DVD Talk
Studios dastardly plan to split TV season sets? [Archive] - DVD Talk Forum
 
Best Sellers
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
The Longest Day
Buy: $54.99 $24.99
9.
10.
DVD Blowouts
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Alien [Blu-ray]
Buy: $19.99 $9.99
8.
9.
10.

PDA
DVD Reviews

View Full Version : Studios dastardly plan to split TV season sets?


Easy
07-13-04, 08:50 AM
This guy claims they are going to do just that! Interesting read anyway.....

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htforum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=204359

mzupeman2
07-13-04, 09:02 AM
You know, it IS possible... but there'd be a lot of cheesed off people. Stuff like Transformers or GI Joe is split up because of the huge number of episodes in a season, where 'Sex And The City Season 6 Part 1' was in order to keep up with the release schedule for Sex And The City.... but the entire show had just barely ended on HBO.... so it had to accomodate for that.

chanster
07-13-04, 09:33 AM
I stopped buying Sex in the City when they inflated the prices. Season 5 was a complete rip and so was the splitting of the final season.

matome
07-13-04, 09:40 AM
I'm glad the Buffy series will be finshed before this practice begins to take place. Stick with full season sets. If you want to sample a series, rent from Netflix first.

ZackR
07-13-04, 09:46 AM
I'll just post what I posted over at HTF on this topic:
------------------------------------------------------------

OK, well, what's wrong with wanting to make money? You see, in my opinion, these studios have zero and I do mean zero obligation to release this stuff at all. They only do so to make money. Period. The shows were only aired in the first place to make money. Period. It is a moot point here because the price of the 2 split sets is 1 cent less than season 1. So, what's the problem? And even if it were more expensive, it is their prerogative to do so. They want to make money. They certainly don't have any obligation to us to release the stuff. People often bitch and moan on here about X-Files being expensive...so what? Obviously they have sold well enough that Fox continued to release all the seasons at that point, so why wouldn't they sell them at that price. It's called capitalism. Shoot, if X-Files sets sold well at at $300 a season, then I would expect the studio to release it at that price. I wouldn't like it personally, but I wouldn't blame them for doing it. If I were in charge of the studio, I would do whatever necessary to maximize profits. Once the price got to a point that sales suffered to an extent that the profits were hurt, then I would cut back the price until maximum profit is received. Simple economics. Same thing with people whining about, "Well I bought all 40 volumes of Star Trek: TOS and now they come out in season sets and that's not fair to those of us who bought the originals." Well, so what? Paramount maximized sales to those willing to shell out the $$$ for the single discs and now they want to release season sets for those of us who didn't spring for the 40 discs before. Again, so what? Sounds like good marketing and a good financial move to me. Now all of those who didn't buy the single discs (like me) will buy the season sets. More money for Paramount. Good for them! Seriously, what's with all this "evil companies wanting to make more money" crap. Of course they want to make more money. That is why they exist!!! They don't release these shows out of kindness so you will enjoy them. They release these shows so they can make money. That is the whole point. I see absolutely zero problem with that idea. NONE WHATSOEVER. I don't go to work every day just because I an a nice guy or something. I go to work because I want to make money. If I were in their shoes, I would market the products to maximize profits. If they do not do that, then they aren't really doing their jobs. So, while I am not a Lost in Space fan, if I were, I certainly wouldn't be up in arms about splitting the sets...especially when the combined price is the same. My personal preference is full season sets, but if I have to choose between split sets or no further releases (such as Mary Tyler Moore), then I will happily take the split sets.

skipnet
07-13-04, 01:26 PM
Fox has already announced plans to split Lost in Space Season 2 into two releases.

Skip

corycouger
07-13-04, 01:45 PM
I hope they don't do this to Miami Vice.

Blade
07-13-04, 03:19 PM
While I think what HBO has done with Sex and the City is pretty ridiculous, I'm willing to wait and see with Fox. They've been very good to DVD over the last several years.

Here are Peter Staddon's (Fox Studio Home Video exec) comments on this subject, which he posted in the thread linked above. Sounds reasonable enough to me.
As one of the Greedy Studio Execs reffered to indirectly by our "Whistle Blower" let me just make a couple of points.

