Warner Takes Aim at Redbox, Netflix - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 429 Old 08-14-2009, 05:24 PM - Thread Starter
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Warner Takes Aim at Redbox, Netflix

Quote:
Warner Home Video is drastically changing the way it sells DVDs and Blu-ray Discs to rental kiosks such as Redbox and by-mail services such as Netflix.

Quote:
But industry sources say the most revolutionary aspect of the new policy is that it targets not just kiosks but also subscription rental services. They maintain that Netflix and other by-mail renters, too, will be subject to a 28-day window on new Warner DVD and Blu-ray Disc releases unless they strike revenue-sharing deals with the studio. Sources say Warner has no such agreements in place with Netflix.

http://www.homemediamagazine.com/war...-netflix-16749
Lee Stewart is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 429 Old 08-14-2009, 06:05 PM
Senior Member
 
Vmk2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 219
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
sounds like a cool move by warner...
Vmk2 is offline  
post #3 of 429 Old 08-14-2009, 06:34 PM
Senior Member
 
SDouglas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 206
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Why did Warner make it a bug when it could have been a feature?

Warner could have announced instead that they were reducing the sell-through disc release window on average by 28 days, but not the rental window.

If they made good on such a promise, home theater fans could watch the movie on their setups a month sooner, albeit by buying rather than renting.

SCD
SDouglas is offline  
post #4 of 429 Old 08-14-2009, 08:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
rlsmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Posts: 5,618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDouglas View Post

Why did Warner make it a bug when it could have been a feature?

Warner could have announced instead that they were reducing the sell-through disc release window on average by 28 days, but not the rental window.

If they made good on such a promise, home theater fans could watch the movie on their setups a month sooner, albeit by buying rather than renting.

SCD

They have moved the home video window up so aggressively that there isn't much room, they would crowd the theatrical release window.

Theatrical release still brings in a lot of money and also establishes the value of the films.
rlsmith is offline  
post #5 of 429 Old 08-15-2009, 04:04 AM
Advanced Member
 
CRT Dude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Hanover, PA
Posts: 887
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
On page 45
"We have entered into revenue sharing arrangements with more than 50 studios and distributors. The arrangements cover six of the top eight studios, including Buena Vista Home Video, Columbia TriStar Home Entertainment, Dreamworks International Distribution, Twentieth Century Fox Home Entertainment, Universal Studios Home Video and Warner Home Video."
CRT Dude is offline  
post #6 of 429 Old 08-15-2009, 09:58 AM
AVS Special Member
 
coolscan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,794
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 102
See also;

Quote:
http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.co...e-warner-bros/


Analyst Predicts Redbox Will Sue Warner Bros Within A Week; "But Bigger Question Is Will Netflix Sue Warner Bros?"

"Given that Redbox has sued Universal (45 days) and Fox (30 days) over their windowing strategies, we would expect Redbox to sue Warner Bros (28 days) in short order, Greenfield predicts -- maybe as soon as next week. "While Sony, Lionsgate, Disney (and likely Paramount) appear to be happy working with Redbox directly or via distributors, we have a hard time understanding how a studio would not feel threatened by Redbox’s current business model, as it sets an ultra-low price point for movie content that will impact consumers’ decision-making process about all forms of movie-related commerce (theater-going, DVD purchase, Video-on-Demand, electronic/online rental/sell-thru, etc…)."


coolscan is offline  
post #7 of 429 Old 08-15-2009, 01:22 PM
AVS Special Member
 
MEC2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Frisco, TX (D/FW area)
Posts: 1,267
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Dammit, RedBox is making movies affordable and convenient to consumers, something MUST be done to stop this!
MEC2 is offline  
post #8 of 429 Old 08-15-2009, 01:28 PM
 
PSound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,074
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Desperation move. Ultimately there is nothing any studio can do to keep Netflix, Redbox or any rentailer from obtaining and renting movies at whatever price they want.

