netflix vs blockbuster case 5

21
Competition in the Movie 1 Running Head: COMPETITION IN THE MOVIE Case Study: Competition in the Movie Rental Industry in 2008: Netflix and Blockbuster Battle for Market Leadership Emilsen Holguin Excelsior College

Upload: angelita-rodriguez-frisancho

Post on 18-Apr-2015

872 views

Category:

Documents


13 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Netflix vs Blockbuster Case 5

Competition in the Movie 1

Running Head: COMPETITION IN THE MOVIE

Case Study: Competition in the Movie Rental Industry in 2008: Netflix and Blockbuster

Battle for Market Leadership

Emilsen Holguin

Excelsior College

Page 2: Netflix vs Blockbuster Case 5

Competition in the Movie 2

Table of Contents

I. Overview ..................................................................................................................... 3 II. Diagnosis of Strategic Issues ...................................................................................... 4 III. Application of Techniques of Strategic Analysis ................................................... 4

A. Competitive Forces: The Five-Forces Model of Competition ............................... 4 1. Suppliers ............................................................................................................. 4 2. Buyer Power........................................................................................................ 5 3. Threat of Substitution ......................................................................................... 5 4. Threat of New Entry ........................................................................................... 5 5. Competitive Rivalry ............................................................................................ 5

B. Market Position: Strategic Group Map ................................................................... 6 C. Industry Key Success Factors (KSFs) ..................................................................... 7 D. Netflix’s Competitive Strategy ............................................................................... 7 E. Netflix SWOT Analysis .......................................................................................... 9 F. Blockbuster SWOT Analysis ................................................................................ 10 G. Financial Ratios .................................................................................................... 11

IV. Analysis and Evaluation ....................................................................................... 13 A. The Rental Movie Industry and Netflix’s Position ............................................... 13 B. Inside Netflix ........................................................................................................ 14 C. Inside Blockbuster ................................................................................................ 15

V. Recommendations ..................................................................................................... 17 A. For Netflix ............................................................................................................. 17 B. For Blockbuster ..................................................................................................... 18

VI. New Developments: 2010 Update ........................................................................ 19 Reference .......................................................................................................................... 21

List of Figures

Figure 1. Strategic Group Map Application for Selected Movie Rental Services .............. 6 Figure 2. Netflix SWOT Analysis ...................................................................................... 9 Figure 3. Blockbuster SWOT Analysis ............................................................................ 10 Figure 4. Comparative chart: Operating profit ................................................................. 12

List of Tables

Table 1. Comparative table: Financial Ratios (December 2007) ...................................... 11 Table 2. Comparative table: Financial Ratios (December 2009) ...................................... 20

Page 3: Netflix vs Blockbuster Case 5

Competition in the Movie 3

Case Study: Competition in the Movie Rental Industry in 2008: Netflix and

Blockbuster Battle for Market Leadership

I. Overview

Since founded in 1999, Netflix has grown to become the world’s largest online

movie rental service. In the beginning of 2007, Netflix surpassed 6.3 million subscribers.

With a catalog that includes more than 100,000 titles, Netflix is leading the movie rental

market (Thompson, Strickland & Gamble, 2009).

Netflix’s subscription-based business model was a disruptive innovation in the

movie rental business. By using the internet, Netflix focused on providing convenient and

affordable prices for an entertainment industry that was already highly popular. Based on

a product that consumers already loved, Netflix’s business model was profitable because

it improved the consumer’s rental experience. The company aimed to become the best-

cost provider. As part of its competitive advantages, Netflix has an intuitive website (easy

to use), personalized movie recommendations, and excellent customer service. Netflix

has been rated No. 1 in online retail customer satisfaction by Neilsen Online for the past

3 years and for nine consecutive periods by Forsee/FGI Research (Netflix, 2009).

Netflix’s strategy for success has included providing a comprehensive selection of

movies; an easy way to choose movies, fast delivery, a no-late-fees policy and a

convenient drop-it-in-the-mail return system. These strategies ensured a competitive

advantage to Netflix and threatened to make the traditional video store obsolete. A

combination of its business model and strategic approach carry out the mission of the

company: “Our appeal and success are built on providing the most expansive selection of

DVDs; an easy way to choose movies; and fast, free delivery” (Briki Media, LLC, 2007).