1)We were very disaappointed in the sales of "Lost in Space Season 1". A big part of the reason we felt it was not as successful as it should have been was the pricepoint. It was just too expensive for an impulse purchase, or a purchase by anyone other than the really committed fan. No retailer would have said that this flew off the shelves, although just to give you a benefit of the doubt it may have flown off the shelf at an individual store, most would have said that it clogged up shelf space. I still have the inventory returned from retail stores in my warehouse to prove it!

2) When we looked at ways of reducing the price, the only way of effectively reducing the price enough so that it would impact the on shelf price was to split the set in half.

3)As far as "1+1=3+" I wish that were the case but even a rudimentary understanding of business would enable anyone to understand that there are greater economies to be had by producing one set than splitting them into two. You have nearly twice the packaging costs, twice the freight and handling costs, twice the merchandising costs, twice the inventory holding costs, etc.

4) I will admit that we are releasing "Lost in Space season 2" in two parts in order to increase the profitability of the release. That is my job! However, we will do this by selling more units, not by charging more or making a higher profit percentage on each unit sold.

5) If we are not successful with this strategy we will not go back to launching similar series as a single season because that did not work (see point 1), and one of the definitions of insanity that I agree with is to do exactly the same thing again and expect a different result.

Fox has been committed to releasing full season sets for TV product, however if that does not work what would you suggest we do? Would you prefer that we did not release the show at all? I read that some of you will not buy Lost in Space Season 2 as a two part release. Obviously that is your choice, but the point I would make is at least you have the choice.

I'm not going to reply to any further posts as I have laid out what I needed to say here. Other than to say to Mark that a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Thanks

PixyJunket
07-13-04, 04:07 PM
I WILL NOT HAVE MY TV SERIES CENSORED INTO SPLIT SETS!!

DRG
07-13-04, 04:41 PM
Originally posted by ZackR
I'll just post what I posted over at HTF on this topic:
------------------------------------------------------------

...

You're right, they DO have the right to do what they want with these TV sets. But we have an equal right to bitch about it all we want (or we have the right to not buy the sets when they come out). In turn, you have the right to bitch about us bitching about the sets. Then, I have the right to bitch about you bitching about us bitching about these split tv sets. It's the American Way. :)

Iron_Giant
07-13-04, 05:07 PM
They need us allot more than we need them.

chanster
07-13-04, 09:27 PM
A big part of the reason we felt it was not as successful as it should have been was the pricepoint.

So why not lower the price? Instead you raise the price (albeit a buck or two more, but that makes a big difference,) by splitting them into 2 sets.

Blah.

Adam Tyner
07-13-04, 09:46 PM
Originally posted by chanster
So why not lower the price? Instead you raise the price (albeit a buck or two more, but that makes a big difference,) by splitting them into 2 sets.

...but the individual expenditure is lowered since, IIRC, Fox isn't releasing both parts simultaneously. A consumer who may have been hesitant about spending $50 on a set may be more willing to spend $25 now and $25 later, especially if it's a title the individual was on the fence about in the first place. Dropping the overall price may not have been a viable option, even if Fox's target price turned out to be more than the average consumer wanted to spend.

moocher
07-13-04, 10:30 PM
Originally posted by chanster
So why not lower the price?

So obvious, yet nobody mentions that solution.

I see the post by Mr. Staddon as utter BS. Splitting the seasons is not the answer. They stand a good chance of ruining the TV/DVD boom (that has lined their pockets) with this strategy.

Before Season sets, they released "best of" collections that did not sell. When they went to full season sets, TV on DVD took off. That's what people obviously want. They don't want piece-parts.

So why did people not buy sets like Mary Tyler Moore and Lost in Space? Isn't it obvious? Price point! Mr. Staddon said it himself yet he doesn't get it. Both of these sets were overpriced for the amount of fan support they have. They are old shows. Take me for instance, I might have considered purchasing both of these shows but I was not enough of a fan to pay a premium price for them. Therefore, they are not in my collection. They still won't be with the same total price but split in two parts. TV sets are not Walmart bin impulse buys. If they want that, then they will have to do the Star Trek thing and go to 2 episodes releases. (That won't work either.)

These studio execs need to go retake Economics 101. If something doesn't sell at one price, duh, lower the price! They aren't going to lose money at a price point in the 20s (street) for seasons of these shows. They just won't make as much per set and that is what Mr. Staddon wants to avoid but I don't think splitting the seasons will achieve his desired result.