Unless studios want to go back to "rental pricing" like they did back in the VHS days and absolutely obliterate the sell-through market that served them so well during the growth period of DVD.
PSound is offline  
post #9 of 429 Old 08-15-2009, 01:56 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fpconvert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: w. mass
Posts: 1,499
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
This news did not seem to help NF stock this week even with the big buyback plans.
Coinstar got hammered...down $5...ouch.
fpconvert is offline  
post #10 of 429 Old 08-15-2009, 02:57 PM
 
PSound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,074
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by fpconvert View Post

This news did not seem to help NF stock this week even with the big buyback plans.
Coinstar got hammered...down $5...ouch.

Netflix was up $1 for the week, and is up slightly over the weekend in after hours trading. That is up more than 2% of what could have been a rough week (and despite analysts trying to downplay them).

You are right about Coinstar. They dropped 12% for the week!


Interestingly enough, Blockbuster also took a beating on Friday, and was down more than 5% for the week and are now trading at $.72 a share.
PSound is offline  
post #11 of 429 Old 08-15-2009, 08:50 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fpconvert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: w. mass
Posts: 1,499
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
12% of $35 for Coinstar is tad more than 5% of $1 for BB. Interesting...yah, like paint drying

Netflix actually started the week at 44.88 and finished at 44.49. Check the batteries on that calculator.
fpconvert is offline  
post #12 of 429 Old 08-15-2009, 09:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
westgate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: ʇuoɯɹ
Posts: 5,624
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by uvwx304 View Post

这是新加的空白文章67,可以在ubb可视化编辑器中,添加和修改文章内容。

---------------------------------------------------------------------
˙˙˙pıɐs ʇı/ǝɥs/ǝɥ ʇɐɥʍ

10' from 84" screen.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
westgate is offline  
post #13 of 429 Old 08-15-2009, 10:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
rezzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: The Matrix
Posts: 7,723
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Warner has the insane dream of ruling the world; they make me ill....

"I knew you'd say that"...*BLAM!*
rezzy is offline  
post #14 of 429 Old 08-16-2009, 10:19 AM
AVS Special Member
 
42Plasmaman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 5,044
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by PSound View Post

Desperation move. Ultimately there is nothing any studio can do to keep Netflix, Redbox or any rentailer from obtaining and renting movies at whatever price they want.

Unless studios want to go back to "rental pricing" like they did back in the VHS days and absolutely obliterate the sell-through market that served them so well during the growth period of DVD.

This this model is an option and they can dictate rental prices, it may be their next move to control prices and disc prices as well.

2014
42Plasmaman is offline  
post #15 of 429 Old 08-16-2009, 04:49 PM - Thread Starter
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42Plasmaman View Post

This this model is an option and they can dictate rental prices, it may be their next move to control prices and disc prices as well.

Those days are over. All they are doing is digging themselves a hole to be buried in - those that are fighting Redbox.
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #16 of 429 Old 08-16-2009, 04:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
42Plasmaman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 5,044
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

Those days are over. All they are doing is digging themselves a hole to be buried in - those that are fighting Redbox.

Care to elaborate why?

2014
42Plasmaman is offline  
post #17 of 429 Old 08-16-2009, 05:58 PM
AVS Special Member
 
ChrisW6ATV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Hayward, Collie-fornia USA
Posts: 4,205
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Does anyone here remember when WB first tried the revenue-sharing model for rental video tapes in the early 1980's? They supplied specially-marked tapes to rental stores, and they got a cut of each transaction. The scheme didn't last long. In recent years, though, revenue-sharing seems to be the normal way the big rental chains work with the studios. If Redbox or another company wants to just buy discs and keep all the rental revenue, I don't know that any studio could stop them, and these delay schemes sound illegal to me-some variation of restraint of trade or unequal access. Is this ultimately any different at all from, say, a studio delaying releases of discs into poor neighborhoods or other locations?

