The cloud goes Hollywood

Amazon already has this for their mp3s. Part of me sees the appeal, and part of me wonders what you do when your internets goes down.

Not much appeal when the majority of isps either have or are threatening data usage caps. And I don't particularly like the fact that someone else is in control of my media. The cloud is not consumer friendly, but of course that's probably the reason why corporations are pushing it.

I don't have a problem with UltraViolet, it makes sense to have one format to stream to multiple devices. It's no different than the cloud service Amazon, VUDU and CinemaNow use to store movies you buy. Having said that I have never bought a streaming movie because I like to have a physical copy, if I get a free digital copy then I think it's a bonus.

I have a problem with Ultraviolet, since it's the first step to studios forcing you to get content from them.

Why would they let Netflix or Vudu stream a movie to us when they can force us to stream from their service? What's their incentive to license any content to anyone?

It's no different than a network not allowing us to view their content on Hulu or HBO not licensing to Netflix. Only this time it's something I actually care about.

It's just a step for the studios to kill off the 3rd party rental services, IMO.

At least the studios are starting to figure out streaming. Since the movies belong to them, they are within their rights to charge whatever they want for them and distribute them any way they choose. We as consumers, however, have the right to not use their services or pay their prices. Let the market decide. Embrace the streaming model you want to see succeed and inform others to do the same.

Having said all that, after paying large amounts of money for internet access, I will will tend to have very little left over to pay for individual content. This is something Hollywood needs to understand and I don't think they do yet.

I think that price is wishful thinking since most VOD and a la carte streamers are around the $4-$6 mark. I suppose they could drop it a bit to undercut the other guys, but I really don't see them dropping to Redbox prices if they can get away with it, especially since Redbox itself might raise prices in the future.

I suppose it loses you as a customer, but were you ever a customer of VUDU?

I just think their mentality would be "Joe Streamer pays X amount to stream VUDU. We could also charge X, or maybe slightly less than X to undercut VUDU." I don't see them even thinking of Redbox as a competitor, at least not one they need to drop prices to match.

The problem, as I see it, with the studios directly competing with third parties is the issue with library titles, not so much new releases. If the studios succeed in this, they have zero incentive to license old content to people like Netflix and absolutely nothing will come without a per-view price. They may offer package deals from time to time, but I seriously doubt they will ever offer a buffet package except for huge amounts of money.

I still think the ideal service would be something like a one-stop service, like Netflix, with a set monthly fee and the gross revenues shared according to per view. It could even be tiered according to content age, etc. The more people watch your stuff, the more money you get. That keeps the content owners honest and the quality of content high.

I don't think the movie studios want to get rid of the middlemen(ie VUDU) for PPV because the studios get a percentage of every sale(probably 60-70%), as was mentioned rental prices are $4-6 and purchase prices are $15-20 so I think the studios have a big say on the price. I also agree that BD is the final disc format we will see as more consumers prefer to stream to their devices, many of us are tired of replacing our libraries with new formats.

Don't underestimate the overhead in providing the streaming service. And not just the physical act of streaming you have to include all of the ongoing expenses... marketing, billing, support, etc. I'm not saying they can't deliver it less expensively although I don't think it's a slam dunk in ease or increased margins.

Pricing wise I believe they look at relative value (their perceived value) versus cost of delivery plus margin. So they will work backwards in charging what they can and only lowering it if the net result produces more profits. Even then they may fight lowering prices.

Personally, I think the content owners want to make as much as they can (who can blame them) and as such don't give a hoot who is or isn't involved.

That's why I think the current $4-$6 per movie pricing is here to stay. Ignoring Netflix's buffet pricing, if everyone is charging around that price, that's probably what the market supports, in expenses and profit margins.

No reason to drop the price unless you know what it nets you in the long run.

And what the consumer is willing to pay. If no one would pay the $6 for an HDX VUDU movie, they'd either drop their prices or close up shop tomorrow.

I totally agree, that's one reason I have never bought a digital movie. I might be inclined if the SD version was $6 and the HD was $10. I rent PPV movies all the time but I refuse to pay more than $4. Another reason for not buying digital movies is because I'm locked into one company, if I buy a new player it might not have VUDU(or Amazon, etc) on it. The last reason I don't buy digital movies is if VUDU(or Amazon, etc) goes broke then what will happen to my movies? Again I see UltraViolet as a bonus and wish all distributors would sign up, if and when my BD gets scratched I still can stream it for free on any device.

Risky proposition, IMO. I don't doubt they could expand that way, but it would get hairy really quick. Redbox is tough to compete against because they have little in the way of infrastructure costs once the kiosks are paid for, compared to ongoing costs that the streamers have (that bandwidth doesn't pay for itself.)

You can get the equivalent of $1 per disc through Netflix, but Netflix would rather you didn't. Remember when they tried to throttle people who rented as many discs as they could? That was and still is cutting into Netflix profits (some of which the streaming has made up.) Netflix would also love to dump the DVD side, they just botched it with the pricing fiasco and that Quikster trainwreck that they had to regroup. They're still trying to find out what exactly their pricing structure for their services should be.

Honestly, though, and I said this in another thread, rental prices today for anything is dirt cheap for what you get compared to how it used to be when Blockbuster and video stores ruled. IMO, $6 for an HD rental delivered to you in seconds isn't all that much.

Oh, I don't disagree that streaming is the future. It's the reason I waited on buying a Blu-ray player that also added streaming and DLNA. I just think the pricing structure isn't going to come down anytime soon. Not without a humongous "streaming good, disks bad" PR push, though.

I wonder if the studios don't run a risk to losing control of movie distribution if streaming becomes a much bigger source of revenue than the box office and they cut the streaming services off. Wouldn't Apple, Netflix, and Amazon just start buying rights direct from the producers? I'm sure James Cameron could easily raise the necessary cash to produce Avatar 2 by selling the electronic distribution rights to one of the streaming services while still selling the theater distribution rights separate.

It depends on the producer's existing contracts and relationships already established. While a handful of producers could pull it off, most would need the studios just to get the cash to make the films. Cameron could do it, but he also takes years to make an Avatar level film. I'm not sure the streamers could rely on him for consistent content.

You could do independent financing, but that tends to take forever (a studio already knows the risk, a hedge fund that hasn't invested in film before wants all the ducks in a row before signing off.)

I like the idea of Ultraviolet.....I currently have over 300 movies I own on VUDU.....I'm watching very carefully the development of UV.....There is supposed to be a download component to it at some point and THAT is what I want....Their CFF (Common File Format) is supposed to allow downloading.....I've tried a few films on CinemaNow and was able to download them to my WDTV Live Hub.....If there is only streaming, that is a deal-breaker for me....

The studios (honestly) believe such pricing undervalues their content. That's why they are so anti Redbox, Netflix, etc. They are currently fighting to recover this perceived value and have no interest in reducing prices. I think this was proven when Starz walked away from Netflix... have they struck a deal to replace those lost revenues? Right now they are giving up millions to fight the good fight...


Certainly lower pricing has the ability to increase sales but it doesn't guarantee increased profits. There is always a sweet spot... and as long as VOD as been around I can't believe they aren't aware of it. Not to say when the infrastructure is in place it won't be different.

Long term (far, far away) I see very few delivery providers. There will be clearing houses for virtually all streaming content. There won't be an endless number of streaming services offering their own or others content. Rather there will by few (ultimately one?) companies providing an integrated interface to your world of entertainment.