Page 4: Netflix vs Blockbuster Case 5

Competition in the Movie 4

II. Diagnosis of Strategic Issues

Netflix’s main competitor, Blockbuster, was losing the battle until 2007, when a

resurgent Blockbuster started to take over market share and forced Netflix to reduce

subscription prices. This reaction raised a red flag and caused a drop in Netflix’s stock

price.

In addition to Blockbuster, other competitors are increasing their presence in the

market (i.e., Redbox) and new technology innovations (i.e. VOD and DVR) are changing

the business environment. Netflix’s business model was a disruptive technology, but its

competitors’ strategies for damage control and recovering market share are starting to

affect Netflix’s competitive advantage. The market conditions for Netflix have changed

and the company needs to adjust and react to new developments.

III. Application of Techniques of Strategic Analysis

A. Competitive Forces: The Five-Forces Model of Competition

1. Suppliers

Netflix acquires its content from movie studios and movie distributors.

Although they offer a unique product and there is no chance of

substitution, the relationship between Netflix and its suppliers is

symbiotic. They need each other. Movie studios and movie distributors

make their revenue by selling its content to the largest number possible of

viewers. Netflix acquires content by buying DVDs, paying on a fee-per-

DVD basis, paying a fee to license content and signing revenue-sharing

agreements (Thompson et al., 2009, p. C104).

Page 5: Netflix vs Blockbuster Case 5

Competition in the Movie 5

2. Buyer Power

Netflix sells its subscriptions to those who prefer online-only browsing

and mailbox delivery. By July 2008, Netflix had 8.4 million subscribers

(Thompson et al., 2009, p. C102). Individually Netflix’s customers have

little buyer power; however, with no fees for canceling the subscription,

there is virtually no cost for switching to other provider.

3. Threat of Substitution

Netflix competes for customers by offering almost any kind of movie

broadcasting, movie rental or movie distributor. Netflix’s subscribers

easily find ways to watch movies. They can watch movies from cable

companies, online services, movie theaters, DVD vending kiosks and

rental stores. The substitution of Netflix subscription is viable and easy.

4. Threat of New Entry

Netflix’s economy of scale and distribution systems place a high barrier

for new entries to this market. New entries to the online rental movie

business would face high costs and require state-of-the-art technologies to

compete effectively.

5. Competitive Rivalry

In 2007, the movie rental business accounted for a $9.5 billion market in

the United States. Movies can be rented in-stores ($5.8 billions), via mail

(2.0 billions), on-demand (1.3 billions) and vending machines (400

millions). The main movie rental competitors for Netflix are Blockbuster

Page 6: Netflix vs Blockbuster Case 5

Competition in the Movie 6

and Redbox. Netflix’s competitors offer the same products for almost the

same price. (Thompson et al., 2009, p. C99).

The five-forces model of competition for the movie rental industry shows that

supplier power, buyer power, and the threat of new entries do not represent a

strong force against a company’s market position. However, the threat of

substitution and the threat of competitive rivalry can affect a company’s ability to

make sustainable profit in the movie rental business.

B. Market Position: Strategic Group Map

Industry competitors - Netflix, Blockbuster, Movie Gallery and Redbox - are

evaluated here in terms of added value (instant movies, personalized recommendations,

number of queues, etc) and market coverage (online, stores and vending machines). The

size of the circle is representative of market share relative to others in the industry.

Figure 1. Strategic Group Map Application for Selected Movie Rental Services

Page 7: Netflix vs Blockbuster Case 5

Competition in the Movie 7

The strategic group map (Figure 1) illustrates that the closest rival for Netflix is

Blockbuster. Also, it reveals that although Netflix’s customers receive more value for

their money, Netflix has less coverage because it limits its coverage to internet users.

Blockbuster has a strategic advantage by offering rental movies through stores, internet

and vending machines, but its customers receive less value for their money.

The strategic map also reveals the presence of a new player in the business game:

Redbox. Although the company is relatively new (first market test launched in 2004 in

Denver, CO), the company is growing its market share rapidly. The Redbox business

model is focused on fully automated kiosks that holds approximately 630 DVDs and are

placed in strategic locations (such us major groceries stores, pharmacies and restaurants)

(Redbox, 2009).

