[HurricaneKid]

I am curious why we haven't had more discussions about Home Video. The latest developments with Redbox are absolutely fascinating to me. It appears that the studios blame Redbox, Netflix and the availability of cheap rentals for the diminishing revenues of DVD/BluRay and are beginning to alter the landscape of home video.

Warner, Universal, and Fox have established plans to delay release to kiosks by 28 days after street date. Sony and Lionsgate have contracts with Redbox and Paramount has a $525M deal in place through 2014 that many analysts believe they will opt out of to join Warner, Universal and Fox in having a "sales-only" window.

It makes some sense. I have Redbox's inside of area Walmart's etc. Why would you go in and buy a movie at Walmart when you can rent it at Walmart for $1? Of course, this isn't really the problem. The issue is that the studios have ruined their business model with greed. I bought VHS movies with the idea that I would own them forever. Then came DVD and probably atleast a few releases. Now comes Blu-Ray. The notion that I would have that movie for a lifetime has been replaced by the feeling that I would have to replace it in another 2 years. This ruins the amortization schedule for the consumer. There is no longer any value in owning movies.


As kiosks and Redbox, in particular, remain in the crosshairs, there is increased industry buzz about studios and rentailers, including Netflix and Blockbuster, hammering out a new release hierarchy spearheaded by a “sales only” window.

The thing I keep hearing is "who cares? Its just Redbox". Well no its not. Clearly the next step, and many studios have mentioned it, is Netflix, Then Blockbuster (who is already on its last legs). Maybe you won't mind waiting another 28 days to watch movies. I think its just one more way the studios are actively attempting to separate me and my money while providing a worse product with worse service.

The peculiar thing is that the studios cannot stop these companies from renting the movies. It is covered under First Sale Doctrine. The issue is the massive discounts the rental outlets get for purchasing large numbers of movies. In fact, Redbox is working with Walmart to see if they can come to an arrangement for massive DVD purchasing.

[HurricaneKid]

Nobody cares that they aren't going to be able to Netflix or rent new releases for a month. REALLY?

[SamCat]

Nope because I get my DVDs two months before they are released by downloading them. They are the actually home releases too, not some cam. This type of thinking will just push people to download more and more revenue will be lost...but then again no one has ssaid that any entertainment company has been ahead of the curve in their thinking.

[HurricaneKid]

Originally Posted by SamCat

Nope because I get my DVDs two months before they are released by downloading them. They are the actually home releases too, not some cam. This type of thinking will just push people to download more and more revenue will be lost...but then again no one has ssaid that any entertainment company has been ahead of the curve in their thinking.

This is essentially my line of thinking as well. Rather than block access and technology the studios need to embrace the new distribution channels. I am prepared to play by the rules... until they force me not to. These actions push me closer to your behavior than their intended reaction (buy more movies). They are acting shockingly like the RIAA and we all now how it worked out for them.

[totalmatt]

Honestly I have almost completely stopped using DVD's in whole. I have an old iPod Video that is 120gb that I can download movies and tv shows on and I just plug it into the TV and set it to TV Out. The picture and sound is just as good as a DVD and there is nearly no clutter involved beyond storage space on the PC.

I had to find something else as the over 1000 DVD's I own were overtaking my entire living room

[YARN]

Originally Posted by HurricaneKid

The peculiar thing is that the studios cannot stop these companies from renting the movies. It is covered under First Sale Doctrine. The issue is the massive discounts the rental outlets get for purchasing large numbers of movies. In fact, Redbox is working with Walmart to see if they can come to an arrangement for massive DVD purchasing.

I think this is an important topic and I am also interested in discussing it.

Your last point is significant - there is only so much studios can do. Redbox can simply go to Best Buy and purchase copies there. They don't turn as much of a profit this way, but they still turn a profit.

I think we are in the last days of disco as far as fixed media (actual artifacts you possess) is concerned.