Chris

"It's [expletive] lame to watch Jaws, a film that uses the 2.40 ratio as well as any ever produced, in the wrong format on HBO." -Steven Soderbergh, Oscar-winning director

ChrisW6ATV is offline  
post #18 of 429 Old 08-16-2009, 06:05 PM - Thread Starter
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42Plasmaman View Post

Care to elaborate why?

It has already been explained.

Redbox and the other kiosk manufacturers have already publically stated that if they can't buy new releases from either wholesalers, or the studios themselves - they will buy them from retailers like BB or WM.

Nice to see a company(s) that care enough about their customers that they will not bow down to the money hungry, greedy Hollywood studios and are willing to do something about it - like haul their a$$ into court over anti-trust, misuse of copyright and restraint of trade.
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #19 of 429 Old 08-17-2009, 02:38 AM
AVS Special Member
 
coolscan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,794
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Liked: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by rezzy View Post

Warner has the insane dream of ruling the world; they make me ill....

I don't know that Warner is in any different position than Universal and Fox.
RedBox have already sued Fox over this, Universal and Warner are expected to to be next.

Ineresting position for Blockbuster in all this. Are they playing a dangerouse game to try to save themselves?

The internet tech guys at TechCrunch have a take on this under the headline;
(read the whole article and the comments to see the reactions from people involved in digital delivery applications)

Quote:


The Movie Studios Have A Great Idea To Ramp Up Piracy. And Blockbuster Wants To Help.
http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/08/14...wants-to-help/

Movie piracy is a problem, but it’s not as huge of a problem as music piracy was this past decade. While certainly the size of the movie files and the need for fast broadband connections to get them in a reasonable amount of time plays into it somewhat, also helping is the fact that there are some fairly decent ways to get movies quickly, for a pretty fair price these days. And now Hollywood is apparently trying to change that.

The studios are starting to rally around a horrible new idea: Keeping new releases out of Redbox and more importantly, Netflix for 30 days. Let me repeat that: They think Netflix shouldn’t be able to ship many new movies to you until 30 days after they’re released on DVD.

Now, this doesn’t appear to be set in stone yet for Netflix, as the studios are said to be currently negotiating this with the company, but it is what the studios want. And the strategy is going forward with Redbox, which recently filed a lawsuit against 20th Century Fox over the same issue. And now, with Universal and Warner Brothers getting on board, another lawsuit seems likely.

And in a move that couldn’t be less surprising, Blockbuster is on the wrong side of this. Despite the company having a strategy to do a massive roll-out of kiosks like the ones Redbox has, it is all in favor of the 30-day window, based on comments CEO Jim Keyes made during its Q2 earnings call.

Why? Well the company once again completely bombed in those earnings, posting a net loss of $36.9 million, while overall sales fell 22 percent in the quarter. It is getting fleeced by the likes of Redbox and Netflix and needs to gain some sort of competitive advantage in movie rentals. A 30-day rental window for its stores would certainly offer that.

Of course, as the name synonymous with movie rentals for the past couple of decades, Blockbuster could have used its power to get ahead of some of these trends (by-mail rentals, cheap kiosks, online rentals/streaming), but didn’t. So now they will have to rely on the movie studios attempting to put stricter rules in place for gaining access to its movies right away. Rules, that would seem to be basically prodding users to obtain those movies illegally.

coolscan is offline  
post #20 of 429 Old 08-17-2009, 04:50 AM - Thread Starter
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
^^^

Redbox has already sued Universal as Uni was the first studio that refused to sell Redbox new D/D releasaes. Then came Fox and this week we expect them to include WB.
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #21 of 429 Old 08-17-2009, 05:08 AM
AVS Special Member
 
fpconvert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: w. mass
Posts: 1,499
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolscan View Post

I don't know that Warner is in any different position than Universal and Fox.
RedBox have already sued Fox over this, Universal and Warner are expected to to be next.