C. Industry Key Success Factors (KSFs)

The key success factors that affect movie rental players the most are:

• overall low costs

• market coverage

• large selection of movies

• updated catalog (new releases in stock)

• ability to provide fast and convenient service

• customer-centered approach

• state-of-the-art technology and distribution systems

D. Netflix’s Competitive Strategy

Netflix applies a best-cost provider competitive strategy. Movies are an affordable

entertainment that almost everyone loves. Netflix offers a large range of subscription

Page 8: Netflix vs Blockbuster Case 5

Competition in the Movie 8

plans to meet their consumers’ needs and added “convenience” to offer customers more

value for the money.

• A Netflix customer has a broad selection of subscriptions plans starting at $5.99

up to $47.99 – from two movies per month to unlimited numbers of movies

anytime (Thompson et al., 2009, p. C101). Movies are delivered and returned by

mail. Netflix has no due dates or late fees. Subscribers can watch “instant movies”

on the internet, all for a fixed price.

• Netflix adds value in many ways. It provides each account with as many as five

separate rental queues (with ratings-based parental controls), offering separate

viewing choices to individual family members. Based on one’s ratings, the

Netflix system learns one’s taste and offers personalized lists of

recommendations. Users can invite each other to join a “friends list,” so they can

see each other's rental queues and make additional viewing suggestions (Netflix,

2009).

Page 9: Netflix vs Blockbuster Case 5

Competition in the Movie 9

E. Netflix SWOT Analysis

Figure 2. Netflix SWOT Analysis

As shown in Figure 2, Netflix has a long list of strengths and opportunities. This

puts the company in an advantageous position to continue gaining market share.

Netflix’s customers are used to state-of-the-art technology and they probably welcome

novelty in delivering formats such as VOD. However, the company needs to move fast to

keep up with technology and innovations.

Page 10: Netflix vs Blockbuster Case 5

Competition in the Movie 10

F. Blockbuster SWOT Analysis

Figure 3. Blockbuster SWOT Analysis

Although Blockbuster has a good list of strengths and opportunities (as shown in

Figure 3), its challenges are greater because the company is losing reputation and is

already behind in using technologies and distribution systems. For a company that is in

recovery mode, conditions such as slowing numbers of movie DVD rentals and an

economic slowdown can be highly detrimental.

Page 11: Netflix vs Blockbuster Case 5

Competition in the Movie 11

G. Financial Ratios

Ratios Netflix Blockbuster

Working capital 203.9 30.7

Debt to Equity 0.50 1.96

Long term debt to Equity 0.008 1.015

Return on Assets 0.10 -0.031

Assets turnover 1.862 2.027

Operating Profit 0.075 0.007

Table 1. Comparative table: Financial Ratios (December 2007)

The financial ratios above are based on financial data from 2007 fiscal year

(Thompson et al., 2009, p. C106, C110). Netflix is highly liquid and has more than

enough solvency to cover expenses. Netflix’s debt-to-equity ratio is only 0.50 which

shows that the company is creditworthy and has a strong balance sheet. This is confirmed

with its very low (0.008) long term debt to equity ratio. The company shows

considerable capacity to borrow additional funds if needed. In addition, Netflix generates

$1.862 sales for each dollar of assets.

From Blockbuster’s perspective, its working capital is very low (only 30.7). This

can represent a significant challenge to cover its operating expenses. In addition,

Blockbuster’s debt to equity ratio (1.96) indicates excessive debt and a weak balance

sheet. High long-term debt equity undermines the company’s capacity to borrow

Page 12: Netflix vs Blockbuster Case 5

Competition in the Movie 12

additional funds. Blockbuster generates $2.027 sales for each dollar of assets, which is a

good indicator; unfortunately, its operating profit is very low.

The chart below compares operating profit ratios for Netflix and Blockbuster

from 2002 to 2007. The operating profit margin or return on sales shows the profitability

of current operations (not including interest charges and income taxes). The operating

profit ratio is best used to compare a company’s results over time to reveal trends. The

chart shows a rapid decline in Blockbuster’s operating profits from 2002 to 2004,

followed by a recovering curve until 2006. At the time of this analysis, Blockbuster’s

operating profit trend was falling in negative direction. In contrast, Netflix’s trend over

time is upward. According to the 2007 notes in Netflix Annual Report, its flatten out of

operating profit during that period was “primarily the result of an increase in personal-

related costs due to the growth in headcount and expenses related to the development of

solutions for the Internet-based delivery of content” (Netflix, 2007, p. 47).

