Disney Switching To Netflix For Exclusive Film Distribution 124
An anonymous reader writes "When Disney films leave the theater and head for TV, they currently go through the Starz channel first. That's going to change in 2016. Disney has signed a deal to give Netflix the first crack at its animated and live-action films. Even if you're not a fan of either company, this is a bit of a big deal; Disney is ditching a traditional pay-TV service in favor of online streaming. (It also includes properties from the recent Lucasfilm deal.) The article wisely points out that pay-TV in general isn't in danger until the live sports situation changes, but this is a big step away from the status quo."
A Positive Move (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:A Positive Move (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately, that's not how it works. It's grab the big bucks for an exclusive deal with one content distributor and F*** the people who aren't with that one. Other studios will get their big bucks from another distributor, so the only way consumers can have it all, is to pay for Netflix, LoveFilm (do they have that in the US?) etc.
Then, of course, they wonder why the Pirate Bay was popular?
Maybe it's because they have content from everyone, not to mention, in a format that plays on anything.
Re: (Score:1)
Unfortunately, that's not how it works. It's grab the big bucks for an exclusive deal with one content distributor and F*** the people who aren't with that one. Other studios will get their big bucks from another distributor, so the only way consumers can have it all, is to pay for Netflix, LoveFilm (do they have that in the US?) etc.
Then, of course, they wonder why the Pirate Bay was popular?
Maybe it's because they have content from everyone, not to mention, in a format that plays on anything.
Not to completely invalidate your argument, however first off, Netflix streaming service is 8 bucks a month. Same as HuluPlus. Amazon is $79 per year. If you are posting on this forum you most likely have a device compatible with Netflix streaming. If not, a used Roku can be picked up for as cheap as $25 on ebay. If you were to get all three big streaming services (Netflix, Amazon, Hulu) it's still faaaaaar cheaper per month than cable television.
As for Pirate Bay - I can walk to my TV, and in less tha
Re: (Score:1)
Except if you live outside the US ofcourse. Because fuck those people.
Even when those services expand outside US they have the same problems as any local player trying to do it. Lack of deals due to agreements locking everything in to random restrictions.
The only way to get a good streaming service is to get a US proxy/VPN and go through that.
Piratebay will continue to be popular where the studios won't let the users pay.
Re: (Score:2)
His point isn't actually invalid, as it applies to Cable TV as well. If you want all of the new movies you have to pick up HBO, Stars, and what ever else there is, each at an additional charge per month. $271 a year (your math for netflix+hulu+amazon) is kind of expensive, and really a joke to do something like that because you would be buying the extras just for the sake of the couple exclusives they have.
Re: (Score:2)
His point isn't actually invalid, as it applies to Cable TV as well. If you want all of the new movies you have to pick up HBO, Stars, and what ever else there is, each at an additional charge per month. $271 a year (your math for netflix+hulu+amazon) is kind of expensive, and really a joke to do something like that because you would be buying the extras just for the sake of the couple exclusives they have.
How is that expensive compared to a Cable TV bill - which could be as much as $200/month without getting all HBO and Stars.
Seriously, if you dropped your Cable TV subscription and just went with Netflix+Hulu+Amazon, then you would have it paid off inside of 3 months. Even if you only got basic cable - which can run anywhere from $20/month to $60/month, you'd still save money or at worse break even over the course of a year.
Or you do like me and only have Netflix and no Cable TV - $64/year. Well...we'v
Re: (Score:3)
cool rant bro.
Netflix is $9 a month. That's actually counter-piracy pricing. I happily pay that every month for what Netflix has to offer.
This deal is a bonus. The only thing left is just waiting for an online streaming provider to get current television shows from all networks.
Re: (Score:2)
Except that Netflix (just like the BBC service offering their shows) hasn't studied the usage patterns of its customers.
They often offer only 1 season, or sometimes a few seasons of a popular show but they never offer the whole thing unless the series is long dead it seems.
When my wife and I want to watch a series, we will go through it from beginning to end. If its on Netflix (or the far superior but very limited apple BBC app), then its a no brainer. I am quite happy with Netflix generally but I get very
Re: (Score:2)
that choice isn't Netflix's to make if the show is currently on TV.
