←back to thread

492 points storf45 | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.558s | source
Show context
_fat_santa ◴[] No.42157053[source]
When you step back and look at the situation, it's not hard to see why Netflix dropped the ball here. Here's now I see it (not affiliated with Netflix, pure speculation):

- Months ago, the "higher ups" at Netflix struck a deal to stream the fight on Netflix. The exec that signed the deal was probably over the moon because it would get Netflix into a brand new space and bring in large audience numbers. Along the way the individuals were probably told that Netflix doesn't do livestreaming but they ignored it and assumed their talented Engineers could pull it off.

- Once the deal was signed then it became the Engineer's problem. They now had to figure out how to shift their infrastructure to a whole new set of assumptions around live events that you don't really have to think about when streaming static content.

- Engineering probably did their absolute best to pull this off but they had two main disadvantages, first off they don't have any of the institutional knowledge about live streaming and they don't really know how to predict demand for something like this. In the end they probably beefed up livestreaming as much as they could but still didn't go far enough because again, no one there really knows how something like this will pan out.

- Evening started off fine but crap hit the fan later in the show as more people tuned in for the main card. Engineering probably did their best to mitigate this but again, since they don't have the institutional knowledge of live events, they were shooting in the dark hoping their fixes would stick.

Yes Netflix as a whole screwed this one up but I'm tempted to give them more grace than usual here. First off the deal that they struck was probably one they couldn't ignore and as for Engineering, I think those guys did the freaking best they could given their situation and lack of institutional knowledge. This is just a classic case of biting off more than one can chew, even if you're an SV heavyweight.

replies(8): >>42157067 #>>42157069 #>>42157146 #>>42157772 #>>42158104 #>>42158143 #>>42158185 #>>42158359 #
TheAceOfHearts ◴[] No.42157146[source]
This isn't Netflix's first foray into livestreaming. They tried a livestream last year for a reunion episode of one of their reality TV shows which encountered similar issues [0]. Netflix already has a contract to livestream a football event on Christmas, so it'll be interesting to see if their engineers are able to get anything done in a little over a month.

These failures reflect very poorly on Netflix leadership. But we all know that leadership is never held accountable for their failures. Whoever is responsible for this should at least come forward and put out an apology while owning up to their mistakes.

[0] https://time.com/6272470/love-is-blind-live-reunion-netflix/

replies(1): >>42158759 #
1. crazygringo ◴[] No.42158759[source]
> But we all know that leadership is never held accountable for their failures.

You've never heard of a CEO or other C-suite or VP getting fired?

It most definitely happens. On the other hand, people at every level make mistakes, and it's preferable that they learn from them rather than be fired, if at all possible.

replies(1): >>42160122 #
2. TheAceOfHearts ◴[] No.42160122[source]
Accountability can take many forms. I don't think they should be fired for making a mistake, I think they should release a statement recognizing their failure along with a post-mortem. Not a particularly high bar, but most leadership failures are often swept under the rug without any public accountability or evidence that they've learned anything.

We have evidence of prior failures with livestreaming from Netflix. Were the same people responsible for that failure or do we have evidence of them having learned anything between events? If anything, I'd expect the best leaders would have a track record that includes failures while showcasing their ability to overcome and learn from those mistakes. But based on what information is publicly available, this doesn't seem to be the case in this situation.