Comparative chart: Operating profit

-0.35

-0.3

-0.25

-0.2

-0.15

-0.1

-0.05

0

0.05

0.1

2002 2004 2005 2006 2007

Year

Ope

ratin

g pr

ofit

BlockbusterNetflix

Figure 4. Comparative chart: Operating profit

Page 13: Netflix vs Blockbuster Case 5

Competition in the Movie 13

IV. Analysis and Evaluation

A. The Rental Movie Industry and Netflix’s Position The five-force model of competition shows that in the rental business the main

threats are substitution and competition. A movie rental business competes with any kind

of movie broadcasting business (cable, theaters, movie rentals, streaming videos, etc). A

company that wants to succeed in the movie rental industry must apply strategies to keep

customer satisfaction high and to promote consumer loyalty.

In the Strategic Group Map (Figure 1), the competition for market share with

Blockbuster is evident. Although Movie Gallery and Redbox together have a significant

presence in the market, they do not represent a direct threat to Netflix. In contrast,

Blockbuster has a large market share and has a wide geographic coverage. If Blockbuster

implements strategies to add value to its customers, Netflix can face a significant

challenge that could harm the direction of the company.

Success in the rental movie industry depends on seven factors. Netflix is

especially good on most of the key success factors for the movie rental business:

• overall low cost (an upward trend on operating profits),

• large selection of movies (with a catalog of more than 100,000 titles),

• updated catalog (Netflix offers new releases the same day they are

available in the market),

• ability to provide fast and convenient service (Online instant movies and

mail delivery),

Page 14: Netflix vs Blockbuster Case 5

Competition in the Movie 14

• customer centered approach (Netflix policies are customer friendly. its

intuitive website allows customers to make all transactions; in addition,

Netflix offers phone help available 24 hours a day) and

• state-of-the-art technology and distribution systems (Netflix system learns

to customer taste and personalize recommendations. Movies arrive within

one business day).

• Netflix’s market coverage is limited to internet users.

According to Internet World Stats, the percentage of penetration of the internet in

the North American population in 2009 was 74.2% (an increase of 134% since 2000).

This rate indicates that Netflix could reach 74.2% of the American populations, which

adds market coverage to Netflix’s list of key success factors (Miniwatts Marketing

Group, 2009).

B. Inside Netflix Netflix has been successful in applying the best-cost strategy. It has been able to

offer additional benefits to its customers while controlling its expenses, keeping low

levels of debt, and continuing to increase net income. Netflix is a very profitable business

that has built on its first mover advantages and created a business model that promotes

customer satisfaction and technology innovation. Although it only provides online rental

services, the rapid increase of internet users will help the company to convert this

weakness into an opportunity.

In 2007, Netflix’s most significant weakness was the lack of stores and the

difficulty for subscribers to have immediate access to movies. Although “instant movies”

were available, the titles were limited and the movies had to be watched on a computer

Page 15: Netflix vs Blockbuster Case 5

Competition in the Movie 15

screen. In addition, competitors had emulated Netflix online services, making the war for

market share more competitive. The biggest threat for Netflix is to overcome the business

cycle of its model. Netflix’s business model is at its peak, competitors are getting close

enough to force Netflix to lower the price of its subscriptions. Netflix needs to take

advantage of its opportunities to continue its growing trend and avoid a contraction cycle.

Its most attractive opportunity is the growing awareness of video streaming technology

and its promising partnerships with gaming console manufacturers to offer video on

demands.

Netflix’s financial ratios confirm the financial health of the company. Large

amounts of working capital, low levels of debt, high rates of asset turnover and a positive

trend of operating profit makes the company attractive for investors and ensures financial

stability.

C. Inside Blockbuster The main problem with Blockbuster is the lack of a defined strategic approach.

Blockbuster used to set its own price standards until Netflix came aboard. Since 2003, the

company has been losing money. In its effort to recover its market share, the company

tried to add value to its memberships. This initiated when Blockbuster launched an ad

campaign that communicated their value proposition: “Get 4 movies by mail and trade

them for in-store movies, as often as you like for $20 a month” (Steele, 2009, para 1).