Re:A Positive Move (Score:4, Insightful)
Except that Netflix (just like the BBC service offering their shows) hasn't studied the usage patterns of its customers.
I highly doubt that is at all a correct statement for Netflix.
Your particular issue, is the same one i have, and if you actually look into why it is that way it is because the content owners don't want Netflix to have the full catalog. There is a trickle down pattern that the content creators/owners follow to maximize the revenue from a product, first it is broadcast fees for the live/first showing, then its DVD Sales/Physical rental income, then it's bargain bin distributions (which is what Netflix falls into for most of them).
Disney switching to Netflix is a big deal, and i hope that if they see the value init other content owners will see it too and switch over to them.
Re: (Score:2)
Except that Netflix (just like the BBC service offering their shows) hasn't studied the usage patterns of its customers.
You REALLY think Netflix doesn't pay attention to what people watch on Netflix? They have no studies? No analytics? No reporting? No analysis at all? Just because things are missing (hint: online content deals are hard to cut) doesn't mean they aren't paying attention. PS: Everyone was up in arms when Starz and Netflix failed to cut a deal and tons of Disney stuff disappeared. Now, they signed a deal with Disney direct, and cut out Starz. You don't think they did that because they knew how many kids wanted
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why would people get that when thepiratebay is 0$ per month, is accessible from anywhere, and there is no digital restrictions management involved? Or even better to keep that money and purchase a new dvd every other month? At least a dvd can be ripped to the hard drive and copied as many times as someone wants. Paying 9$ per month for getting no value in return is ludicrous.
Yes, because once EVERYBODY starts pirating, and NOBODY has to pay for ANYTHING, I'm sure there won't be any ramifications. People will keep making movies and TV shows for fun. Maybe we can develop some technology to blur out product placements, so we see NO advertising, ever. This way, we don't see commercials, we don't see product placements, and we don't pay for access to the content.
I need to find a way to steal my neighbors Internet too, why do I pay for Internet, when I could get it for free?
Som
Re: (Score:3)
Why would people get that when thepiratebay is 0$ per month, is accessible from anywhere, and there is no digital restrictions management involved? Or even better to keep that money and purchase a new dvd every other month? At least a dvd can be ripped to the hard drive and copied as many times as someone wants. Paying 9$ per month for getting no value in return is ludicrous.
As a U.S citizen living in the U.S., I don't want to be sued by the MPAA or RIAA. BTW, with Amazon Prime, I pay only $7 per month and I get more than Movie & TV show streaming.
Re: (Score:3)
easy netflix is legal, the pirate bay is illegal and you can be sued by the riaa/mpaa, netflix streams on demand you have to wait for torrents to download, bluray players televisions tablets phones and $30 streaming boxes from walmart come with netflix apps, netflix sends you dvds/blurays that you can rip return and get more, netflix has relevant movie recommendations the pirate bay has popups and porn ads.
Re: (Score:2)
Because NetFlix is cheap and easy.
I used to pirate a lot of content, because the structure of cable and satellite is horrible. Since NetFlix streaming came along, that amount has dropped to almost nothing.
The people who pirate everything do so either A) because they can, B) because they can't afford to do otherwise, or C) as a preview to determine if it's worth buying. I don't really know anyone who regularly pirates material who doesn't fall into one of those three categories. I'm sure they exist, but they
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I wish that was the way it already worked.
If I want to buy laundry soap, I can buy almost every brand at almost every store.
If I want to buy, say, a video game -- I can only buy certain ones at certain places. Unlike buying groceries, I can't just take them home and use them however. So you end up requiring an account and a running installed client for Steam, Origin, GOG, D2D, Impulse, Green Man Gaming, Beamdog, Desura, etc. It's a fucking mess and it only is a problem because every mother fucker wants to b
Re: (Score:2)
You do know that games bought on GoG come without DRM and you don't need to install the downloader do download and play the games, right?
(says that and updates his Steam and Origin clients *g*)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
True, GOG doesn't force it on you, but the others do. And GOG would obviously *like* you to use it, which is why I count it in the same list. They are the least annoying of every one, though.
