It’s a Netflix news party! Announcements related to the streaming service have been popping up often the past couple of days, especially coming out of the Television Critics Association winter tour. Whether it’s development of a possible Punisher series, Neil Patrick Harris starring in A Series of Unfortunate Events, or new seasons for Jessica Jones and Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt, it’s a good time to be a Netflix fan and customer.
And yes, you read that title correctly. $6 BILLION. That’s how much Netflix chief content officer Ted Sarandos says the company is planning to spend on content just in 2016. Continue reading to see what he had to say.
There’s an ongoing debate going on. Some believe there’s far too much TV out there right now, while others feel the more the better. There’s no denying that there’s a insane amount of TV options out there these days, but it is subjective whether or not that’s a good thing or a bad thing.
For me personally, it’s both. I always have something new I’m looking forward to watching, but I’m also always so far behind on most of them. And in a world dominated by folks who just love spoiling what happens in these shows, my relationship with TV can be a love-hate one. Still, I’d rather have lots of great stuff to watch and always be behind than have little to no shows I care enough about to bother with.
Sarandos touched on this debate during said Television Critics Association tour, saying:
“Is there too much TV? … We don’t think there’s too much TV. And if there is too much TV, someone else is going to have to slow down, because we have big plans for 2016 and beyond.”
He then offered an idea of what these big plans include, sharing that Netflix will have 600 hours of original content for their 70 million subscribers worldwide this year:
“We’re going to spend in 2016 about $5 billion dollars on content on a P&L basis, which means about $6 billion in cash. We are running a global network, one that is not easily comparable either in business or cultural terms … We’re not courting advertisers, because we’re not targeting a single demographic.”
Sarandos said this astronomical amount (for comparison, Disney paid $4 billion to acquire the entire Star Wars franchise), will go towards both their original programming and also content acquisition.
All I have to say to Mr. Sarandos is…if you’re throwing that kind of coin around, you should seriously take a peek at a little abandoned property called FIREFLY! I know, I know—I say this far too often and the efforts of desperate Browncoats everywhere are likely futile at this point, but hey, we’re passionately stubborn.
Sarandos has already spoken about the possibility of reviving shows like Firefly in the past, and it was sadly not what fans wanted to hear, basically stating that he didn’t feel it had a big enough following to consider. Hopefully since then he’s realized that there are many more fans than there were when the show was first on, and the fanbase grows every day. I know this because I’m a part of that fanbase, someone who had no idea about the show when it was on the air and only discovered it when a friend made me watch it (after a friend of theirs made them watch it), and I’ve since passed it along to numerous people whenever possible. And if a full-on series revival is too much, let’s not forget that a straight-to-streaming movie would be just as awesome and would help gauge level of subscriber interest in more.
This might not even be an option at the moment—the cast is keeping busy with other projects and who knows if FOX would even entertain offers on acquiring the rights—but it’s always worth mentioning because Firefly fans never really know who’s listening out there and it’s never going to be “too late.” Even if all of the actors are much older, fans would be excited to see what’s going on in the ‘Verse. And it could work too, as The Force Awakens has proven.
That’s my vote. What existing content, movies or television, would you like to see Netflix spend some of that $6 billion on?