And get this: Netflix (NFLX) added a net 510,000 subscribers during the period, 95 percent more than in the same three months last year. In fact, in the past year, Netflix has added 2.4 million subscribers, the most it has signed on in its 10-year history.

“Our business momentum is strong and our third-quarter performance keeps us solidly on course for a record 2009,” Netflix CEO Reed Hastings said in a statement.

Given that and the fact that Netflix beat estimates, it’s odd to see investors dragging the company’s shares down. Netflix fell 4.39 percent to 47.45 in after-hours trading.

“[A partnership with Apple] is something that’s likely to come over time,” Hastings said. “But nothing in the short term. [With] movie watching, we are not focused on mobile yet, but on the TV, on Blu-ray and on the video game consoles. We will get to mobile eventually, including the iPhone.”

Of course, bringing a Netflix (NFLX) streaming-video app to the iPhone will no doubt take some doing–and a few concessions. Certainly, it seems unlikely that AT&T (T) would be thrilled to have Netflix streaming movies over its wireless cellphone network. So at the very least, the company would have to agree make its app Wi-Fi-only.

Kaufman Bros. analyst Aaron Kessler recently conducted a survey of 700 Internet users (see charts below; click to enlarge) and found that 20 percent of those who aren’t currently Netflix (NFLX) subscribers plan to register for the service in the next five years. Moreover, 68 percent of all respondents said that “the ability to watch videos on the Internet vs. renting from a physical store or by mail” doesn’t much matter to them. Only six percent said that feature is important.

And if DVD rental stores were to suddenly disappear from the face of the earth, 52 percent would turn to a DVD-by-mail service as a replacement. A smaller number, 32 percent, would turn to the Internet.

“DVD by Mail life cycle may be longer than current thinking,” Kessler said in a research note issued today. “While we would agree that a large percentage of the DVD rental market will move to digital in the long term, our survey indicates that the current life cycle of physical rentals may be longer than people think.”

[Image credit: NetFlix Origami]

The online DVD-rental pioneer said Thursday that its second-quarter profit rose 22 percent on revenue of $408.5 million. It earned $32.4 million, or 54 cents a share, easily surpassing Wall Street’s expectations of 50 cents per share.

Netflix’s (NFLX) subscriber base finished the quarter at 10.6 million, up 26 percent year-over-year and at the high end of the company’s own forecasts.

“We continued to execute very well in the second quarter and are on track to deliver a record 2009,” Netflix CEO Reed Hastings said in a statement. “As our subscriber base and disc shipments continue to expand, and as we offer more opportunities to watch instantly via the Internet, we believe we are striking the right balance between growth, investment and earnings.”

“We do not intend to file for bankruptcy….We have lots of plans to grow our business.”

– Blockbuster spokesperson Karen Raskopf, March 3, 2009

Blockbuster in a Monday filing told the Securities and Exchange Commission what anyone who’s observed its fast-declining fortunes has known for some time now: The company isn’t sure it can stay in business much longer. In a PricewaterhouseCoopers assessment included as part of its latest 10-K, Blockbuster (BBI) acknowledged that its financial situation raises “substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern” and said it may have to close its doors if its financial situation doesn’t improve in the near future. Seems that $250 million revolving loan Blockbuster announced last week is conditional, and the video rental chain says there is “no assurance” that it can meet its requirements.

An unfortunate turn of events for Blockbuster, but far from an unexpected one. The company did not fare well in its battle against DVD-by-mail pioneer Netflix (NFLX), and its recent efforts to stay relevant have been head-shakers at best. A $1.3 billion gambit for an electronics chain that would go bankrupt less than a year later? A weak (and costly) set-top box offering that would later be made redundant by a deal with TiVo (TIVO)? A vending-machine program with partner NCR (NCR) that, like its entry into the DVD-by-mail market is late to a game it’s already losing? And all these things conceived and launched amid a challenging macroeconomic environment and constrained capital markets. Sad, really. Hard to imagine that 10 years ago Reed Hastings was doing all that he could to convince Blockbuster to buy Netflix…

“We think we have solved the real fundamental problem, which has been that choosing movies on a television has been extremely challenging,” Netflix CEO Reed Hastings told the New York Times. “Video-on-demand companies worked at it for a long time, but choosing movies on the TV just doesn’t have the power of the Web. We want to be integrated on every Internet-connected device, game system, high-definition DVD player and dedicated Internet set-top box. Eventually, as TVs have wireless connectivity built into them, we’ll integrate right into the television.”

A compelling vision of Netflix’s future and one that may sound the death knell for Blockbuster, Amazon’s Unbox and Vudu as well. Or perhaps not. Certainly, this little bit of legalese at the tail-end of the press release announcing the services belies Hastings’s optimism just a wee bit.

This press release contains certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the federal securities laws, including statements regarding the development of a set-top box for delivery of content over the Internet to television sets, the delivery of a compelling online home entertainment service, Netflix’s strategy and positioning in online delivery of content, and the future of Internet to the television. These statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results and events to differ, including, without limitation; the risk that the development of the set-top box or its associated online delivery service may not meet technical requirements, consumer expectations, or otherwise be implemented by the parties; that certain studios will not grant either of the parties necessary rights or otherwise impose limitations on such rights that might impede implementation or hamper consumer adoption; Netflix’s ability to create other partnership opportunities for the delivery of digital content to the television; and possible technological or content licensing impediments.”

People keep asking what Web 3.0 is. I think maybe when you’ve got an overlay of scalable vector graphics–everything rippling and folding and looking misty–on Web 2.0 and access to a semantic Web integrated across a huge space of data, you’ll have access to an unbelievable data resource.”

–Tim Berners-Lee, May 2006

Web 2.0 is well documented and talked about. The power of the Net reached a critical mass, with capabilities that can be done on a network level. We are also seeing richer devices over the last four years and richer ways of interacting with the network, not only in hardware like game consoles and mobile devices, but also in the software layer. You don’t have to be a computer scientist to create a program. We are seeing that manifest in Web 2.0 and 3.0 will be a great extension of that, a true communal medium … the distinction between professional, semiprofessional and consumers will get blurred, creating a network effect of business and applications.”

–Jerry Yang, co-founder and CEO of Yahoo, November 2006

“Web 1.0 was dial-up, 50K average bandwidth, Web 2.0 is an average one megabit of bandwidth and Web 3.0 will be 10 megabits of bandwidth all the time, which will be the full video Web, and that will feel like Web 3.0.”

–Reed Hastings, founder and CEO of Netflix, November 2006

Had to happen sooner or later, right? The lexicographers who gave us the term Web 2.0 have finally gotten around to issuing an “official” definition of Web 3.0 and, having undoubtedly scurried to trademark the term, are probably already plotting the pricey industry conference that will accompany it.

So what is Web 3.0, “officially”?

Web 3.0 is defined as the creation of high-quality content and services produced by gifted individuals using Web 2.0 technology as an enabling platform.”
–Jason Calacanis

In other words it’s Web 2.0 2.0, Web 2.0 with another 1.0’s worth of marketing BS. Or, as Josh Kopelman, managing director of First Round Capital, aptly puts it, “any Internet-based company that has launched after 2004.“