Netflix is upgrading its 'Basic with Ads' streaming plan with two big improvements

AppleInsider

Netflix is increasing the resolution of its Basic with Ads plan, and also increasing how many videos can be streamed simultaneously.

Netflix with ads will have higher quality

The company rolled out the ad-supported tier in November and costs $6.99 monthly. It occasionally plays commercials in the middle of programming, with each streaming hour having four to five minutes of advertising time.

Since the launch, video streaming content on the plan has been limited to 720p resolution. However, in a first-quarter earnings report for 2023, Netflix said it would increase the video quality to 1080p at no extra cost.

Subscribers on the plan can now have two simultaneous streams, up from only one. Netflix says that the ad-supported program has been doing better than the Standard plan, which costs $15.49 per month without ads.

Starting on Wednesday, the upgraded plan will be immediately available to Netflix users in Canada and Spain. After that, it will gradually roll out to the rest of its advertising markets, including Australia, Brazil, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, South Korea, the UK, and the US.

Netflix's revenue for the first quarter was in line with its forecast, growing 4% year-over-year to $8.1 billion. It forecasts revenue of $8.2 billion for the second quarter, which would be up 3% year-over-year.

Read on AppleInsider

omasou

The ad plan should provide the same benefits as the top paid tier, e.g. 4K + 4 devices.

Appleish

Whoa. 2011 video quality. Nice!

CarmB

Here in Canada it’s $5.99 a month which is reasonable for two devices and a 1080p feed. Even 720p looked watchable on a set with decent upconversion. Going further to 4K is just not that noticeable an upgrade, all things considered. For $6 a month, it’s a good deal, if what you want is inexpensive access to lots of good content with usable video quality.  

Mcnaugha2

I had a 1080p TV in 2006.

CarmB

Mcnaugha2 said:

I had a 1080p TV in 2006.

I bought my first 4K TV in 2014 and my first HDR set in 2018. I often use either set to watch content that is neither 4K nor HDR. It’s great when you can enjoy content with both done well but it’s hardly an immense hardship to have to settle on content that has neither. Unless you have a poor TV, the picture quality of today’s sets is very good even with 1080p non-HDR source material. Keep in mind that broadcast TV is neither 4K or HDR, generally speaking. Having grown up in the 1960s watching black and white TVs, having to settle on 1080p with plain old dynamic range is no hardship at all. And today, considering how expensive everything has gotten, to have a ton of content available for about $6 a month feels like a real bargain. 

entropys

What is amusing about this is how soon the changes have been made after launch.

Poor market feedback eh, MBA weenies? Maybe don’t put it on your resumé.

chasm

Serious streaming services don’t charge extra for resolution or a decent number of streams. I have Britbox, AppleTV, Criterion, and Disney+, and if they had ads or charged for 4K I would quit them in a second.

The reason I don’t have cable is because 1) I *hate* commercials, and 2) I want to watch my favourite shows at the resolution of my television whenever available, exactly the way cable can’t.

On top of this, most of the services I subscribe to charge about the same or a bit more than Netflix’s worst tier with ads. Good luck ever getting my money with that attitude, Netsux.

On the upside, dick moves like this will probably help boost competitors like Apple TV, which is a good thing.

saarek

I’ll never understand why the pricing gulf between ad supported and ad free is so high. Surely they are not being paid $8.50 a month per user for ads that, generally speaking, people either just mute or walk away from?

appleinsideruser

Seems people hate paying, more than they hate ads.

CarmB

saarek said:

I’ll never understand why the pricing gulf between ad supported and ad free is so high. Surely they are not being paid $8.50 a month per user for ads that, generally speaking, people either just mute or walk away from?

Consider that the more subscribers you can attract to an ad-supported tier, the more you can charge advertisers. Those advertisers, obviously, want to reach the biggest possible audience and pay according to how big an audience you can deliver. To me this is a big win for consumers. Let those who can’t handle a few ads pay a premium to have them removed and let those who are fine with the ads enjoy lots of programming for an attractive price.