Netflix Europe is testing an Ultra subscription tier

[HEXUS]

However, the pricy 'Ultra' option swipes HDR content, currently part of the Premium package.

Read more.

[cptwhite_uk]

I'm a recent convert to the subscription model, I think it offers great benefits, having Dropbox, Spotify, Amazon Prime and Netflix accounts...however there are limit to what I'm willing to pay. For me there's a mental ceiling of £10 per month per service. I'm potentially open to paying more if I think the service is worth it, but right now I would seriously reconsider any service trying to charge more than that.

[DanceswithUnix]

Hmm, I'm currently on the Premium setup as we kept getting errors that three of us were watching at the same time. If they take away HDR, we don't really have the kit to notice so nothing changes. If they took away 4 channels at once, then I downgrade to standard. I can't see any parallel universe where I would upgrade to Ultra, the service is good but not worth that much to me.

[philehidiot]

Netflix has bigger issues. Firing someone for saying an offensive word during a meeting about offensive words was madness. Streaming a film with child pr0n in it ultimately showed me they really do have no morals whatsoever. They can keep their HDR and their service.

[LSG501]

And as usual there's no 'in between' option for someone like me who would need just one stream and would eventually want 4k and hdr etc.... while I'm all for getting the 'best value' I also have an issue for paying for stuff I'll never use.

EDIT: and side note, increasing prices is not the way to 'discourage' people from getting things from 'alternative' sources....

[shaithis]

Probably the final nail in the coffin for Netflix for me. Already on the top package and to have HDR removed just so that they can charge extra for it, when the catalog keeps getting smaller and many classics that you look for are not there any more, is just too much for me.

Great way to force people to Showbox, Terranium etc!

[AGTDenton]

I've gone back to buying discs. They all take so long to give you something worthwhile to watch or they remove an older series half way through because of 'licensing issues'...
These were great services but hook, line and sinker.

[SkywalkerLuke]

I'm with Shaithis on this one. Currently have to top package and there isn't much 4K content anyway, so to have to pay more for less. No thanks. I'll either go to Amazon Prime, or lower my package instead..

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Not surprising Netflix thought they could charge more especially after Google trying to charge £9.99 a month for YouTube Premium!

[Jonj1611]

I have a 4k TV but most of the stuff I watch is HD anyway. Most of the Marvel stuff is a bit Meh, apart from Punisher which was pretty good. I'm not paying more than £10 per month

[Tunnah]

4K is absolutely pointless without HDR, otherwise it just looks like a slightly sharper 1080p. This is a right con.

[Saracen]

Well, I'm not currently a Netflix subscribed, though the wife and I had talked briefly about it.

If we do, then ....

- priority = breadth of content available

- no interest = higher resolutions.
- no interest = multiple connections.

By those criteria, it'd be Basic for me, as I understand the content offerings, and so neither Premium nor Ultra, nor the balance between them, matters to me.

[Iota]

Currently on Standard, which works fine for my usage scenario, I don't have anything capable above HD, it allows me to watch stuff I like and also allows my 75 year old dad to stream on his Roku whenever he wants (I've converted him to streaming new stuff, instead of complaining about reruns on normal TV or Sky TV ).

Would I pay more than £10 a month for any online streaming service? Highly unlikely. Seems like a bad move splitting HDR content out from the Premium, without offering something additional to make the "ultra" worthwhile (like lots of actual programs....). It also means that the "Premium" service now only seems worthwhile if you want 4 available streams, I'm surprised they even kept 4K on it.

Personally, I think it should be more of a "select your options" subscription. Why isn't there an option to simply pick and choose?

Number of screens;
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
Resolution;
- SD
- HD
- HD / 4K
- HD / 4K / HDR

Setting the price based on which of those options subscribers want to have? Wouldn't that make much more sense? That way someone could have 2 screens + SD (slightly more than £5.99) or 1 screen and HD / 4K / HDR (cheaper than Ultra).

[Hoonigan]

My partner and I recently upgraded to the 4K subscription, which I believe is £10.99 a month, but we've been thoroughly enjoying Orange is the New Black in UHD.

The only major issue we have is the lack of framerate. It's so stuttery.

However, all of that being said, I won't be paying any more than I currently am. Not a chance.

[azrael-]

4K is absolutely pointless without HDR, otherwise it just looks like a slightly sharper 1080p. This is a right con.

If you consider that HDR isn't linked to UHD/4K (well, it is, but artificially and not technically), it gets even worse. Couple that with a country where we already pay through the nose for Netflix (Denmark is the 2nd most expensive country for Netflix in the world), this really beckons the question if it's all worth it. My problem: there's more or less nothing decent left to watch on regular tv around here.

[DanceswithUnix]

4K is absolutely pointless without HDR, otherwise it just looks like a slightly sharper 1080p. This is a right con.

But there are a lot of people out there with 4K TV that either have no HDR or like the one my son has where the HDR isn't that impressive as it is a £400 LCD panel.

I have to wonder if this is a way for Netflix to try and cut down the network traffic. It seems pointless to increase the bitrate to a TV that says it can do HDR when the user can't see the difference and probably doesn't care. But if you give users an option box saying "I want HDR" they will tick it, if you ask them "I will pay another £1 for HDR" they probably won't and you find their real preference.