Question:
anyone see bbc breakfast this morning?
it was funny to watch as blockbuster claimed that warner were trying to drive them out of business.
lol
i personally hate the fact that there is a rental only window on dvd releases, like 'the others' etc.
if people want to rent then fine, put them on rental and retail at same time.
But Blockbusters argument with WB isn't over rental windows. The statistics seem to show that the rental business benefits from same day rental/sell thru releases due to the marketing effort of the sell-thru distributor. The argument seems more to do with the increased prices that WB expects the rental firms to pay for the discs/vids that they rent to the public.
Scott
P.S. I did see BBC breakfast this morning - dont know why I still watch it, because it continues to disappoint with its superficial analysis. I thought that the slot on WB/BB completely missed the point.
why only hate the rental only window on dvd's what about vhs!.
also..
rental only dvds for a few months then going to sales are important to video shops. since the window closed i have not been in a video shop. as i buy all dvds i want.
so the video shop is losing money, and if they lose money they get that bit closer to going out of business.
makes sence to me.
i understand from those people i know who buy dvds they rarely do from video shops, more often from HMV or the web.
i am of course playing devils advocate here as i want dvds to buy asap, but the point here is no rental only window does effect video shop sales.
because i don't use vhs.
i don't agree with the rental only window either, but i mentioned it on dvd because i use dvd not vhs.
Originally posted by dean richardson
so the video shop is losing money, and if they lose money they get that bit closer to going out of business.
makes sence to me.
yea i understand what their corporate reason is, but that does not matter to me, i don't rent dvds, and to have to wait another 3 months to be able to buy dvds is rubbish. if people want to rent dvds they rent them, consumers get ripped off with this rental only window system.
Why do people rent anyway? It's cheaper to buy DVDs and sell them if you don't like them, especially if your friends do the same thing and you borrow each others discs.
I saw the sign in Blockbuster about Oceans 11 the other evening when I bought They Live.
I noticed recently that Blockbuster didn't seem to have any stock of a new film (can't remember which one, but I'm sure it was a Buena Vista long rental window title - might've been The Others?). But they had stacks of ex-rental copies which they were trying to sell for £17.99 which they didn't seem to be able to shift.
Oh well, it made me laugh...
Warners did the same thing over Training Day as well - They wanted to charge £150 per copy of the film (the usual price is £50-70) and it really makes no sense for a shop to pay that as it means they have to buy less copies which means less money for everyone - but then they couldn't even sell the discs on at the end of it all.
As for Oceans 11 though, well the store i work at (choices) has about 30-40 copies on video and dvd so maybe they are being funny with Blockbuster?
yea i understand what their corporate reason is, but that does not matter to me, i don't rent dvds, and to have to wait another 3 months to be able to buy dvds is rubbish. if people want to rent dvds they rent them, consumers get ripped off with this rental only window system
how are you being ripped off?
you dont rent and you buy it 3 months later. same cost as if you dont rent and buy it 3 months earlier!!
the only thing that is happening is your choice is being limited for a short period. if you are that bothered you should have bought oceans 11 on region 1 a few months ago anyway!
Originally posted by GrossePointeJack
Warners did the same thing over Training Day as well - They wanted to charge £150 per copy of the film (the usual price is £50-70) and it really makes no sense for a shop to pay that as it means they have to buy less copies which means less money for everyone - but then they couldn't even sell the discs on at the end of it all.
As for Oceans 11 though, well the store i work at (choices) has about 30-40 copies on video and dvd so maybe they are being funny with Blockbuster?
I thought the "rental" price of Warner DVDs was closer to £30? (I could be wrong) Blockbuster are objecting because they think they should be able to buy it for the same £13 Virgin or whoever pay..
I didn't see the BBC news thing so I may be way out of date here.
Blockbuster used to negotiate deals with the major distributors where they duplicated their own VHS cassettes and paid on actual rentals not on stock copies. This meant that they could fill the shelves with new titles ("Phantom Menace" springs to mind) and then offer their rental promise that you could always get a copy or next time it was free. The tape duplication is very cheap when you do it in bulk for loads of strores so BB must have got used to the almost pure profit this generates.