Letting you own a physical object is bad business. At most, they can try to goad you into buying it again when the next generation improvement is available. That, and they can build planned obsolescence into DVD's by manufacturing them with poor scratch and UV protection. Still, if you take care of a DVD, it will last a very long time.

The next step is to control output by only selling streaming rentals. Hence, any fixed-physical copy is an illegal copy. Fortunately, you can still record shows off cable and satellite, so when it hits HBO and Showtime, it's fair game, but the copy you get will not be as good as DVD or blue ray since you will have to record it yourself.

These people want to make a dime every time you listen to a song or view something that they "own." Fair use is under a massive assault and it is taking longer and longer for works to enter the public domain.

[Optimus Pixels]

If they want me to start buying more dvds and blu rays they should release better movies, its as simple as that. I have no problem paying for a movie if its a flick that I really loved but unfortunately a high percentage of whats released now a days falls into the category of rental and nothing more.

[HurricaneKid]

Originally Posted by totalmatt

I have an old iPod Video that is 120gb that I can download movies and tv shows on and I just plug it into the TV and set it to TV Out. The picture and sound is just as good as a DVD.

No. An Ipod movie is ~800MB. A DVD is atleast 4.7GB and most are ~8GB (most are dual layered now). So its about 1/10th a DVD. Blu-Ray is ~20-48GB depending on the release (almost all newer ones are nearing 50GB). It is great for a 2" IPod screen. It is of no use in my home theater; it is actually 1/60th of a BD.

In fact, this is one of my concerns. HD has gotten worse and worse as more people have gotten into it. It is HD Lite and even that is beginning to become generous terminology. Cable, Satellite, etc don't want to give you full HD due to bandwidth constraints and you end up with a choppy macroblocked excuse of its former glory. MP3s have hurt the sound quality of music; I don't want my movies messed up in similar fashion.

[YARN]

Originally Posted by HurricaneKid

No. An Ipod movie is ~800MB. A DVD is atleast 4.7GB and most are ~8GB (most are dual layered now). Blu-Ray is ~20-48GB depending on the release (almost all newer ones are nearing 50GB). It is great for an IPod. It is no good in my home theater; it is actually 1/60th of a BD.

In fact, this is one of my concerns. HD has gotten worse and worse as more people have gotten it. It is HD Lite and even that is beginning to become generous terminology. Cable, Satellite, etc don't want to give you full HD due to bandwidth constraints you you end up with a choppy macroblocked excuse of its former glory. MP3s have hurt the sound quality of music; I don't want my movies messed up in similar fashion.

And the quality is just going to keep getting worse.

[HurricaneKid]

Originally Posted by YARN

I think this is an important topic and I am also interested in discussing it.

Your last point is significant - there is only so much studios can do. Redbox can simply go to Best Buy and purchase copies there. They don't turn as much of a profit this way, but they still turn a profit.

I think we are in the last days of disco as far as fixed media (actual artifacts you possess) is concerned.

Letting you own a physical object is bad business. At most, they can try to goad you into buying it again when the next generation improvement is available. That, and they can build planned obsolescence into DVD's by manufacturing them with poor scratch and UV protection. Still, if you take care of a DVD, it will last a very long time.

The next step is to control output by only selling streaming rentals. Hence, any fixed-physical copy is an illegal copy. Fortunately, you can still record shows off cable and satellite, so when it hits HBO and Showtime, it's fair game, but the copy you get will not be as good as DVD or blue ray since you will have to record it yourself.

These people want to make a dime every time you listen to a song or view something that they "own." Fair use is under a massive assault and it is taking longer and longer for works to enter the public domain.

Glad to hear someone is interested. I mean it is how most people here view their movies.

But forcing Redbox to purchase from secondary sources would crush their profitability.

Clearly, BD represents the last gen of optical disks. The fact that it was essentially released before they could really even manufacture disks (70% fail rates were common) shows that the window was seen as closing long ago.