Lost in Space and MTM are not Star Trek. They should be priced accordingly or they won't sell. Splitting the Seasons is trying to put the genie back in the bottle. People are used to Season sets, they are not going to go back to partial seasons or "best ofs".

sracer
07-13-04, 10:50 PM
Except for recent shows, I don't think older shows are selling as well as they expected. I have a very cynical view on splitting season sets... to decide whether or not to release the 2nd half of the season.

I see two scenarios.... The first, sell the first half, and if it doesn't sell well, cancel the 2nd half set. The second scenario is that if the first half sells well, jack up the price on the 2nd half.... going under the assumption that those who bought the 1st half will want the 2nd half.

kayelefkay
07-13-04, 10:54 PM
A consumer who may have been hesitant about spending $50 on a set may be more willing to spend $25 now and $25 later, especially if it's a title the individual was on the fence about in the first place. Dropping the overall price may not have been a viable option, even if Fox's target price turned out to be more than the average consumer wanted to spend.

True, but halving each season may not be a good idea either. Fans may be hesitant about purchasing half a season only for the second half not to be released because of poor sales of the first half. Which may have the effect of driving down sales of the first half.

If the idea is to try to reel in non-hardcore fans who've been on the fence, then isn't it a better idea to release a single disc "sampler" of sorts (minimal packaging, no extras, just a few choice episodes) at an even lower price point rather than half a season? Sure, if I'm on the fence, I'd probably be more willing to pay $25 for half a season to see if I like it than $50 for the entire season. But I'd prefer to pay $10 for a sampler (it could even simply be disc 1 to save on production costs) to test the series than $25 for half a season.

As a sweetener to consumers who buy the sampler disc, the studios could have a rebate program for those who choose to upgrade to the full season set (say half the price of the sampler).

Anyway, just a thought. I think that halving seasons would not reel in enough people and could risk alienating fans. But then again, what do I know?

calhoun07
07-13-04, 11:10 PM
Split the seasons up if you have to but what I really want to see is full series coming out on DVD. Not season sets, but series sets in collector's box sets. Let the collector's be happy and those worried about price points be happy.

icruise
07-13-04, 11:16 PM
I'll admit that I have no idea just what it costs to put out a TV series on DVD, and I'm sure the licensing fees etc vary greatly from show to show, but I can't help but think that the studios are making an obscene amount of money on most of these shows. After all, in the past, they could really only expect TV shows to make money during their initial run and in re-runs. I think lowering the prices of these sets would induce a lot more people to buy. I know I have a lot of shows (even Lost in Space, I suppose) which I would buy if they were cheaper.

calhoun07
07-13-04, 11:18 PM
Originally posted by icruise
I'll admit that I have no idea just what it costs to put out a TV series on DVD, and I'm sure the licensing fees etc vary greatly from show to show, but I can't help but think that the studios are making an obscene amount of money on most of these shows. After all, in the past, they could really only expect TV shows to make money during their initial run and in re-runs. I think lowering the prices of these sets would induce a lot more people to buy. I know I have a lot of shows (even Lost in Space, I suppose) which I would buy if they were cheaper.

Good point. There are some sets I have in my collection because I got them at really good prices (usually through sales in store or online, which is lower than SRP) that I would not have purchased otherwise.

Jah-Wren Ryel
07-13-04, 11:41 PM
They may have every right not to release these shows and instead let them moulder away in dusty vaults until the film stock is totally useless. But if they choose not to make them legitimately available to the paying public then they have no moral ground to stand on when the shows are bootlegged. Copyright is a two-way bargain designed to benefit the public by having material released (and ultimately into the public domain) under a short-term monopoly of distribution rights. When one party breaks the agreement by refusing to even distribute, then the other party (the public) is not morally bound to honor their half of the bargain either (monopoly distribution rights).

Easy
07-14-04, 06:47 AM
Originally posted by Adam Tyner
...but the individual expenditure is lowered since, IIRC, Fox isn't releasing both parts simultaneously. A consumer who may have been hesitant about spending $50 on a set may be more willing to spend $25 now and $25 later, especially if it's a title the individual was on the fence about in the first place.

The trouble is that skeptics like me think the current $50 show split up is more likely to be $30 and $30 later = a nice price hike.
That won't fly with me. They better be damn careful what they do. Instead of raising profits they may kill the goose that laid the golden eggs.