Other smaller operators were still forced to buy full price £50-60 copies and could never compete.
I assume with DVD and rental resales the distributors have got wise and are now attempting to put the squeeze back on BB.
Originally posted by dean richardson
how are you being ripped off?
you dont rent and you buy it 3 months later. same cost as if you dont rent and buy it 3 months earlier!!
the only thing that is happening is your choice is being limited for a short period. if you are that bothered you should have bought oceans 11 on region 1 a few months ago anyway!
What you are advocating is the restriction of choice to enable some companies to make money. The choice between buying the DVD on it's release or to rent. Now if I want to buy it, why should I have to wait 3 months so that I can watch the movie. If I have friends around and we want to watch this movie, I am forced to rent it. To me, that is unacceptabe and the sooner it is stamped out the better.
Although I have a multi-region player I think your comment on Region 1 is bit flippant, not everybody has a multi-region player.
Originally posted by GrossePointeJack
As for Oceans 11 though, well the store i work at (choices) has about 30-40 copies on video and dvd so maybe they are being funny with Blockbuster?
Saw a few weeks back that Choices gave in to Warner so that why they have Oceans 11 for rental.
However they also said that Chocies owned a distribution company and now Blockbuster will not stock their titles.
My view is get rid of rental windows as I buy all the DVDs I want to watch normally waiting for the sales 6 months after release in the UK.
For the lazy renters they should allow Sky Box Office and Front Row to have PPV imemdiately without the current 6 month wait. In the US the window is only a month or so before PPV.
Now if I want to buy it, why should I have to wait 3 months so that I can watch the movie. If I have friends around and we want to watch this movie, I am forced to rent it.
why stop there! why should you pay to watch it once in the cinema when you want the choice to buy it so should we bring dvd window forward 6 months ?
i stress again i am playing devils advocate!
Originally posted by SShaw
But Blockbusters argument with WB isn't over rental windows. The statistics seem to show that the rental business benefits from same day rental/sell thru releases due to the marketing effort of the sell-thru distributor. The argument seems more to do with the increased prices that WB expects the rental firms to pay for the discs/vids that they rent to the public.
Mate, I could not have said it better myself!
Originally posted by malcy
Saw a few weeks back that Choices gave in to Warner so that why they have Oceans 11 for rental.
However they also said that Chocies owned a distribution company and now Blockbuster will not stock their titles.
Incorrect. The only titles Blockbuster do not stock are Warner and Warner distributed films. We would not have had Bend it like Beckham before because it was distributed by Warner but they (Helikon - I think thats their name) got their own dist channels due to us not taking a previous film of theirs (which was dist by warner.).
This is the reason why the cover has a 'not for rental' notice on it.
Originally posted by andymc
I didn't see the BBC news thing so I may be way out of date here.
Blockbuster used to negotiate deals with the major distributors where they duplicated their own VHS cassettes and paid on actual rentals not on stock copies. This meant that they could fill the shelves with new titles ("Phantom Menace" springs to mind) and then offer their rental promise that you could always get a copy or next time it was free. The tape duplication is very cheap when you do it in bulk for loads of strores so BB must have got used to the almost pure profit this generates.
Other smaller operators were still forced to buy full price £50-60 copies and could never compete.
I assume with DVD and rental resales the distributors have got wise and are now attempting to put the squeeze back on BB.
Your almost 100% correct other than the I assume with dvd and rental resales the distributors have got wise and are now attempting to put the squeeze back on BB. Line.
You also foget the Only Major taking Warner titles is Choices. Global, Apollo, Blockbuster, VideoBox and most (if not all) the Indies are showing the same support.
The problem is the high price that Warner are now charging for rental stock. Choices must be quite happy about paying through the nose for a title when they can't (as far as I'm aware anyway) buy from a dist for 11 quid but have to pay upto 30 quid for it instead.
Totally with the retailers on this one - to charge 150 quid for a rental copy is simply ludicrous - this means that a disc has to be rented over 50 times before a profit is shown! I really don't see how this can be done.