This assumption caused studios to sell their movies at "rental pricing" of $119 25yrs ago because they wanted to continue to charge on a per viewing basis. When DVDs became so easy to manufacture and they found just how steep the penetration rates were they realized they were selling at a far higher profitablility than per consumption pricing would allow. Of course they want to continue to shift purchasing to a new format but why would people (in significant numbers) buy into a format that relies solely on quality when over and over again we see that consumers don't care enough about quality (just ask all the high quality audio formats). Besides, why would they want to rebuy the same title AGAIN?

Fair use is under attack and it is shocking what they are trying to do. I cannot imagine it will work but the mere suggestion makes my skin crawl.

My recordings off HBO, etc are of better quality than DVD but often we don't get OAR, hi-def audio, etc.

[YARN]

Originally Posted by HurricaneKid

My recordings off HBO, etc are of better quality than DVD but often we don't get OAR, hi-def audio, etc.

Really?

What are you using to record shows?

When I have used a DVD burner the quality has always been significantly lower even on the highest quality setting.

[HurricaneKid]

Originally Posted by YARN

Really?

What are you using to record shows?

When I have used a DVD burner the quality has always been significantly lower even on the highest quality setting.

I have a HD DVR from Dish; I can transfer files if I need to (but I don't often).

[Penarin]

For me, I still find some value in owning DVDs. For one thing, it's mine forever to watch anytime of day or night, and I don't have to worry about downloading, burning, other people scratching it up, or eating greasy KFC and then handling the disks (which seemed to be rather common back in the Blockbuster rental days).

As for BD, I'll get one sometime, and replace some of my favorites (not the whole freaking collection, of course). My current Oppo DVD player continues to amaze me with it's upconverting, and I'm sure BD players upconvert quite nicely.

But, unless we go 3D or something, I agree that at some point, the tech is good enough. 1080p BD seems plenty good to me. But they always have to sell the next big thing...

[QuotedForTruth]

Originally Posted by SamCat

This type of thinking will just push people to download more and more revenue will be lost...but then again no one has ssaid that any entertainment company has been ahead of the curve in their thinking.

.

[HurricaneKid]

Originally Posted by Penarin

For me, I still find some value in owning DVDs. For one thing, it's mine forever to watch anytime of day or night, and I don't have to worry about downloading, burning, other people scratching it up, or eating greasy KFC and then handling the disks (which seemed to be rather common back in the Blockbuster rental days).

As for BD, I'll get one sometime, and replace some of my favorites (not the whole freaking collection, of course). My current Oppo DVD player continues to amaze me with it's upconverting, and I'm sure BD players upconvert quite nicely.

But, unless we go 3D or something, I agree that at some point, the tech is good enough. 1080p BD seems plenty good to me. But they always have to sell the next big thing...

The Oppos are wonderful. The new Oppo BluRay player is a work of art.

3D is almost here. I haven't like what I have seen of the home variety but its not far away.

[YARN]

Originally Posted by HurricaneKid

I have a HD DVR from Dish; I can transfer files if I need to (but I don't often).

Hmm... hadn't thought of that...

[Bronco67]

Someone here who still loves discs, even though i just rent them(Blockbuster or Netflix). I hate the idea of downloading everything and keeping digital copies.

For one thing, I have no desire to own movies, when I can just rent it, because if I really need to watch it again -- I'll just rent it again.

The other problem I have with digital media is that its just vulnerable to many dangers -- misplacing somewhere on a hard drive, data corruption, hard drive failure, accidental deletion, etc -- just like photos.

I'm also not liking on the idea of all of our precious bandwidth being tied up while the entire world downloads 6GB copies of every movie and TV show that comes out, including the crappy ones. Bandwidth is not as limitless as everyone thinks.

Whatever happens in the future with our entertainment media, I hope the creators find a way to flourish and keep making my stupid movies and TV shows that I love so much. I'm not going to speak for anyone, but it seems like there are a lot of attitudes leaning toward entitlement to everything, without having to pay for it.

[YARN]

Originally Posted by Bronco67

Someone here who still loves discs, even though i just rent them(Blockbuster or Netflix). I hate the idea of downloading everything and keeping digital copies.