The comparison to music is fair enough, I suppose. Except that almost ten years into mainstream digital distribution, we are way on the other stream of where we were ten years into digital music distribution. And I don't like the solution you pose as the ultimate evolution of it, either. I prefer Steam and GOG (even tho
Re: (Score:2)
True, GOG doesn't force it on you, but the others do. And GOG would obviously *like* you to use it, which is why I count it in the same list.
You wrote about services that *require* a running client.
That is not true for GoG, so it's inclusion is outright wrong. No matter what they would like you to do.
Also, I thought they only have a download manager and not a full fledged client? (I might be wrong here.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And GOG would obviously *like* you to use it, which is why I count it in the same list
GOG does not even have a client for you to run, so this statement is just plain wrong. The download manager makes it easier for you to download products because GOG typically bundles soundtracks, artwork, etc., with your purchases. With the download manager you can download everything together with the added ability of pausing and resuming downloads. I really do believe it's there just to make things simpler for the customer, because I've not seen them try to push its use on anyone who would rather just
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Even though I am a Netflix subscriber I completely disagree that this is a good move. My problem is with the word "exclusive". As long an individual distributors get exclusive rights to content it means that large groups of consumers (those who choose for various reasons to go with another distributor) are blocked from getting the content they would like. In my country for example I can't watch most HBO shows because HBO has signed an exclusive deal with a different cable provider but if I switched to that
Re: (Score:3)
This has a long term distorting effect on the market.
That's an unavoidable consequence of IP law as it is currently implemented. We could go with much shorter copyrights (so you only have to wait 5 years or so for the content) or use a stronger compulsory system, but as long as the law grants exclusive rights you will get exclusive deals.
Re: (Score:2)
What I don't understand is why the content producers go along with it. By giving an exclusive rights to one distributor they are cutting the audience for their product. Sure they can charge over the odds to that one distributor but ultimately the more people see your product the more money in total comes in so surely it would be better for them to distribute their content widely at a reasonable price than to rely on one big payment from one distributor.
Re: (Score:2)
It's simple - people will pay more for a scarce commodity. With "real" property, the commodity generally has some shelf life or cost associated with holding on to it. With IP and a near-infinite monopoly, it pays to restrict supply to keep the price high.
Huge Win for Everyone (Score:2)
Disney has been eying this space for nearly two decades, trying to find a way to monetize digital content streaming. Starz has been an impediment to content distrubtion, forcing content to go through pay-channel services first... Netflix has made a huge win here. The legalities of these contracts are insane too. They have release windows for TV, streaming, DVD distribution--it's all factored into these contracts.
People don't want to lug around DVDs to watch movies, and now they don't have to with smart pho
2016? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Hopefully it will be in time for Finding Nemo 2.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:2016? (Score:4, Interesting)
That's eons away in the context of consumer electronics. By that time, they might be the last one switching to online streaming.
It is.... but this might be good strategically. This is a sign Netflix may be able to ink a deal that applies in the nearer future. If Disney was willing to sign for 2016, perhaps another deal/option/provision is around the corner that will come to effect sooner?
Possibly Starz will be willing to reconsider, their current refusal to make any kind of deal with netflix, as they will become irrelevent.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
After looking into it further, I realized... part of the exclusive deal is delayed until 2016. However, Netflix immediately gets access to old movies, so there is a mixture of some delayed gratification, and some more immediate gratification.
I just felt a tremble in the force (Score:1)
I think this will start working out well for Disney, and their execs will get the idea into their heads: "Wouldn't it be a whole lot easier if we just owned Netflix?"
Netflix vs. Starz ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Starz: $1.6 billion in revenues in 2011 and relatively stagnant.
Pretty much explains why.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Dear Netflix: don't jack up rates (Score:4, Insightful)
Don't jack up rates to pay those Disney people. We'll just move elsewhere.
— Your customers
Re: (Score:2)
The money has to come from somewhere--it's not as if Disney will simply give the streaming rights away. So if you don't want to pay more, you have to hope that Netflix is able to attract more customers because of this deal.
Re:Dear Netflix: don't jack up rates (Score:5, Interesting)
No we won't. I pay $8 a month for unlimited viewing of a ridiculous amount of content. If they could add even more (and recent) content to that, it'd be worth a lot more. I currently pay $13/mo for most of my entertainment ($8 for Netflix and $5 for MOG, where I get my unlimited music). Netflix is a steal at $8. It'd be a deal at $16. It'd be fair (but starting to push it) at $24/mo.