Warner are doing the typically American corporate thing - trying to browbeat and dictate. I for one will not be buying Oceans 11 on retail as a matter of principle. I'll wait for a second hand copy courtesy of the forums.
Originally posted by stefmcd
Totally with the retailers on this one - to charge 150 quid for a rental copy is simply ludicrous - this means that a disc has to be rented over 50 times before a profit is shown! I really don't see how this can be done.
Warner are doing the typically American corporate thing - trying to browbeat and dictate. I for one will not be buying Oceans 11 on retail as a matter of principle. I'll wait for a second hand copy courtesy of the forums.
Blockbusters aren't being charged £150!
For simultaneous WB Rental/Retail releases a retailer will pay about £13 for a copy to sell, and about £30 for a copy to rent out.(maybe a bit more - I don't know exact figures)
Seems fair to me, Blockbuster are trying to sell it as some kind of consumer choice issue, when it's WB whose policies give the consumer the best choice at the moment.
Originally posted by dean richardson
why stop there! why should you pay to watch it once in the cinema when you want the choice to buy it so should we bring dvd window forward 6 months ?
i stress again i am playing devils advocate!
Eh??... I don't get the opportunity to go to the Cinema. I cannot buy the cinema 'format' of the movie so that argument is irrelevant.
We are talking about releasing a movie onto DVD and then withholding the release to allow certain companies make money from consumers. That is the only reason why DVD's are released on the rental market before you 'allow' consumers the chance to purchase the product. Why are they afraid to release the movie for rental and purchase at the same time. If it's released at the same time, you then give a consumer the choice of buying or renting?? It's not much to ask... is it?
Does Blockbuster & the other chains, do a revenue share scheme with those companys that bring out DVDs same day rental/retail (e.g. EV titles, Columbia etc) or do they coin in loads a money on 3.75 rentals for dvds that cost 13.00 odd (dealer)????
oh dear here we go again, i think i'm going to have to write an article on this for my site and just put a link in every time this starts.
1. i manage a video shop so i know OK
2. warner wants to charge £24.00 for a vhs copy and £19.00 for a dvd.
3. Rental copies (i.e. with a window) from other companies cost up to £55 on both VHS and DVD
4. Choices own (or are owned by the same people that own) a distribution company called mosaic movies. Blockbuster et al have decided not to stock any of their releases either but mosaic managed to chose the time blockbuster said that to strategically move all releases for the rest of the year to at least january next year, causing me to have to wait longer to see buffy in harvard man.
5. while it is true that Helkon SK broke their distribution ties with warner over this issue i am unaware of any release of theirs that was boycotted while their deal was still i place. to my knowledge the first title they were due to release was the mothman prophecies and the deal was broken so they could release this to rental.
6. the boycott includes titles by icon which are distributed by warner, hence no we were soldiers.
7. i hope the boycott works and we get our films cheaper but if it doesn't i don't care. we have stocked all warner titles since this began and have proved there is still plenty of money to be made, yes an extra tenner a title would be nice but as it is training day has still made our shop nearly £1000 profit from 5 vhs and 3 dvd.
daniel - so what u are basically saying is that warner wanted to charge u less for dvd's i.e. not 55 quid but 19 quid - but that would be without the rental window period? correct or not?
dvd have always been straight to retail from warner so the price of those went up from £13.61 (major title £19.99 retail) to £19.00
vhs used to have a window, that has been lost but the price has dropped for £50 (£37 after our usual discount) to £24.00
I'd still like to see Warners holding out until May/June next year until Harry Potter comes out, and then watch Blockbuster's resolve crumble...
Originally posted by danielzavitz
oh dear here we go again, i think i'm going to have to write an article on this for my site and just put a link in every time this starts.
1. i manage a video shop so i know OK
2. warner wants to charge £24.00 for a vhs copy and £19.00 for a dvd.
3. Rental copies (i.e. with a window) from other companies cost up to £55 on both VHS and DVD
4. Choices own (or are owned by the same people that own) a distribution company called mosaic movies. Blockbuster et al have decided not to stock any of their releases either but mosaic managed to chose the time blockbuster said that to strategically move all releases for the rest of the year to at least january next year, causing me to have to wait longer to see buffy in harvard man.
