest. Note that the cost of Apple's new platform reects what you get. Apple's TV slate is bare bones with big names attached. Apple doesn't have an existing library of lm and TV content and is unlikely to buy one. Its going to be small and many consumers won't even pay the monthly fee for AppuleTV-= as the company is including it ee to anyone who buys a new qualifying device, including an iFhone, Apple TV or Mac. It sure looks as though Apple is doing what Amazon did ommg TV content as a hinge benet for loyal Apple customers. J an. 31 Hill) _ On the heels of Amazon's eye-popping Q4 2019 results, its time to consider really consider what a powerful= ominous force this behemoth is in the world of media and entertainment (MSzE). Amazon already plays massively in ME but does so relatively stealthily. So: while Hollywood continues to buzz about today's very real \"streaming wars\" amongst giants Amazon typically is not the lead story (or even the secondary story). Its role in streaming's current epic land grab is not su'iciently or properly understood. Netix continues to lead, of course. And, new entrant Disney+ now steals some of its thunder as a result of its highly successful launch. Meanwhile Apple TV+ entered the world under a massive spotlight at the same time but landed with a thud. Not much talk of momentum 1 there, although Apple just announced record quarterly revenues of $92 billion and new data suggests that some shows are faring better than thought So, Apple has time on its side to get it right Lost amidst all this chatter is Amazon's linking, daunting presence in this epic streaming battle. Let=s not forget that Amazon Prime Video is the number two player in the U5. subscription streaming world. 1|III'thereas Netix counts lo? million paid subscribers worldwide, Amazon CEO JeEBezos announced that Amazon Prime (with Prime Video} now boasts over 150 million subscribers worldwide [up 'om l-EI million one year ago) a number that is worlds away om distant number three player Hulu (about 30 million} and the new guys who just le the gates, including Disney and Apple. It's not exactly an \"apples to apples\" oompaiison, of oourse. Amazon is a very di'erent streaming player than all others. Neti; Disney" and Apple TV+ all require customers to actively sign up for individual monthly subscriptions. Amazon, on the other hand, gives Amazon Prime Video for \"ee" to all its Prime members who happily pay $119 annually for ee shipping (aer all, who doesn't like ee shipping?}. Prime members passively receive Amazon Prime Video, whether they know it or not, as just another \"goodie\" to keep them shopping. The video servioe is not the end itself; it inctions more like a lossleading end cap in a retail store. That is Amazon=s special sauce and prime di'erentiator om Netix, which boasts no such luxury. Netix itself must be protable and selfsustaining. Amazon Prime Video does not. Amazon Prime Video essentially becomes just another marketing line item for this Seattle behemoth that seemingly now inltrates every aspect of our lives both online and increasingly ofine (Whole Foods is one notable example}. Disney and Apple also drive multi faceted business models in which streaming (movies and television) can be seen as Trojan horses to lure customers into their overall Magic Kingdoms. But even those behemoths can't compete with Amazon's reams of data about all of our shopping habits, likes and dislikes. Data is power, of oourse, and Amazon's precise knowledge of how we spend our money is data of the highest order. Amazon knows how to use it. Our viewing habits inform Amazon about how best to optimize our shopping experiences and maximize the outow of our dollars into its coers. For these reasons, Amazon is happy to remain relatively quiet amidst all the shouting of others. It faces less overall pressure to trumpet itself, because Amazon plays by its own rules by its own opaque metrics of success. Prime shopping and membership mimbers are what \"'I'I" is all about. Amazon reports no separate Amazon Prime Video subscriber ninnbers. At the same time, all other major streaming services use, and are beholden to, a very diEerwt report card subscriber oounts and viewership numbers. And all of us in the media and entertainment world (not to mention Wall Street) will constantly harangue them about those numbers throughout 2020 to make our own judgments of their relative sucoess in the face of this hypercompetition. Meanwhile, team Bezos can sit back, enjoy the \"streaming wars" tension om the sidelines, use its boundless war chest to selectively ind awardwinning content (like perennial favorite The Marvelous hits. Maisel}, and perhaps pick up a struggling movie theater chain or two to further extend its 360-degree online/ offline integration into, and relentless domination of, our daily lives. Yes, Amazon Prime Video doesn't spend $17 billion on content like Netflix will this year. But Bezos could. Without even blinking .... Oct. 21, 2020 Short-video app Quibi is shutting down just six months after its early April launch after struggling to find customers. The company said [..] that it would wind down its operations and sell its assets. The video platform - designed for people who were out and about to watch on their phones - was one of a slew of new streaming services started to challenge Netflix over the past few years, most of which were part of much bigger tech and entertainment companies, like Apple and Disney. Quibi, short for "quick bites," raised $1.75 billion from investors including Hollywood players Disney, NBCUniversal and Viacom and its leadership were big names: entertainment industry heavyweight Jeffrey Katzenberg and former Hewlett-Packard CEO Meg Whitman. But the service struggled to reach viewers, despite a 90-day free trial, as short videos abound on the internet and the coronavirus pandemic kept many people at home. Part of the appeal of the service, which started at $5 a month, was supposed to be that you could watch short videos while out, without access to a TV. Being stuck at home made TV more desirable than watching on a phone, and Quibi only later and slowly rolled out TV options. Katzenberg blamed the pandemic for Quibi's woes. The shows never achieved big name recognition, although the platform scored some Emmys earlier this year. 