Adam Tyner
07-14-04, 07:23 AM
Originally posted by Easy
The trouble is that skeptics like me think the current $50 show split up is more likely to be $30 and $30 later = a nice price hike.

Staddon explains in his post why that is that's almost a certainty.

There's not an answer here that'll placate the people who are convinced they're being ripped off, but Peter Staddon is the only exec from any of the major studios who's kept in close contact with DVD enthusiasts on a major web forum, and he played a significant role in taking Fox Home Video away from the grossly overpriced, bare-bones, non-anamorphic Bill Mechanic days to the studio they are today. He's a bright guy who's done an incredible amount for the format -- while it might be easy to dismiss him and say "take Econ 101!"...well, just because a solution is obvious and isn't mentioned doesn't mean it hasn't been considered and dismissed. Is Staddon out there to make Fox money? Of course, and if dropping the list price of the set a few bucks were an option, I'm sure that's the course that would've been taken.

A few things to consider:

1) If the first season didn't sell well, the second season will sell even worse. The novelty of owning one season of Lost in Space is enough for a lot of people, I'd imagine. The glut of TV-on-DVD releases may keep away some other potential owners. I know I'm to the point where I watch almost nothing but TV-on-DVD, and there are still numerous series available now that I want to buy but have a hard time squeezing into my schedule.

2) Studios seem to like uniformity in their price points. Comparable seasons of a TV series tend to cost the same for the entire run. The second season of Buffy, released a little over two years ago, has an MSRP of $59.98. I expected season seven, when it's released later this year, to have the same price. I think there might be concern on the part of the studios about continually dropping a price throughout the run of the series. I think they'd like to maintain a steady price to build a specific sense of value in the mind of the consumer. While that's not as defensible a reason to stick with a price as the other points I'm mentioning, I do understand where they're coming from with that.

3) Yes, I took Econ 101 in college, and I know that lower price theoretically means more sales. But for a series with the limited appeal of Lost in Space, "more" doesn't necessarily mean enough to offset the revenue they would've brought in with fewer sales at a higher price point.

WhovianZorker
07-14-04, 07:56 AM
Originally posted by kayelefkay
If the idea is to try to reel in non-hardcore fans who've been on the fence, then isn't it a better idea to release a single disc "sampler" of sorts (minimal packaging, no extras, just a few choice episodes) at an even lower price point rather than half a season? Sure, if I'm on the fence, I'd probably be more willing to pay $25 for half a season to see if I like it than $50 for the entire season. But I'd prefer to pay $10 for a sampler (it could even simply be disc 1 to save on production costs) to test the series than $25 for half a season.

As a sweetener to consumers who buy the sampler disc, the studios could have a rebate program for those who choose to upgrade to the full season set (say half the price of the sampler).

Why, oh why, couldn't a studio think of this? If they were to do this (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/feature/-/306174/102-0123207-5188101) for example? :)

sracer
07-14-04, 08:40 AM
Originally posted by Adam Tyner
Staddon explains in his post why that is that's almost a certainty.

There's not an answer here that'll placate the people who are convinced they're being ripped off, but Peter Staddon is the only exec from any of the major studios who's kept in close contact with DVD enthusiasts on a major web forum, and he played a significant role in taking Fox Home Video away from the grossly overpriced, bare-bones, non-anamorphic Bill Mechanic days to the studio they are today. He's a bright guy who's done an incredible amount for the format -- while it might be easy to dismiss him and say "take Econ 101!"...well, just because a solution is obvious and isn't mentioned doesn't mean it hasn't been considered and dismissed. Is Staddon out there to make Fox money? Of course, and if dropping the list price of the set a few bucks were an option, I'm sure that's the course that would've been taken.


Fair enough... but by the same token, since the guy is "bright" he's not going to come right out and say that this move is a way to bump up revenue a bit.

I can almost buy the whole "lower price point to entice consumer to buy" idea for first seasons of TV shows. But to do this on subsequent seasons doesn't make sense.

For example: I can't see people jumping on season 3 for a show (when they haven't bought 1 and 2) If a person wants to buy a show, they're gonna jump in and buy the first season and keep on buying. If someone was so "into" a show that they knew that season 3 and onward were the best and simply wanted those, then they want the show enough to buy the season set (split or not).