5. while it is true that Helkon SK broke their distribution ties with warner over this issue i am unaware of any release of theirs that was boycotted while their deal was still i place. to my knowledge the first title they were due to release was the mothman prophecies and the deal was broken so they could release this to rental.
6. the boycott includes titles by icon which are distributed by warner, hence no we were soldiers.
7. i hope the boycott works and we get our films cheaper but if it doesn't i don't care. we have stocked all warner titles since this began and have proved there is still plenty of money to be made, yes an extra tenner a title would be nice but as it is training day has still made our shop nearly £1000 profit from 5 vhs and 3 dvd.
Intresting points and some nice figures there (Re: training day).
I'm glad that you have an opinion thats not just about flaming!
Well, my local video shop (Wasp), simply buys the retail versions and rents them.
:norty:
Originally posted by danielzavitz
oh dear here we go again, i think i'm going to have to write an article on this for my site and just put a link in every time this starts.
I think that would be handy.
2. warner wants to charge £24.00 for a vhs copy and £19.00 for a dvd.
3. Rental copies (i.e. with a window) from other companies cost up to £55 on both VHS and DVD
Okay - so Warner are still charging significantly less than other companies do for windowed titles - the problem is that they want £19 from dealers instead of the £11 that consumers pay. An £8 increase. That about right?
7. i hope the boycott works and we get our films cheaper but if it doesn't i don't care. we have stocked all warner titles since this began and have proved there is still plenty of money to be made, yes an extra tenner a title would be nice but as it is training day has still made our shop nearly £1000 profit from 5 vhs and 3 dvd.
Obviously you'd be happy to get stuff cheaper - goes without saying. But from an outlay of £177 you've made nearly a £1000 profit - so had £1150 quids worth of rentals. I've got to say - from those figures I'm certainly not on the side of Blockbuster...
Originally posted by Mark Wilson
You also foget the Only Major taking Warner titles is Choices. Global, Apollo, Blockbuster, VideoBox and most (if not all) the Indies are showing the same support.
Looks like Global have thrown the towel in... Warner films now available to rent from their shops. (In the Manchester area anyhow)
yup all global stores are now stocking warner titles, apparently they've been losing a lot of market share to blockbuster and have decided that warner are not going to budge so have taken the oppertunity to get a headstart on blockbuster. i always said oceans eleven would be a big turning point in this one, i'd expect another major to go by the time scooby doo comes out.
Originally posted by andrew_lee
But they [Blockbuster] had stacks of ex-rental copies which they were trying to sell for £17.99 which they didn't seem to be able to shift.
Oh well, it made me laugh...
Yeah - this is crazy. I reject UK DVD prices as they are in the main high street retailers but to imagine that £17.99 for a second-hand copy is acceptable simply proves that there really are unbelieveable morons frequenting Blockbusters when it comes to buying DVDs at a sensible price. After all, BB wouldn't sell them at this price if they didn't sell at this price I guess.
And more specifically, I saw Ocean's Eleven in early January this year and then it came out for theatrical UK release about six weeks later if I remember correctly. My R4 DVD arrived in early June at a shipped cost of around £11. Now, some 4-5 months later the UK version arrives which is an identical disc essentially but in an annoying "snapper" case which costs "too much" (says me) retail and apparently "much too much" rental (says BB).
I don't believe BB will be able to win their fight ultimately since they really are the proverbial "Daivid" in this encounter and since I prefer my friendly local rental store because they are personable, knowledgeable and run a much better service I really haven't been affected by this. However, I'm far more annoyed about the differences in territorial marketing, pricing and scheduling.
Just to end on a more positive note, I'll wave a "not all UK DVD retailers are rip-off merchants" flag by saying that I've been very impressed by the local Fopp record store which has a smattering of titles at (mostly) reasonable prices. I like what they try to do for CDs and their DVD philosophy seems to match. However, for the non-impulse buys, I'm still a DeVoTeD fan through and through! :)
it was funny to watch as blockbuster claimed that warner were trying to drive them out of business.
lol
i personally hate the fact that there is a rental only window on dvd releases, like 'the others' etc.
if people want to rent then fine, put them on rental and retail at same time.