For one thing, I have no desire to own movies, when I can just rent it, because if I really need to watch it again -- I'll just rent it again.

The other problem I have with digital media is that its just vulnerable to many dangers -- misplacing somewhere on a hard drive, data corruption, hard drive failure, accidental deletion, etc -- just like photos.

I'm also not liking on the idea of all of our precious bandwidth being tied up while the entire world downloads 6GB copies of every movie and TV show that comes out, including the crappy ones. Bandwidth is not as limitless as everyone thinks.

Whatever happens in the future with our entertainment media, I hope the creators find a way to flourish and keep making my stupid movies and TV shows that I love so much. I'm not going to speak for anyone, but it seems like there are a lot of attitudes leaning toward entitlement to everything, without having to pay for it.

I like disks too, but for different reasons. If it is a disk - I own the disk after I have paid for it.A disk is a physical artifact that gives me old-world rights which strictly electronic media do not enjoy. Buy a digital book and it could disappear in the middle of the night. Lose your ITunes on your computer and you might have to buy all those songs all over again.

You logic actually makes sense for the new age. Don't waste space - pay for it when you want to watch - this is the logic of pay-per-play viewing. But why go to the video store?

Bandwidth is not unlimited, you can stream video.

[Bronco67]

Originally Posted by YARN

Bandwidth is not unlimited, you can stream video.

But when is that stream(or even a download) going to equal the transfer quality of a DVd movie? Also, even when streaming, the same amount of data will eventually come through.

[HurricaneKid]

Originally Posted by Bronco67

Someone here who still loves discs, even though i just rent them(Blockbuster or Netflix). I hate the idea of downloading everything and keeping digital copies.

For one thing, I have no desire to own movies, when I can just rent it, because if I really need to watch it again -- I'll just rent it again.

The other problem I have with digital media is that its just vulnerable to many dangers -- misplacing somewhere on a hard drive, data corruption, hard drive failure, accidental deletion, etc -- just like photos.

I'm also not liking on the idea of all of our precious bandwidth being tied up while the entire world downloads 6GB copies of every movie and TV show that comes out, including the crappy ones. Bandwidth is not as limitless as everyone thinks.

Whatever happens in the future with our entertainment media, I hope the creators find a way to flourish and keep making my stupid movies and TV shows that I love so much. I'm not going to speak for anyone, but it seems like there are a lot of attitudes leaning toward entitlement to everything, without having to pay for it.

I entirely agree with your point about bandwidth. We just don't have infrastructure to do this now. I think you are missing the point about digital media though. Its not meant to be kept and burnt. It is meant to be streamed once so it can be tracked and the studios can send you an invoice. Make no mistake about it, the studios are going after pay per use with downloads.

You also miss the point with rental. The studios don't want you to continue to rent. That is why they are altering the landscape in this fashion.

My problem is I don't want a 6GB (DVD quality) copy. I want a 45GB copy (Blu quality). I think I'm going to be left in the lurch on this one.

[HurricaneKid]

Originally Posted by YARN

I like disks too, but for different reasons. If it is a disk - I own the disk after I have paid for it.A disk is a physical artifact that gives me old-world rights which strictly electronic media do not enjoy. Buy a digital book and it could disappear in the middle of the night. Lose your ITunes on your computer and you might have to buy all those songs all over again.

You logic actually makes sense for the new age. Don't waste space - pay for it when you want to watch - this is the logic of pay-per-play viewing. But why go to the video store?

Bandwidth is not unlimited, you can stream video.

I think that within 5-10 years almost every movie will be available through a variety of merchants similar to Netflix's instant watch. You will be able to pay per play or have a subscription service. I just hope they work on the quality of the AQ and PQ. Rather than buy one movie a month you will be able to watch any movie ever made any time you want (17.99 DVD vs $17.99 Netflix sub). This is the problem the studios have. Their products are being priced out of the market.