Re:Dear Netflix: don't jack up rates (Score:5, Informative)
It is getting harder and harder to find things that I actually want to watch on Netflix. To add to this, I decided to try and watch some classic dystopian movies that I either havent seen in a long time or have not seen as of yet. So I went to wikipedia [wikipedia.org] to get a nice list of dystopian movies. Of the earliest made movies in that list, 16 of the first 20 (80%) are NOT available on netflix streaming:
La jetee (1962), The Trial (1962), Privilege (1967), Punishment Park (1971), THX 1138 (1971), Silent Running (1972), Z.P.G. (1972), Sleeper (1973), Soylent Green (1973), Welt am Draht (1973), Death Race 2000 (1975), Logan's Run (1976), Sleeping Dogs (1977), Escape from New York (1981), Blade Runner (1982), Turkey Shoot (1982)
I know that a few of these used to be available but now no longer are, such as Blade Runner and Escape from New York.
This is not the service that I wanted.
Re:Dear Netflix: don't jack up rates (Score:4, Informative)
Poor baby. They must all be on Starz or HBO then right?
Most of them are available on Amazon Instant Video.
To be specific, the only ones not available are:
La jetee (1962), Privilege (1967), Sleeper (1973), Welt am Draht (1973), Death Race 2000 (1975), Sleeping Dogs (1977), Escape from New York (1981), Turkey Shoot (1982)
So while Netflix offers 20% of the first 20 movies on the dystopian list, Amazon Instant offers 60% of the first 20 movies on the dystopian list.
Not only that, just searching Amazon Instant for "Soylent Green" will include in the first page of search results (7 results) a total of 6 movies in the first 20 of the dystopian list that are available for streaming, and 3 of those are free with Prime (the movie not on the list, also free with prime.)
In other words, there are services that offer vastly more content than Netflix does in general (3x as much in this sample), and also more content even under the umbrella of a cheaper ($6.67/mo for Prime) subscription rate.
Netflix is dropping the ball. Its not the service people actually want.
Re: (Score:1)
FWIW, all but Turkey Shoot and Sleeping Dogs are available DRM-free for unlimited viewing on usenet without anyone tracking your viewing habits. Minimum quality DVD5, many in 1080p that is head-and-shoulds above the bit-starved "hd" streams from the likes of netflix and amazon instant.
Thanks for reminding me about Silent Running, I am going to watch that in a couple of minutes here.
Re: (Score:2)
Most of them are available on Amazon Instant Video.
Most of them are available for rent (which you mention in passing later, I just wanted to highlight this). If we're comparing Netflix to Amazon's Prime Instant Video, they're largely identical movie lists (anecdotal experience only, no hard data). However, Amazon has an advantage in that it offers other films for rent. Netflix did away with its own advantage of "if you can't stream it, at least you can get it delivered on DVD" (Amazon's advantage is more instantaneous, but doesn't have the catalog of Net
Re: (Score:2)
Most of them are available for rent (which you mention in passing later, I just wanted to highlight this).
How is this functionally different than netflix, which doesnt guarantee access to things that you have previously watched later?
The only meaningful distinction between "renting a stream" and "subscription streaming", aside from what content is available right this moment, is cost breakpoints... a totally different discussion.
Re: (Score:2)
AC is being kind of mean, but he has a point... piracy still offers the best service, even without getting into cost. Google + Torrent or Usenet is still the best offering for content variety, timeliness, and quality in the online arena.
Re: (Score:2)
I watched Logan's Run recently. They do rotate through though, so maybe you missed the window of opportunity. I've also seen Escape from New York (I think) in the list though I don't believe I remember seeing any of the others. If you're looking for distopian, go older, say the 20s through the 50s and you'll find lots of options.
I find the selection is reasonable for now and they've been getting newer releases more consistently now. Especially the Disney owned Marvel comics stuff. I think anyone paying
Re: (Score:1)
The point is that Netflix's current system of content rotating in and out makes the user's perception of the value wildly changeable --- it wouldn't be so bad if they'd track things which you added to your streaming queue and when they drop off notify you the next time you log on to the web interface that you might want to get said shows on disk.
