GZFX

[dinaro]

GZFX-Bad news for Netflix is good news for them and they are now being partnered with Circuit City.
http://www.gameznflix.com/

[neptune]

I have been holding 30,000 shares of GZFX for a while; glad to see it finally moving. The Circuit City PR is HUGE!!!!!!
The reasons I bought into this company: INTERNET & VIDEO GAMES! That is the product that they have that no one else does. I myself am a member of Blockbuster online-And I have children-and having to go to the local Blockbuster store just to rent the PS2 games is a pain in the a@#! That is why I thought GZFX would be such a hit because they are filling an online market need. Looks like it is paying off too!:happy64:
(Netflix stock is 28.75!)

[dinaro]

Yes,I also have been holding GZFX for a few months and it's starting to pay off.Was up 145% the first hour but profit takers have brought it down to up 90% so far the second hour.
Netflix has also been receiving bad press about their service and I like that Gameznflix also has video games like Gamefly and movies like Netflix.One stop renting is a great idea.I also expect more good news from them after the Circuit City furor dies down.
Hold this like me and it is going places.:)

[dinaro]

Bad Netflix!Bad bad Netflix!:)



Netflix Settlement Gets Reworked After Protests

By Caroline E. Mayer
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, March 22, 2006; Page D03

A proposed class-action settlement involving Netflix Inc. customers has been rewritten to address complaints that the agreement did little for consumers while rewarding the company and lawyers who filed the suit.

The new version of the settlement, which is scheduled to be reviewed by a California Superior Court judge at a hearing today, still gives the plaintiffs' attorneys more than $2 million. However, the chief complaint about the previous settlement -- that it would have resulted in Netflix customers paying higher monthly fees -- has been resolved.
The settlement stems from a September 2004 lawsuit on behalf of more than 6 million former and current customers. The lawsuit accused Netflix of misleading consumers by promising DVD delivery within one business day after an order was processed. In reality, the lawsuit said, it would often take as long as four to six business days for customers to receive requested DVDs. That meant customers could watch fewer videos than promised under Netflix's monthly membership plans, which allow customers to check out a certain number of DVDs at one time.

The lawsuit also alleged that customers who were heavy users -- those who viewed and returned movies quickly -- received lower delivery priority.



'Throttling' angers Netflix renters

By Michael Liedtke, AP Business Writer | February 10, 2006

SAN FRANCISCO --Manuel Villanueva realizes he has been getting a pretty good deal since he signed up for Netflix Inc.'s online DVD rental service 2 1/2 years ago, but he still feels shortchanged. That's because the $17.99 monthly fee that he pays to rent up to three DVDs at a time would amount to an even bigger bargain if the company didn't penalize him for returning his movies so quickly.
Netflix typically sends about 13 movies per month to Villanueva's home in Warren, Mich. -- down from the 18 to 22 DVDs he once received before the company's automated system identified him as a heavy renter and began delaying his shipments to protect its profits.

The same Netflix formula also shoves Villanueva to the back of the line for the most-wanted DVDs, so the service can send those popular flicks to new subscribers and infrequent renters.

The little-known practice, called "throttling" by critics, means Netflix customers who pay the same price for the same service are often treated differently, depending on their rental patterns.

"I wouldn't have a problem with it if they didn't advertise `unlimited rentals,'" Villanueva said. "The fact is that they go out of their way to make sure you don't go over whatever secret limit they have set up for your account."

Los Gatos, Calif.-based Netflix didn't publicly acknowledge it differentiates among customers until revising its "terms of use" in January 2005 -- four months after a San Francisco subscriber filed a class-action lawsuit alleging that the company had deceptively promised one-day delivery of most DVDs.

"In determining priority for shipping and inventory allocation, we give priority to those members who receive the fewest DVDs through our service," Netflix's revised policy now reads. The statement specifically warns that heavy renters are more likely to encounter shipping delays and less likely to immediately be sent their top choices.