Answers:
But Blockbusters argument with WB isn't over rental windows. The statistics seem to show that the rental business benefits from same day rental/sell thru releases due to the marketing effort of the sell-thru distributor. The argument seems more to do with the increased prices that WB expects the rental firms to pay for the discs/vids that they rent to the public.
Scott
P.S. I did see BBC breakfast this morning - dont know why I still watch it, because it continues to disappoint with its superficial analysis. I thought that the slot on WB/BB completely missed the point.
Answers:
why only hate the rental only window on dvd's what about vhs!.
also..
rental only dvds for a few months then going to sales are important to video shops. since the window closed i have not been in a video shop. as i buy all dvds i want.
so the video shop is losing money, and if they lose money they get that bit closer to going out of business.
makes sence to me.
i understand from those people i know who buy dvds they rarely do from video shops, more often from HMV or the web.
i am of course playing devils advocate here as i want dvds to buy asap, but the point here is no rental only window does effect video shop sales.
Answers:
because i don't use vhs.
i don't agree with the rental only window either, but i mentioned it on dvd because i use dvd not vhs.
Answers:
Originally posted by dean richardson
so the video shop is losing money, and if they lose money they get that bit closer to going out of business.
makes sence to me.
yea i understand what their corporate reason is, but that does not matter to me, i don't rent dvds, and to have to wait another 3 months to be able to buy dvds is rubbish. if people want to rent dvds they rent them, consumers get ripped off with this rental only window system.
Answers:
Why do people rent anyway? It's cheaper to buy DVDs and sell them if you don't like them, especially if your friends do the same thing and you borrow each others discs.
Answers:
I saw the sign in Blockbuster about Oceans 11 the other evening when I bought They Live.
I noticed recently that Blockbuster didn't seem to have any stock of a new film (can't remember which one, but I'm sure it was a Buena Vista long rental window title - might've been The Others?). But they had stacks of ex-rental copies which they were trying to sell for £17.99 which they didn't seem to be able to shift.
Oh well, it made me laugh...
Answers:
Warners did the same thing over Training Day as well - They wanted to charge £150 per copy of the film (the usual price is £50-70) and it really makes no sense for a shop to pay that as it means they have to buy less copies which means less money for everyone - but then they couldn't even sell the discs on at the end of it all.
As for Oceans 11 though, well the store i work at (choices) has about 30-40 copies on video and dvd so maybe they are being funny with Blockbuster?
Answers:
yea i understand what their corporate reason is, but that does not matter to me, i don't rent dvds, and to have to wait another 3 months to be able to buy dvds is rubbish. if people want to rent dvds they rent them, consumers get ripped off with this rental only window system
how are you being ripped off?
you dont rent and you buy it 3 months later. same cost as if you dont rent and buy it 3 months earlier!!
the only thing that is happening is your choice is being limited for a short period. if you are that bothered you should have bought oceans 11 on region 1 a few months ago anyway!
Answers:
Originally posted by GrossePointeJack
Warners did the same thing over Training Day as well - They wanted to charge £150 per copy of the film (the usual price is £50-70) and it really makes no sense for a shop to pay that as it means they have to buy less copies which means less money for everyone - but then they couldn't even sell the discs on at the end of it all.
As for Oceans 11 though, well the store i work at (choices) has about 30-40 copies on video and dvd so maybe they are being funny with Blockbuster?
I thought the "rental" price of Warner DVDs was closer to £30? (I could be wrong) Blockbuster are objecting because they think they should be able to buy it for the same £13 Virgin or whoever pay..
Answers:
I didn't see the BBC news thing so I may be way out of date here.
Blockbuster used to negotiate deals with the major distributors where they duplicated their own VHS cassettes and paid on actual rentals not on stock copies. This meant that they could fill the shelves with new titles ("Phantom Menace" springs to mind) and then offer their rental promise that you could always get a copy or next time it was free. The tape duplication is very cheap when you do it in bulk for loads of strores so BB must have got used to the almost pure profit this generates.
Other smaller operators were still forced to buy full price £50-60 copies and could never compete.