The internet tech guys at TechCrunch have a take on this under the headline;
(read the whole article and the comments to see the reactions from people involved in digital delivery applications)

"So now they will have to rely on the movie studios attempting to put stricter rules in place for gaining access to its movies right away. Rules, that would seem to be basically prodding users to obtain those movies illegally".

As if, perhaps by some miracle no doubt, those who currently illegally DL would descend to the kiosk to drop their $1 bills for the chance to redeem themselves and clear their minds of the wrongs they have done to the man.
fpconvert is offline  
post #22 of 429 Old 08-17-2009, 05:46 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Nosferax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Beauharnois, Quebec, Canada
Posts: 1,613
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by fpconvert View Post

"So now they will have to rely on the movie studios attempting to put stricter rules in place for gaining access to its movies right away. Rules, that would seem to be basically prodding users to obtain those movies illegally".

As if, perhaps by some miracle no doubt, those who currently illegally DL would descend to the kiosk to drop their $1 bills for the chance to redeem themselves and clear their minds of the wrongs they have done to the man.

Nah, They'll go down, rent the new movie for $1, rip it, encode it and post it on their favorite P2P site instead. They are already damn to hell anyway, where by the way I would prefer myself to go since all the interesting people, booze and drug is there anyway

No point of going to heaven and freeze my *** on a cloud playing harp for a bunch of stuck up people. Let's go down and party!
Nosferax is offline  
post #23 of 429 Old 08-17-2009, 07:01 AM
AVS Special Member
 
42Plasmaman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 5,044
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Liked: 36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

It has already been explained.

Redbox and the other kiosk manufacturers have already publically stated that if they can't buy new releases from either wholesalers, or the studios themselves - they will buy them from retailers like BB or WM.

Nice to see a company(s) that care enough about their customers that they will not bow down to the money hungry, greedy Hollywood studios and are willing to do something about it - like haul their a$$ into court over anti-trust, misuse of copyright and restraint of trade.

Redbox does not really care about their customers other than they provide revenue. They are a business, not a humanitarian service.
With the new imposed requirements by the studios, their profits would plummet, thus they lose revenue, then go out of business.

I agree that Hollywood studios are greedy but they do not force ANYONE to view or purchase their products. It's by freewill that consumers choose to view and purchase their products.

After all, the stuidos and their investors MUST INVEST a large amount of money in hopes of turning a profit on their investments.

It will be interesting though how this turns out since I haven't seen anyone post any ruling regarding the lawsuit against Fox and Uni.

2014
42Plasmaman is offline  
post #24 of 429 Old 08-17-2009, 07:17 AM - Thread Starter
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by 42Plasmaman View Post

Redbox does not really care about their customers other than they provide revenue. They are a business, not a humanitarian service.

They care enough not to do what the studios want and to take them to court.

Quote:


With the new imposed requirements by the studios, their profits would plummet, thus they lose revenue, then go out of business.

The difference is the price paid to a wholesaler versus to a retailer. This will hardly cause them to go out of business. Just add some time to the ROI, that's all.

Quote:


I agree that Hollywood studios are greedy but they do not force ANYONE to view or purchase their products. It's by freewill that consumers choose to view and purchase their products.

And consumers are gobbling up D/D DVD releases for a buck a night. Consumers have already proved they want it - and a few studios have proved they DON'T want it. Of course a few studios have said they will support it.

Quote:


After all, the stuidos and their investors MUST INVEST a large amount of money in hopes of turning a profit on their investments.

LOL . . . the cost of making movies for the most part is totally out of control. The fact that they sink 10's and 100's of millions of dollars into a movie does not mean they should have some guarantee of getting it back and then some. Movies are still entertainment and entertainment can be judged subjectively

Quote:


It will be interesting though how this turns out since I haven't seen anyone post any ruling regarding the lawsuit against Fox and Uni.