However, the company did not persist in a clear strategy; instead, customers were

surprised by changes to the rental policies and new promotions each time they visited the

stores. The policy changes were frequent to the point that store employees delivered

Page 16: Netflix vs Blockbuster Case 5

Competition in the Movie 16

negative and confused messages to customers. Employees and customers were puzzled

about what the current policy was.

Blockbuster is subject to the same list of key success factors as Netflix. However,

in Blockbuster’s case, the company is weak in maintaining overall low costs; it has seen a

decrease in customers’ satisfaction and has struggled with efficiency in its distribution

systems. In its favor, Blockbuster has a reasonable selection of movies, an updated

catalog (although movies are not always in stock), offers convenient access to movies

across multiple channels (stores, online and vending machines) and has a global presence.

Blockbuster’s diversified delivery channels is the company’s strongest

competitive advantage. Blockbuster is the only company to make media entertainment

available across multiple channels. The company promotes that the fact that “the same

customer may choose different ways to access media entertainment on different nights”

(Blockbuster Corporate, 2009, para 4). A consumer can rent movies at traditional stores,

by-mail, vending or digital download. In spite of this advantage, Blockbuster has lost

reputation and has dealt with high operating costs that make it a difficult to challenge a

strong competitor like Netflix. In addition to its internal difficulties, Blockbuster’s

recovery efforts are being slowed down by the country’s economic recession and a

consumer trend to rent fewer DVDs. However, the company counts on its infrastructure

to take advantages of opportunities such as a growing market for game rentals, a strategic

alliance to deploy Blockbuster-branded DVD vending machines for movies and video

games and a video streaming technology.

Blockbuster’s financial ratios reveal a poor financial performance. A low amount

of working capital, high levels of debt and negative trends of operating profits make it

Page 17: Netflix vs Blockbuster Case 5

Competition in the Movie 17

difficult for the company to attract investors. Its high ratio of long-term debt to equity

(1.015) makes it difficult for Blockbuster to find external funding to support its new

strategies.

V. Recommendations

A. For Netflix The market environment for Netflix has changed and the company needs to adjust

its strategies in order to avoid a contraction cycle. The company enjoys key success

factors needed in the movie rental business, but to keep its leading position in the market,

Netflix must continue improving customer satisfaction rates and customer retention rates.

The following recommendations can help Netflix keep its front running position in the

market:

• Design a marketing campaign to raise awareness of the advantages of

video streaming technology, which allow customers to instantly watch TV

episodes and movies streamed from Netflix.

• Increase the number of digital content movies available in its catalog (in

2007, only 12,000 full-length movies and television episodes were

available for streaming over the Internet to computer screens.)

• Take the first movers’ advantage of digital technology broadcasting.

Netflix should aim to download its digital content directly to TV screens.

Partnerships with TV and game consoles manufactures can give Netflix a

new distinctive competence.

• Continue to increase its number of titles available and seek to include

music digital content.

Page 18: Netflix vs Blockbuster Case 5

Competition in the Movie 18

• Design annual memberships to reward loyal customers. Netflix should

offer a discount price for loyal customers who want to pay for annual

subscriptions.

• Design a referral program. Netflix sells “gift subscriptions” and sends by

mail “free-trial” coupons, but it fails to reward its customers for helping

the company in its marketing efforts. A free-month or a special discount in

membership prices would motivate customers not to trash those “free-

trial” coupons.

• Increase awareness of the company’s social responsibility. Netflix could

create special programs (contests or collections of points) to allow schools

to receive free subscriptions. These kinds of program are powerful ways to

build a company brand and to ensure future loyal customers.

B. For Blockbuster On the other hand, Blockbuster continues working in a recovering mode.

Although some of its strategies have been working and the company saw a small

recovery in 2006 with a modest profit of 39.2 millions, the boost did not last long and the

company went negative again on 2007 (registered a loss of 85.1 million). The conditions

for Blockbuster are more challenging because of its weak financial situation and damaged

reputation.

A priority for Blockbuster must be to become profitable. The company needs to

reduce its operating costs and to design an effective distribution system. It can do this by:

• Building a business model that is sustainable and has the flexibility to

adapt to competitive threats without eroding value.