'Quibi is not succeeding. Likely for one of two reasons: because the idea itself wasn't strong enough to justify a standalone streaming service or because of our timing," Katzenberg and Whitman wrote in a letter posted online. "Unfortunately, we will never know but we suspect it's been a combination of the two.". Katzenberg's connections helped line up stars to make and star in its videos, including Reese Witherspoon, Steven Spielberg and Jennifer Lopez. There was a short version of "60 Minutes" and reality shows. Quibi doesn't release subscriber figures. Mobile research firm Sensor Tower estimates 9.6 million installations of Quibi's mobile app since its launch; that doesn't mean those are actually users. One of the most successful new services, Disney Plus, has more than 60 million subscribers."While we have enough capital to continue operating for a significant period of time, we made the difficult decision to wind down the business, return cash to our shareholders, and say goodbye to our talented colleagues with grace," Whitman, the CEO, said in a statement. The company said that money from the sale of its assets will go toward paying off liabilities and whatever remains will be returned to investors. Dec. 10. 2020 Walt Disney Co on Thursday announced it will aggressively expand the Marvel and Star Wars franchises on its Disney+ subscription streaming service as it hit 86.8 million subscribers and nearly reached its most ambitious 2024 goal. The entertainment conglomerate said it plans to release 10 new TV series in each of the two franchises over the next few years. Another 15 live-action Disney Animation and Pixar shows and 15 Disney Animation and Pixar feature films will be available on the streaming service. Customers should expect something new every week, executives said in a presentation to investors. Disney shares rose 4% in after-hours trading during the presentation. Hollywood is closely following Disney's plans a week after AT&T Inc's Warner Bros upended the film business by saying it would debut all 17 of its 2021 movies on its HBO Max streaming service on the same day they hit theatres. Disney+, the Netflix Inc competitor Disney launched a year ago, projected it would gain 60 million to 90 million subscribers worldwide by fiscal 2024. Since October, the service added 13 million customers and now has 86.8 million subscribers. Including Hulu and the ESPN+ sports streaming services, the company has about 137 million subscribers. Netflix, which pioneered streaming in 2007, had 195 million paying subscribers at the end of October. Disney also said it would launch its Star-branded general entertainment service in international markets in February 2021. In October, Disney said it was restructuring the company to put more emphasis on streaming over traditional linear television to better meet customer demands. Next year it will offer a streaming platform overseas under the Star brand. Cinema chains including AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc, Cineworld Group and Cinemark Holdings Inc are watching to see if Disney, the box-office leader last year, plans big changes to the slate of movies it has set for theatres. Disney and other studios previously moved some films to streaming because the coronavirus pandemic has closed many cinemas.Hollywood trade publications have reported that Disney has considered shifting the release of live-action movies including "Pinocchio," which stars Tom Hanks as Geppetto, as well as "Peter Pan & Wendy," to Disney+ from theatres. Sources: Forbes . Financial Times The Globe and Mail Questions You are assuming the role of consultant for Netflix Inc. 1) Determine the major stakeholders in this case. Which of these stakeholders do you think Netflix should pay particular attention to and why? 2) Which perspective(s) should be held by Netflix's top management to respond to the rapid changes in the streaming industry? Explain. 3) Assume for this question that your role has changed and that you are now a Canadian government official in the Competition Bureau. a) Are you concerned at all about the fact that the industry is dominated by these giants? Why or why not? b) If Quibi was a Canadian firm, would you have intervened? Why and How? Instructions This is a reflective exercise, students are expected to answer questions based on the information shared in the case using the concepts learned in class, no external research is required Page limit: max 5 . Font: Times New Roman 12 (or similar), single spacing According to its website (https://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/co-bc.nsfeng/home), "The Competition Bureau, as an independent law enforcement agency, ensures that Canadian businesses and consumers prosper in a competitive and innovative marketplace." 5