iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Qwikster Goes Qwikly: A Look Back At A Netflix Mistake

Netflix Qwikster Canceled Ended

First Posted: 10/10/11 04:12 PM ET Updated: 12/10/11 05:12 AM ET

If there is one downside of Netflix's decision to cancel Qwikster, it is that Jason Castillo, the semi-coherent, weed-curious high-schooler who owned the Twitter handle @Qwikster, never got to extort Reed Hastings and his company for all the money that he could. The single bright side in the monumentally stupid Qwikster fiasco was the existence of @Qwikster; there was an unspoken hope that the totally undeserving, totally unprepared and likely totally blazed owner of that Twitter handle would somehow stumble into a large financial payday from Netflix, which would have represented some kind of victory-by-proxy for all of those customers stupefied by Netflix's stupefying decision to split the services in the first place.

Qwikster was a dumb idea. Dumb, dumb, dumb. It should certainly be a first ballot entrant into the Bad Decision Hall of Fame, enshrined next to New Coke, Prohibition and that time Garth Brooks dyed his hair black and played rock music under the name Chris Gaines. Better choices have been made at 24/7 Las Vegas chapels after too many Limoncello shots.

In its month of existence, Qwikster did nothing but foster ill will toward Netflix. The assumed purpose of the split--to enable Netflix to focus its resources and energy on acquiring streaming content and to phase out the less profitable, less popular DVD-by-mail service--was never well-articulated. Qwikster was pitched, in a blog post and accompanying video, as a way to offer users more convenience, though the entire concept of Qwikster seemed anything but: Netflix was all but forcing its 12 million customers with joint streaming-DVD accounts to create two accounts, at two different domain names, with two credit card statements and two different sets of ratings and preferences, all on a new website run by a guy who couldn't even spell the word "quick" correctly.

Well, if Netflix CEO Reed Hastings is to be believed, there might not even be a DVD-only side of the company for long. One sentence from Hastings' blog post announcing Qwikster stands out: "DVD by mail may not last forever, but we want it to last as long as possible." This indicates, to me at least, that Netflix doesn't want to be in the DVD business for much longer. With Netflix continuing to focus its efforts on acquiring new content to stream, and with the DVD rental section being apparently a low priority, look for Netflix to ax its postage-heavy DVD-delivery service sooner rather than later. People may want to cling to their DVDs, but Hastings is confident that the future of media consumption is not in physical discs, but rather in streaming, over an Internet connection, and he wants to usher in that future ASAP.

Hastings knew that his company needed to phase out DVDs, but traveling the Qwikster route could not have gone worse. Because for all of the (deserved) moaning over the inconvenience of the very idea behind "Qwikster," the name was always what pushed it over the top into the highest realm of ill-conceived business plans. Qwikster never would have received such mockery or derision if it had been called something that approached a respectable name for a media company, something like"Netflix By Mail" or "Netflix DVDs"--unless, I suppose, @netflixdvds was the active Twitter account of an acid-dropping sixteen-year-old porno addict who never met a vowel he couldn't remove from a word.

Qwikster sounds like a lot of things--a super cool startup from 1998 that's going to be totally rad and revolutionize the way you "surf" the "web"; something a cop in a 1930s talkie picture might call an elusive criminal; a nickname for Rainn Wilson's genitalia--but a DVD-by-mail service in 2011 it does not. Had the DVD website been given a more suitable, Netflix-branded domain name, the split would have simply been an awful strategic move; that it was dubbed Qwikster, and that the avatar for the Qwikster Twitter account was an illustration of beloved Muppet Elmo smoking marijuana, only served to increase the perception that no one at Netflix knew what they were doing.

The embattled CEO of Netflix has done a good, smart, honorable and difficult thing by axing Qwikster. He has shown that he is not insensitive to the demands and grievances of his customers, and that he is not afraid to admit, in public, that he has made a mistake. There is also the possibility that the most exciting development from Qwikster--namely, that Netflix would be getting into the video game business--is still on: A Netflix representative told tech blog SplatF that the company is "still considering" renting out games. Good for them, and good for Hastings.