Re: (Score:1)
For that matter, it would be nice if they would notify us of which movies in our queue are about to be removed from streaming. Give us, maybe, 2 weeks warning.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree. As much as I like Netflix and think it's worthwhile now, they really need to get some deals together so that their catalog is approaching something like "complete". I can understand not having new releases, but you should be able to count on them for movies that were released decades ago, and I'd be willing to pay a little extra to get that.
Honestly, right now I pay for Netflix and Hulu Plus. On top of that, there are some shows that aren't on either of those services (e.g. "The Walking Dead")
Canada (Score:2)
Yeah, well try using Netflix Canada, which has about 1/4 of the US content.
Re: (Score:1)
Blame the long contracts with other media providers, not Netflix.
Re: (Score:2)
I know La Jetee was on it, as was THX and Blade Runner. Seems Netflix is either doing some rotating, or other contracts expired as well.
Don't blame Netflix, blame content providers. They hold all the reins here. Goes to show though how hard Netflix's position is: streaming services aren't black magic, and streaming abilities without content mean nothing. And since copyright provides a de facto monopoly position.... as said, I don't understand the hate towards netflix when it comes to availability of titles.
Re: (Score:2)
Eh, that's why you shell out the $16 to get both unlimited streaming AND unlimited one-at-a-time DVDs. That's one of the strengths of Netflix, and why they messed up when they tried to separate the services. Then you can watch the complete collection, as long as the movie is available on either DVD or streaming. By the way, La Jetee was on Instant Netflix previously as well. That's where I watched it.
Re: (Score:1)
Soylent Green is available on Netflix. So is The Trial, Privilege is on Youtube, Punishment Park was on Netflix because I watched it there, as was THX 1138, Silient Running, Deathrace 2000. Escape from New York...im looking at it on Netflix right now.
You seem to not be able to tell the difference between netflix's DVD service and netflix's streaming service.
Re:Dear Netflix: don't jack up rates (Score:5, Informative)
Don't jack up rates to pay those Disney people. We'll just move elsewhere
The cellar-dweller lives.
The Disney brand name has been a marketing powerhouse since the 1920s.
Disney and Warner Brothers were the first of the major studios to make the move into television production --- jump-starting the infant ABC television network: Disneyland and Davy Crockett. The Mickey Mouse Club. Zorro.
Disney's move to NBC and full color production was headline news and an enormous driver of sales of color television sets.
Disney was reluctant to move into home video --- but when it did move it came in with all guns blazing. It remains a safe bet that the Disney feature will reach the top ten lists in video sales and rentals through any all distribution channels, no matter how well or how poorly it performed in the theatrical market.
Disney through acqusitions is Marvel Comics.
ESPN. Rocky and Bullwinkle. The Muppets. LucasFilms....
Re: (Score:2)
I agree 100%. As much as I detest Disney for things like breaking the copyright social-compact by "vaulting" [wikipedia.org] movies to create artificial scarcity and their borg-like absorption of so much of my childhood memories, it is foolish to pretend that they are not a massive commercial success.
We can pray for the company's implosion, but it ain't going to happen any time soon.
Re: (Score:2)
Your post poses an interesting question. Could Disney be positioning themselves for another acquisition? I think that would be great situation for both Netflix and Disney. Not so great for Dreamworks who inked a deal with Netflix last year. Disney has a great track record for acquiring companies and not destroying them.
and marvel (Score:1)
disney also owns marvel property rights this is a pretty big move as right now disney houses a large tent of what i enjoy watching
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It is, but it's delayed. That is, all of the pre-Avengers films are streaming now, but the newest of those are over a year old. If the new deal were in place, Avengers would be on Netflix at the moment when, in the current system, it appears on Starz or whichever.
Considering how broad Disney's portfolio is now (Score:2)
That's a HELL of a lot of content!
The Live Sports Situation..? (Score:1)
Dude the live sports situation is awesome! I am streaming live NBA and NFL games and watching their archives directly from the respective sources. You don't need Fox or ESPN for anything besides college football right now.
Finally! (Score:1)
Star Wars on Netflix!
What about iTunes (Score:2)
Interesting they didn't go all in with Apple and put it up on iTunes.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't have a Blu ray player? Well shit, I guess you lose. Wake up, there is more than one way to watch Netflix than Windows and OS X.