I assume with DVD and rental resales the distributors have got wise and are now attempting to put the squeeze back on BB.
Answers:
Originally posted by dean richardson
how are you being ripped off?
you dont rent and you buy it 3 months later. same cost as if you dont rent and buy it 3 months earlier!!
the only thing that is happening is your choice is being limited for a short period. if you are that bothered you should have bought oceans 11 on region 1 a few months ago anyway!
What you are advocating is the restriction of choice to enable some companies to make money. The choice between buying the DVD on it's release or to rent. Now if I want to buy it, why should I have to wait 3 months so that I can watch the movie. If I have friends around and we want to watch this movie, I am forced to rent it. To me, that is unacceptabe and the sooner it is stamped out the better.
Although I have a multi-region player I think your comment on Region 1 is bit flippant, not everybody has a multi-region player.
Answers:
Originally posted by GrossePointeJack
As for Oceans 11 though, well the store i work at (choices) has about 30-40 copies on video and dvd so maybe they are being funny with Blockbuster?
Saw a few weeks back that Choices gave in to Warner so that why they have Oceans 11 for rental.
However they also said that Chocies owned a distribution company and now Blockbuster will not stock their titles.
My view is get rid of rental windows as I buy all the DVDs I want to watch normally waiting for the sales 6 months after release in the UK.
For the lazy renters they should allow Sky Box Office and Front Row to have PPV imemdiately without the current 6 month wait. In the US the window is only a month or so before PPV.
Answers:
Now if I want to buy it, why should I have to wait 3 months so that I can watch the movie. If I have friends around and we want to watch this movie, I am forced to rent it.
why stop there! why should you pay to watch it once in the cinema when you want the choice to buy it so should we bring dvd window forward 6 months ?
i stress again i am playing devils advocate!
Answers:
Originally posted by SShaw
But Blockbusters argument with WB isn't over rental windows. The statistics seem to show that the rental business benefits from same day rental/sell thru releases due to the marketing effort of the sell-thru distributor. The argument seems more to do with the increased prices that WB expects the rental firms to pay for the discs/vids that they rent to the public.
Mate, I could not have said it better myself!
Answers:
Originally posted by malcy
Saw a few weeks back that Choices gave in to Warner so that why they have Oceans 11 for rental.
However they also said that Chocies owned a distribution company and now Blockbuster will not stock their titles.
Incorrect. The only titles Blockbuster do not stock are Warner and Warner distributed films. We would not have had Bend it like Beckham before because it was distributed by Warner but they (Helikon - I think thats their name) got their own dist channels due to us not taking a previous film of theirs (which was dist by warner.).
Answers:
This is the reason why the cover has a 'not for rental' notice on it.
Answers:
Originally posted by andymc
I didn't see the BBC news thing so I may be way out of date here.
Blockbuster used to negotiate deals with the major distributors where they duplicated their own VHS cassettes and paid on actual rentals not on stock copies. This meant that they could fill the shelves with new titles ("Phantom Menace" springs to mind) and then offer their rental promise that you could always get a copy or next time it was free. The tape duplication is very cheap when you do it in bulk for loads of strores so BB must have got used to the almost pure profit this generates.
Other smaller operators were still forced to buy full price £50-60 copies and could never compete.
I assume with DVD and rental resales the distributors have got wise and are now attempting to put the squeeze back on BB.
Your almost 100% correct other than the I assume with dvd and rental resales the distributors have got wise and are now attempting to put the squeeze back on BB. Line.
You also foget the Only Major taking Warner titles is Choices. Global, Apollo, Blockbuster, VideoBox and most (if not all) the Indies are showing the same support.
The problem is the high price that Warner are now charging for rental stock. Choices must be quite happy about paying through the nose for a title when they can't (as far as I'm aware anyway) buy from a dist for 11 quid but have to pay upto 30 quid for it instead.
Answers:
Totally with the retailers on this one - to charge 150 quid for a rental copy is simply ludicrous - this means that a disc has to be rented over 50 times before a profit is shown! I really don't see how this can be done.