What is not good for them, or good for Hastings, is that the existence of Qwikster is not an awful collective nightmare that will vanish upon waking. The very real Qwikster debacle is still a reality, as is the bungled price hike and aftermath. The misstep suggests to the public that Hastings is out of touch with what his customers want, a perception that a CEO cannot afford to have. It was a smart decision to mercy-kill Qwikster as quietly as possible before launch--even if it did prevent the rubber-necking American public the catharsis of watching it fail--though Netflix is still a damaged, blemished company in the wake of Hastings' four months of mistakes. Hastings has righted his wrong, but he has not elevated the company back to that high point of consumer confidence where it once so comfortably lived.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST TECH

If there is one downside of Netflix's decision to cancel Qwikster, it is that Jason Castillo, the semi-coherent, weed-curious high-schooler who owned the Twitter handle @Qwikster, never got to extort ...
If there is one downside of Netflix's decision to cancel Qwikster, it is that Jason Castillo, the semi-coherent, weed-curious high-schooler who owned the Twitter handle @Qwikster, never got to extort ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 79
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4  Next ›  Last »  (4 total)
04:12 PM on 10/12/2011
Here's what I think happened:

1. Netflix started seeing a larger than expected number of subscriptions being cancelled like I did mine. This isn't 10 years ago when DVDs by mail was "new" now people can use Redbox, also Amazon and HULU has got into the streaming business.

2. Blockbuster (who isn't dead yet) has started gaining with their own "Redbox" style kiosks and the offer of streaming + DVDs and games.

3. Like another person said, there just isn't enough streaming content. As opposed to being able to get just about EVERY movie on DVD in about 1 day.

4. Almost everyone has a DVD player, but not every one has the super-fast internet (small towns and rural areas are notorious for poor speed internet), or a very large screen computer monitor for watching movies...some people just have laptops.
Also, since I'm mainly a PC gamer, I dont have a PS3 or XBOX360 - so how do people like me watch streaming content on my TV I just bought ?

5. Blueray HD always beats streaming, and I like to see the movie extras too. The Chronicals of Riddick, and the 1st Blade movie had killer extras.

Every since this announcement, 80-90% of customer reaction has been negative.
...that makes you wonder, does Netflix even HAVE a research department ?
06:11 AM on 10/12/2011
Id rather have a dvd than a crappy stream or file.
04:16 AM on 10/12/2011
To add to my previous post I will digress a bit and say that I would have kept the NETFLIX name attached to the streaming service but I still would have started distancing myself from the DVD business. Although people are change resistant they will eventually follow technology.

And to a previous poster - yes the cable company is and will take a big hit once streaming is accepted by the masses and rightfully so they've had a nice run at price gauging.
04:05 AM on 10/12/2011
It looks like I'm in the minority in thinking that Netflix should have stayed the course and separated the two mediums. They would have been a front runner in their business model. Sure they would have suffered a short term loss but in the long run they would have once again been in front of the tech curve. By the time the rest of the industry has caught up to where they are already at they would have perfected their streaming service and gotten rid of their costly DVD inventory. All they have done was punt the ball into the future because they will eventually have to kill off the DVD portion of their company anyway. Like it or not streaming is where we are headed and the days of using CDs and DVDs are slowly eroding. Has anyone been following iTunes? If so, think about how it is slowly killing physical CD sales. Good riddance DVD's and CD's!
04:18 PM on 10/11/2011
So the price hike they announced was preparation for "Qwikster". Now that they've abandoned Qwikster, does that mean they'll remove the price hike?