Re: (Score:1)
people buy blu fail players in usa ?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And Netflix will actually run under WINE... install Firefox (or Chrome) for Windows in WINE, and then install Silverlight in WINE, and it does work. :)
Re: (Score:2)
And Roku, and Apple TV, and iOS iDevices, and Android, and PS3, XBox 360, Wii, etc... Even many TVs have it built-in.
Re: (Score:2)
Netflix = Windows and Mac OS X and i have none of them so i have to keep on pirating movies
So get a Windows machine. Or a Mac machine. Or a TV with built in Internet apps. Or a BluRay player with built in Internet apps. Or an Apple TV. Or an Android tablet. Or an iPad. Or just about any smart phone. Or a $50 Roku box. Or a $99 Google TV box. Or a Wii. Or a PS3. Or an Xbox. Or a TiVo. There are other options, but I think the point is clear. It's stupid easy to have Netflix, but if you don't have just about any modern, mainstream connected device, then I guess you'll have to go without.
Sport soon to follow (Score:2)
There were lots of good streams of the Olympic Games, and not very good TV coverage. Sure there were some geographical blocks to things like BBC coverage, but that's a small technicality that would be easily overcome if the need/want was great enough (once TV dies). Sure Netflix might not be able to manage ALL the sports, but each provider might manage their own part.
Re: (Score:1)
Why the hell do people want an Apple TV set? What would that add to the equation? The Apple TV is already here and it's a small low-cost box that you can connect to ANY modern television or computer monitor.
Live sports on mah streams? (Score:2)
This is pretty unusual (Score:2)
This is pretty radical and suggests a significant management change of philosophy within Disney.
Historically - with VHS, DVD, rentals, DivX, etc - Disney has *always* been a follower of tech advances, not a leader. In fact, it's appeared that they've been DRAGGED to every new advance, in a seeming effort to prevent their IP from moving to media that would allow piracy.
For them to push out to a streaming company is both a huge win for Netflix and for, I daresay, the viewing public.
Is streaming really all that rosy? (Score:1)
I'm always surprised at the positive comments on netflix here on slashdot. It's a drmd format and you're totally at the whim of netflix on whether content is removed/changed. Personally I'm quite happy we have physical discs so there's a backup of say.. star wars the unspecial edition on laserdisc somewhere out there still. What about the future archival of culture if everything becomes streaming/on demand and we're totally slave to our masters?
for the record (Score:2)
Great News, Concerning Live Sports.... (Score:1)
Its great to see content creators embracing the new paradigm!
Concerning live sports, I recently discovered that this weekends UFC fight is available online as a live stream for $9.99. I've ditched cable\ satellite years ago and its nice to see some live sports becoming available online. As we see some of the bigger creators like Disney shift to services like Netflix its just a matter of time before we see networks follow suit.
What I would love to see is networks offer online subscriptions that plugin to you
I'd pay more to get more (Score:2)
I for one wouldn't mind if Netflix added 'premium' channels for extra fees. they are only able to provide 'X' amount of content for their price, I want more content, and am willing to pay for it; but don't want to have to add apps; change streaming devices, etc. The biggest advantage with Comcast right now is their set up box Just Works. But I know they are taking more steps to lock out 3rd parties (encrypting basic cable for example)
I want to watch Crunchyroll anime; Comedy Centrals Colbert Report/Daily Sh
Re: (Score:1)
for 5-10$usd you can get a vpn or shell to ssh tunnel through from within the US.
not that you're wrong to be annoyed, but there are reasonably low cost solutions out there to get around region based internet services.
Re: (Score:2)
If you have a buddy in the US you can both setup a VPN and trade BBC for Netflix.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, I think he intended it as an exponential growth function, rather than a linear growth function. Badly worded, though. where day 1 = 1, day 2 = 2, day 3 = 4, day 4 = 8, and so forth.
in other words, f(x) = 2^(x-1), solve for the area under the graph from x=1->30. I'm lazy, however, and will just use wolfram alpha to solve it [wolframalpha.com].
Re: (Score:1)
Do you mean from day one to day 30 or all days excluding the first 30 days (i.e. after 30 days)? The first step to solving any problem is making sure the specification is unambiguous and intended.
Re: (Score:2)