[Bronco67]

Originally Posted by HurricaneKid

I think that within 5-10 years almost every movie will be available through a variety of merchants similar to Netflix's instant watch. You will be able to pay per play or have a subscription service. I just hope they work on the quality of the AQ and PQ. Rather than buy one movie a month you will be able to watch any movie ever made any time you want (17.99 DVD vs $17.99 Netflix sub). This is the problem the studios have. Their products are being priced out of the market.

In 5-10 years we'll be renting our movies from Lord Humungus, for 10 gallons of gas and a friendly ass rape.

[Steve Brandon]

Originally Posted by YARN

I think we are in the last days of disco as far as fixed media (actual artifacts you possess) is concerned.

Letting you own a physical object is bad business. At most, they can try to goad you into buying it again when the next generation improvement is available. That, and they can build planned obsolescence into DVD's by manufacturing them with poor scratch and UV protection. Still, if you take care of a DVD, it will last a very long time.

Eh, I'm sticking with physical media until I die, even if it means that there will never be any new mass-market physical media formats after CD and BluRay. I still buy my music on CD now, and I'll still buy my music on CD 40 years from now even if I have to mail order it because all the local music shops are long gone.

[HurricaneKid]

Originally Posted by Bronco67

In 5-10 years we'll be renting our movies from Lord Humungus, for 10 gallons of gas and a friendly ass rape.

Maybe 10 drops of oil! We will be well past peak oil by then.

Good to know Lord Hu will be in charge. I'll get in good with him now.

[blademoviereviews]

Originally Posted by HurricaneKid

I am prepared to play by the rules... until they force me not to.

What absurdity. "They forced me to peform an act that I knew was both morally wrong and criminal prior to my pursuance of such behavior." Only when it concerns the illegal downloading of movies and music does such an idiotic line of dialogue somehow receive widespread support.

There is no ambiguity in US copyright law. Anyone responsible for the production and distribution of a movie should be paid for by those who enjoy it, regardless of the impact it may have on your individual time and wallet.

I don't care if someone downloads a movie illegally. It has no personal affect on me. But it's often amusing to see people use the profitability of a studio as the scapegoat to excuse their unlawful actions, which were performed solely to satisfy one's own self-interest.

Sorry to burst everyone's bubble, but having access to an affordable movie at the most opportune of times is not something we are entitled to. Nor should it be.

[HurricaneKid]

Originally Posted by Steve Brandon

Eh, I'm sticking with physical media until I die, even if it means that there will never be any new mass-market physical media formats after CD and BluRay. I still buy my music on CD now, and I'll still buy my music on CD 40 years from now even if I have to mail order it because all the local music shops are long gone.

I don't think there is a 1 in a million chance at there being physical media 50 years from now.

[Steve Brandon]

Eh, there will still be some physical media as long as physical media people like myself demand it.

[HurricaneKid]

Originally Posted by blademoviereviews

What absurdity. "They forced me to peform an act that I knew was both morally wrong and criminal prior to my pursuance of such behavior." Only when it concerns the illegal downloading of movies and music does such an idiotic line of dialogue somehow receive widespread support.

There is no ambiguity in US copyright law. Anyone responsible for the production and distribution of a movie should be paid for by those who enjoy it, regardless of the impact it may have on your individual time and wallet.

I don't care if someone downloads a movie illegally. It has no personal affect on me. But it's often amusing to see people use the profitability of a studio as the scapegoat to excuse their unlawful actions, which were performed solely to satisfy one's own self-interest.

Sorry to burst everyone's bubble, but having access to an affordable movie at the most opportune of times is not something we are entitled to. Nor should it be.

I know its a cop out. But when they restrict access, increase costs, limit quality, it gets quite easy to rationalize.

Understand, I don't DL movies. I would rather pay to watch them as they were meant to be seen. I just hate to see this tact taken. Its a losing strategy for everyone involved. This is why I made the thread.

I have no issue with the studios profiting. It is a requirement to have movies made. My issue is the draconion steps they are taking to make profits. It is detrimental to the consumers of movies and is an established losing strategy for the studio.