If Netflix wants to keep the price hike, then they HAVE TO stream all the content that is only available on DVD.
12:14 PM on 10/11/2011
I'm only in my 20s, but I miss going to the store and actually picking out a movie.
09:36 AM on 10/11/2011
At a time when people over 60 are spending less money at the movies and restaurants, and staying home watching movies on DVD on their TV sets, going to solid streaming may not be the best choice. We've got an aging population with less discretionary money, and a new TV set with an internet streaming connection (or whatever you call it -- I'm not that tech savvy at 68 years old) isn't in their budgets. There's a whole new world out there -- "comfort food" isn't just meatloaf with mashed potatoes and gravy; it's old fashioned convenience at a cheap price. And I can't see myself sitting in the semi darkness in my home office in my office chair watching a movie on my desktop computer.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ilovedessert
09:28 AM on 10/11/2011
Th article says a Netflix mistake...the entire issue from the 60% increase on top of the increase they had gotten a few months before.....to the phony apology that only insulted more customers.....to splitting the company in two ....to now canceling that....but still not rolling back the HUGE increases.

1. Netflix got greedy, which is so galling in these trying times.
2. Ditto for the studios
3. At least 1 1/2 million customers have fled Netflix with many more pulling the plug daily.
4. They already deleted the Que list of anyone who decided to go with only 1/2 the company.....another mistake.
5. I no longer know anyone who uses Netflix...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Sarijj
Hello Sweetie
09:20 AM on 10/11/2011
Guess they watch SNL too. Now if they would relook at their price structure, customers might come back.
photo
techBob
whatever happened to peace, love and understanding
08:53 AM on 10/11/2011
Another CEO proves they aren't worth the big bucks they pull down. And to think he got a bonus for this debacle? Only in America, only in the corporate suite.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
RattleCat
08:41 AM on 10/11/2011
According to most analysts, this reversal has nothing to do with "the customer".

Rather, it has everything to do with a broken deal that was aborted when Hastings failed to keep the stock above 200.  With no deal, there is no reason to spend millions on completing the split.

We'll know for sure when the quarterly is released in a few weeks.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ILoveGreatDanes
If you can read this,my cloaking device is broken.
04:28 PM on 10/11/2011
Rattle, have you checked Netflix stock price lately? It's down to $108.66. It's actually dropped another $9.00 since Hastings announced he wasn't going to go through with Qwikster. (Hmmm. I expected the stock to go up with his change of heart).
08:19 AM on 10/11/2011
What every tech article has failed to mention is that not everyone has an internet connection that allows for a decent stream, but everybody in the country, no matter how remote or rural, has postal service (at least for now).
Everybody doesn't have a man cave w the latest tech, including the ability to stream to a flat screen, but everybody has a DVD player. Pop in a movie, everybody gather around. It's simple, especially for older people who see no need to upgrade their perfectly good TV and DVD.
There are even some of us oldsters that still rent DVD's from the public library. If Netflix eliminates DVD's, it doesn't follow that all those customers will transition to streaming customers.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Jason Gilbert
Reporter, HuffPost Tech
09:19 AM on 10/11/2011
Point taken. Thanks, Dee.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tone67
Read the whole story
08:14 AM on 10/11/2011
Why do away with the medium you built your company on, they are conceding the dvd market to redbox, if netflix was smart they'd come out with their own redbox type service.
photo
Philip Masiello
A noted entrepreneur and brand developer
07:27 AM on 10/11/2011
Well, Netflix had a good idea to move the DVD rental out of stores like Blockbuster and move it to the mail. The natural progression was to then move to downloading and streaming given the strides in that technology. Unfortunately, no one ever said Reed Hastings was smart. This event points out how much he lacks a strategy and vision and how little control he has over his company.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
harrymudd
07:19 AM on 10/11/2011
I only use the streaming service so I was unaffected. However this was one of the dumbest moves in history. The right thing is for the CEO or whoever came up with it to resign.
photo
trumbull desi
If I have something pithy to say, see below
08:00 AM on 10/11/2011
Indeed, they were trying to solve back-end infrastructure problems on the backs of their customers. They weren't making the customer their priority. I might understand the pricing move as that has everything to do with tiered distribution, but the actual separation of the company into two pieces was dumb and confusing.

And the new name was just lame. They gave up all that brand equity for what?