Netflix vs Blockbuster
Additionally, Wal-Mart also did attempt to spawn profits in the movie rental industry but sooner was outrun in the business by Netflix. These days Wal-Mart merely possesses an advertising contract with Netflix in the industry. Several forces do propel the movie rental industry especially with regard to the performance of one of the market leaders, the Netflix, and they include such forces as i) Market Features-The industry was in actual market maturity stage previous to the application and utilization of the Internet technology as a medium of distribution. Netflix did capitalize and subsequently utilized the Internet sophistication to gain huge market share by offering customers and members with direct movie download accessibility and undeviating shipments to their home. As earlier stated, Netflix was and for that matter still remain a market leader that realized the first potential of the market which did exist for Internet movie rentals.
Both companies offer more or less the same services. Even so, Netflix appears to offer a wider variety of services compared to Blockbuster (Schermerhon, 2011, p. 21). Besides disc rentals, Netflix also offers internet vide streaming as well as original programming.Additionally, the company offers device support services by availing hardware and software support, video game consoles, set-top boxes for better quality digital transmission, Blu-ray disk players and hand-held services. Block buster on its part is only involved in online rentals and retail operations such as GameRush stores and Blockbuster Express (Schermerhon, 2011, p. 27). Given the above status of services offered by both companies it is clear that Netflix has diversified its sources of revenue more than Blockbuster. Unlike Netflix whose ownership has been steady, Blockbuster has had to change ownership a couple of times. The company stock’s tumble in 1994 led to a takeover by Viacom. Blockbuster however de-merged from Viacom in 2004 and immediately introduced the Game Pass nationally. At the same time, the company introduced Blockbuster Online, an online DVD subscription. The takeover and apparent boardroom fights have had an adverse effect on Blockbuster, something its competitor Netflix has been successful in avoiding. Netflix’s cautious approach to expansion and successful avoidance of the business twists that come along with takeovers and change of leadership are evident in their financial results (Hill & Gareth, 2008, p.50). At the same time, the effect of the above trends is clear in the financial performance of Blockbuster. Near bankruptcy has led to the closure of numerous stores in Europe and a chapter 11 bankruptcy protection filing saw Blockbuster purchased by Dish Network. The company sought protection due to apparent failure to service its $900 million debt as well as mounting losses. Management by the new owners has seen the closure of hundreds of stores in its areas of operation including a wind up of the Canadian unit.
Blockbuster initially succeeded because they did one core job better than anyone else: delivering entertainment to people’s homes. But as we all know, technologies change. And instead of investing all of their efforts into finding a new way to deliver on their true purpose (more on that in the next section), Blockbuster’s innovation stagnated. That reality hit Netflix founder Marc Randolph when the business was pivoting from a Mail-order DVD service to online streaming.
Hill, C. & Gareth, J. (2008). Essentials of Strategic Management. London: Springer.
Hitt, A.M. (2009). Strategic management: competitiveness and globalization : cases. NJ: Infobase Publishers.
Ireland, D.R. et al. (2011). Understanding Business Strategy: Concepts and Cases. New York: Routledge.
Klein, T.D. (2010). Built for Change: Essential Traits of Transformative Companies. New York: Routledge.
Light, L. (2011). Taming the Beast: Wall Street’s Imperfect Answers to Making Money. Berlin: Springer Verlag.
Schermerhon, J.R. (2011). Exploring Management. New York: John Wiley & Sons.