Neither has actually gone to trial
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #25 of 429 Old 08-17-2009, 07:30 AM
AVS Special Member
 
fpconvert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: w. mass
Posts: 1,499
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

They care enough not to do what the studios want and to take them to court.



The difference is the price paid to a wholesaler versus to a retailer. This will hardly cause them to go out of business. Just add some time to the ROI, that's all.



And consumers are gobbling up D/D DVD releases for a buck a night. Consumers have already proved they want it - and a few studios have proved they DON'T want it. Of course a few studios have said they will support it.



LOL . . . the cost of making movies for the most part is totally out of control. The fact that they sink 10's and 100's of millions of dollars into a movie does not mean they should have some guarantee of getting it back and then some. Movies are still entertainment and entertainment can be judged subjectively



Neither has actually gone to trial

1) Out of a desire for self preservation. Coinstar stock dropped 12% last week with this problem brewing.
2) Oh well. With lower costs than the video store they are well suited to weather this problem.
3) So who wouldn't want a $5 value for a buck? A few studios negotiated their own deal w/ RB involving the exchange of green for peace.
4) Says you. Why be in business if you can't make a profit.
5) And may never go to trial.
fpconvert is offline  
post #26 of 429 Old 08-17-2009, 07:49 AM - Thread Starter
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by fpconvert View Post

1) Out of a desire for self preservation. Coinstar stock dropped 12% last week with this problem brewing.

Think their stock won't recover? How about netflix? And how has WB's stock price fared?

Quote:
2) Oh well. With lower costs than the video store they are well suited to weather this problem.



Quote:
3) So who wouldn't want a $5 value for a buck? A few studios negotiated their own deal w/ RB involving the exchange of green for peace.

Oh - so Sony and Lions Gate don't want to make money with Redbox? Just extend an olive branch?

Quote:
4) Says you. Why be in business if you can't make a profit.

See - that's the thing about business . . . there is risk involved - especially in the business of making movies.

Quote:
5) And may never go to trial.

Time will tell. Do you see the 3 studios backing down because I don't see redbox backing down.
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #27 of 429 Old 08-17-2009, 01:41 PM
AVS Special Member
 
rezzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: The Matrix
Posts: 7,723
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolscan View Post

I don't know that Warner is in any different position than Universal and Fox.

This topic is just one of the reasons; I won't go into the others....for now.

"I knew you'd say that"...*BLAM!*
rezzy is offline  
post #28 of 429 Old 08-17-2009, 02:16 PM
Senior Member
 
Vmk2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 219
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
why they just don`t make a deal they will suit both sides? they are just greedy. as lee Stewart says, the cost of movies is totally out of control, they spend way too much money into movies which are mostly bad and they can`t get that money back from theaters. now they are using this pitiful strategy to recoup costs. they are lame and despicable.
Vmk2 is offline  
post #29 of 429 Old 08-17-2009, 08:33 PM
AVS Special Member
 
srw1000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 2,586
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21 Post(s)
Liked: 26
There's an interview with Redbox's president posted here, at the Fox Business website. But, you'll have to sit through a commercial.

Scott

srw1000 is offline  
post #30 of 429 Old 08-18-2009, 07:38 AM
Advanced Member
 
Calamus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 990
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I think this is a good idea on their part. I think that having a staged multitier pricing structure sounds like a good move for them. IMO they need 4 levels for their releases.

1. Premium buyers of the product should get it first (Blu-ray)
2. DVD buyers get it 7 days later
3. Premium content providers (VUDU/BB/Netflix) 7 days after DVD
4. Bottom tier get it last, but at a barging price (Red box, Netflix streaming after 30 days)

Don’t forget even people that purchase the movie on BD does NOT own it, only the rights to private viewings. It could be argued that rental services violate this agreement.

Botton line, does having to wait 30 days hurt the people that want to rent at the best possible price? I don't think so

I want my HDM
Calamus is offline  
Closed Thread HDTV Software Media Discussion

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off