Page 19: Netflix vs Blockbuster Case 5

Competition in the Movie 19

• Identifying appropriate strategies and creating company policies to ensure

that employees deliver consistent and reliable information to its customers.

• Taking advantage of new technologies to reduce its operating costs and to

improve customer service.

Blockbuster should quit fighting Netflix and focus on creating a new niche

market. Blockbuster took too long to fight back Netflix’s strategies and currently the

company does not have financial resources to compete against this giant rival. However,

Blockbuster’s global infrastructure provides the company with unique geographic

markets where Netflix is not present. In addition, Blockbuster offers rental of video

games, another market where Netflix does not compete and that is growing in numbers.

Movie rentals could become “the added value” for video game rental consumers.

Investing efforts and resources to build distinctive competitiveness in markets where

Netflix is absent gives Blockbuster a better chance of recovering its competitive

advantage.

VI. New Developments: 2010 Update In September 2009, Blockbuster announced a major store closing initiative that

could result in the elimination of 22% of its current freestanding store bases (Pardy, 2009,

para 1). Also, the company continues promoting its "Total Access" program, which has

only 1.6 million current subscribers.

Redbox has become a major player with more than 19,000 kiosks placed

nationwide by the end of 2009. This represents a significant threat to Blockbuster’s

network of kiosks (only 497). Redbox does not have late fees and customers have up to

25 days to return their DVDs. In addition, Redbox’s system offers online reservations,

Page 20: Netflix vs Blockbuster Case 5

Competition in the Movie 20

allowing customers to choose their favorite titles online and pick them up immediately at

the preferred Redbox location (Redbox, 2009).

By January 2010, Netflix’s base of customers was about 10.6 million subscribers

and the company was launching a strong marketing campaign to promote its “instant

movies” that could be downloaded directly to TV screens (with the help of several

devices such as game consoles, blue ray players and HDTVs.)

The table below summarized the main profitability ratios and profit information

for Netflix and Blockbuster as of December 31, 2009 (Yahoo! Inc., 2010).

Ratios Netflix Blockbuster

Return on Equity 38.66% -119.14%

Return on Assets 20.29% 4.15%

Profit Margin 6.79% -10.70%

Operating Profit 11.01% 3.31%

Net Income 107.68 M -452.80M

Table 2. Comparative table: Financial Ratios (December 2009)

It is clear that Netflix continues to maintain a strong position in business, while

Blockbuster continues to get worse.

Page 21: Netflix vs Blockbuster Case 5

Competition in the Movie 21

Reference Blockbuster Corporate . (2009, December). Company overview. Retrieved from

http://www.blockbuster.com/corporate/news Briki Media, LLC. (2009). Hacking Netflix. Retrieved from

http://www.hackingnetflix.com/2009/08/netflix-posted-a-128-page-internal-presentation-on-the-company-culturereference-guide-on-our-freedom-responsibility-culture.html

Miniwatts Marketing Group. (2009, September 30). World internet usage statistics.

Retrieved from http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm Netflix. (2007, January). 2007 annual report. Retrieved from

http://ir.netflix.com/annuals.cfm Netflix. (2009, May 05). Fact sheet. Retrieved from

http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/NFLX/823470738x0x295021/422b46fb-ca67-47a6-be19-36879cf977fe/IR_Fact_Sheet_05_15_09.pdf

Pardy, S. (2009, September 16). Blockbuster closing up to 960 stores through 2010.

Retrieved from http://www.costar.com/News/Article.aspx?id=CE22237D7F77AE8FED9161447C2874B

Redbox. (2009, December). The History of redbox. Retrieved from

http://redboxpressroom.com/factsheets/TheHistoryofRedbox.pdf Steele, D. (2009, July 1). Death by a thousand paper cuts (aka, the blockbuster pricing

strategy). Retrieved from http://blog.mindspace.net/?p=186 Thompson, A. A. Jr., Strickland, A. J. III, & Gamble, J. E. (2009). Crafting & Executing

Strategy: The Quest for Competitive Advantage: Concepts and Cases, Sixteenth Edition. New York, N.Y.: McGraw-Hill/Irwin

Yahoo! Inc. (2010, January). Yahoo! finance, key statistics. Retrieved from

http://finance.yahoo.com/