Warner are doing the typically American corporate thing - trying to browbeat and dictate. I for one will not be buying Oceans 11 on retail as a matter of principle. I'll wait for a second hand copy courtesy of the forums.
Answers:
Originally posted by stefmcd
Totally with the retailers on this one - to charge 150 quid for a rental copy is simply ludicrous - this means that a disc has to be rented over 50 times before a profit is shown! I really don't see how this can be done.
Warner are doing the typically American corporate thing - trying to browbeat and dictate. I for one will not be buying Oceans 11 on retail as a matter of principle. I'll wait for a second hand copy courtesy of the forums.
Blockbusters aren't being charged £150!
For simultaneous WB Rental/Retail releases a retailer will pay about £13 for a copy to sell, and about £30 for a copy to rent out.(maybe a bit more - I don't know exact figures)
Seems fair to me, Blockbuster are trying to sell it as some kind of consumer choice issue, when it's WB whose policies give the consumer the best choice at the moment.
Answers:
Originally posted by dean richardson
why stop there! why should you pay to watch it once in the cinema when you want the choice to buy it so should we bring dvd window forward 6 months ?
i stress again i am playing devils advocate!
Eh??... I don't get the opportunity to go to the Cinema. I cannot buy the cinema 'format' of the movie so that argument is irrelevant.
We are talking about releasing a movie onto DVD and then withholding the release to allow certain companies make money from consumers. That is the only reason why DVD's are released on the rental market before you 'allow' consumers the chance to purchase the product. Why are they afraid to release the movie for rental and purchase at the same time. If it's released at the same time, you then give a consumer the choice of buying or renting?? It's not much to ask... is it?
Answers:
Does Blockbuster & the other chains, do a revenue share scheme with those companys that bring out DVDs same day rental/retail (e.g. EV titles, Columbia etc) or do they coin in loads a money on 3.75 rentals for dvds that cost 13.00 odd (dealer)????
Answers:
oh dear here we go again, i think i'm going to have to write an article on this for my site and just put a link in every time this starts.
1. i manage a video shop so i know OK
2. warner wants to charge £24.00 for a vhs copy and £19.00 for a dvd.
3. Rental copies (i.e. with a window) from other companies cost up to £55 on both VHS and DVD
4. Choices own (or are owned by the same people that own) a distribution company called mosaic movies. Blockbuster et al have decided not to stock any of their releases either but mosaic managed to chose the time blockbuster said that to strategically move all releases for the rest of the year to at least january next year, causing me to have to wait longer to see buffy in harvard man.
5. while it is true that Helkon SK broke their distribution ties with warner over this issue i am unaware of any release of theirs that was boycotted while their deal was still i place. to my knowledge the first title they were due to release was the mothman prophecies and the deal was broken so they could release this to rental.
6. the boycott includes titles by icon which are distributed by warner, hence no we were soldiers.
7. i hope the boycott works and we get our films cheaper but if it doesn't i don't care. we have stocked all warner titles since this began and have proved there is still plenty of money to be made, yes an extra tenner a title would be nice but as it is training day has still made our shop nearly £1000 profit from 5 vhs and 3 dvd.
Answers:
daniel - so what u are basically saying is that warner wanted to charge u less for dvd's i.e. not 55 quid but 19 quid - but that would be without the rental window period? correct or not?
Answers:
dvd have always been straight to retail from warner so the price of those went up from £13.61 (major title £19.99 retail) to £19.00
vhs used to have a window, that has been lost but the price has dropped for £50 (£37 after our usual discount) to £24.00
Answers:
I'd still like to see Warners holding out until May/June next year until Harry Potter comes out, and then watch Blockbuster's resolve crumble...
Answers:
Originally posted by danielzavitz
oh dear here we go again, i think i'm going to have to write an article on this for my site and just put a link in every time this starts.
1. i manage a video shop so i know OK
2. warner wants to charge £24.00 for a vhs copy and £19.00 for a dvd.
3. Rental copies (i.e. with a window) from other companies cost up to £55 on both VHS and DVD
4. Choices own (or are owned by the same people that own) a distribution company called mosaic movies. Blockbuster et al have decided not to stock any of their releases either but mosaic managed to chose the time blockbuster said that to strategically move all releases for the rest of the year to at least january next year, causing me to have to wait longer to see buffy in harvard man.
5. while it is true that Helkon SK broke their distribution ties with warner over this issue i am unaware of any release of theirs that was boycotted while their deal was still i place. to my knowledge the first title they were due to release was the mothman prophecies and the deal was broken so they could release this to rental.
6. the boycott includes titles by icon which are distributed by warner, hence no we were soldiers.
7. i hope the boycott works and we get our films cheaper but if it doesn't i don't care. we have stocked all warner titles since this began and have proved there is still plenty of money to be made, yes an extra tenner a title would be nice but as it is training day has still made our shop nearly £1000 profit from 5 vhs and 3 dvd.
Intresting points and some nice figures there (Re: training day).
I'm glad that you have an opinion thats not just about flaming!
Answers:
Well, my local video shop (Wasp), simply buys the retail versions and rents them.
:norty:
Answers:
Originally posted by danielzavitz
oh dear here we go again, i think i'm going to have to write an article on this for my site and just put a link in every time this starts.
I think that would be handy.
2. warner wants to charge £24.00 for a vhs copy and £19.00 for a dvd.
3. Rental copies (i.e. with a window) from other companies cost up to £55 on both VHS and DVD
Okay - so Warner are still charging significantly less than other companies do for windowed titles - the problem is that they want £19 from dealers instead of the £11 that consumers pay. An £8 increase. That about right?
7. i hope the boycott works and we get our films cheaper but if it doesn't i don't care. we have stocked all warner titles since this began and have proved there is still plenty of money to be made, yes an extra tenner a title would be nice but as it is training day has still made our shop nearly £1000 profit from 5 vhs and 3 dvd.
Obviously you'd be happy to get stuff cheaper - goes without saying. But from an outlay of £177 you've made nearly a £1000 profit - so had £1150 quids worth of rentals. I've got to say - from those figures I'm certainly not on the side of Blockbuster...
Answers:
Originally posted by Mark Wilson
You also foget the Only Major taking Warner titles is Choices. Global, Apollo, Blockbuster, VideoBox and most (if not all) the Indies are showing the same support.
Looks like Global have thrown the towel in... Warner films now available to rent from their shops. (In the Manchester area anyhow)
Answers:
yup all global stores are now stocking warner titles, apparently they've been losing a lot of market share to blockbuster and have decided that warner are not going to budge so have taken the oppertunity to get a headstart on blockbuster. i always said oceans eleven would be a big turning point in this one, i'd expect another major to go by the time scooby doo comes out.
Answers:
Originally posted by andrew_lee
But they [Blockbuster] had stacks of ex-rental copies which they were trying to sell for £17.99 which they didn't seem to be able to shift.
Oh well, it made me laugh...
Yeah - this is crazy. I reject UK DVD prices as they are in the main high street retailers but to imagine that £17.99 for a second-hand copy is acceptable simply proves that there really are unbelieveable morons frequenting Blockbusters when it comes to buying DVDs at a sensible price. After all, BB wouldn't sell them at this price if they didn't sell at this price I guess.
And more specifically, I saw Ocean's Eleven in early January this year and then it came out for theatrical UK release about six weeks later if I remember correctly. My R4 DVD arrived in early June at a shipped cost of around £11. Now, some 4-5 months later the UK version arrives which is an identical disc essentially but in an annoying "snapper" case which costs "too much" (says me) retail and apparently "much too much" rental (says BB).
I don't believe BB will be able to win their fight ultimately since they really are the proverbial "Daivid" in this encounter and since I prefer my friendly local rental store because they are personable, knowledgeable and run a much better service I really haven't been affected by this. However, I'm far more annoyed about the differences in territorial marketing, pricing and scheduling.
Just to end on a more positive note, I'll wave a "not all UK DVD retailers are rip-off merchants" flag by saying that I've been very impressed by the local Fopp record store which has a smattering of titles at (mostly) reasonable prices. I like what they try to do for CDs and their DVD philosophy seems to match. However, for the non-impulse buys, I'm still a DeVoTeD fan through and through! :)
1 2