The basic premise behind the split-season concept is that it makes these sets attractive to people who would've purchased it if the price was lower.

If "Lost In Space" didn't sell well (or more accurately, actual sales were less than projected sales) it wasn't necessarily because of the price.

It's not even a cult classic, let alone a mainstream hit. It simply isn't going to sell as many copies as "The Twilight Zone". Add to the fact that LIS has been out of the public eye (not in syndication) for the past 5 years or so has hurt it tremendously.

I'd like to see how sales of LIS:Season 1 compared to other shows that haven't been in syndication for the last 5+ years.

moocher
07-14-04, 08:41 AM
Originally posted by Adam Tyner
Yes, I took Econ 101 in college, and I know that lower price theoretically means more sales. But for a series with the limited appeal of Lost in Space, "more" doesn't necessarily mean enough to offset the revenue they would've brought in with fewer sales at a higher price point.

Yes, but since they were "disappointed" with the sales, they obviously don't know everything. I don't claim to know more than they do but when I saw the price, I knew that they blew it. With a show like Lost in Space, you have to look at the "cult" base and then the general audience. This set was priced for the cult base and many of them probably bought it but with so many other TV sets out there, the general audience just isn't going to bother with this show. They will wait for the price to drop or just move on to something else. What I find so odd is that they do not seem to reduce the price of TV sets. Look at MTM, I think its still at MSRP $50.

I think the economic solution for them is one that many here won't like one bit - but it's an obvious one. Release the set at a fairly high price and lower it substantially after 6-12 months. That way you get the die hards up front that simply have to have it the day of release and then market to the general audience a year later - perhaps when you are releasing Season 2. I wouldn't like it but it seems to make good business sense.

Once again, TV sets are not impulse buys for the general public. They may plunk down $5 for a movie but not $30 for a few TV episodes that they can watch on TBS if they want to "try it". Most people are familiar with Lost in Space and can try it for free on cable or cheap through Netflix, BBV, etc. J6P is not going to "try" something for $30.

Adam Tyner
07-14-04, 08:53 AM
Originally posted by sracer
Fair enough... but by the same token, since the guy is "bright" he's not going to come right out and say that this move is a way to bump up revenue a bit.

...although that's exactly what he did.

I will admit that we are releasing "Lost in Space season 2" in two parts in order to increase the profitability of the release. That is my job! However, we will do this by selling more units, not by charging more or making a higher profit percentage on each unit sold.

Originally posted by moocher
I think the economic solution for them is one that many here won't like one bit - but it's an obvious one. Release the set at a fairly high price and lower it substantially after 6-12 months.

Seems to be working well for the video game industry.

Easy
07-14-04, 09:20 AM
Originally posted by Adam Tyner
There's not an answer here that'll placate the people who are convinced they're being ripped off, but Peter Staddon is the only exec from any of the major studios who's kept in close contact with DVD enthusiasts on a major web forum...

I don't recall mentioning any particular person or studio. I may be the Lone Ranger, but I want a complete set and I always look at the total price. If show XYZ has an MSRP of $80 and I think it is overpriced and decide not to buy, cutting it in half and charging $45 per half isn't going to sway me. I don't need an easy payment plan. I want the best bottom line price they can offer on a full season. Period.

Having said that, I am fully aware that there are many people at HTF lobbying for release of a second season of Lost in Space and MTM. I don't doubt that Mr. Standon is trying to find a way to meet that demand. I respect him for that but I agree with moocher when he says:Both of these sets were overpriced for the amount of fan support they have.
Sorry, but if Fox really can't make a profit on these shows maybe they should just let it go.
Compounding the problem is the sheer volume of TV released on DVD. I simply can't afford all the shows I would like to have nor can I store it all. Choices have to be made and there are going to be some losers. I know fans of shows that don't get a second season release don't want to hear that, but there it is.

My concern is really not over a couple of shows with poor sales. My concern is that this "concept" will become the standard for ALL shows and the price increases that will bring. Many studios are giving this concept a trial run.
Most seasons (2-5) of Sex and the City have and MSRP of $49.99. The of Season 6 part one is also $49.99. -eek-
Anyone care to guess what part two will cost? I'm thinking I don't want to know.

LasVegasMichael
07-14-04, 09:51 AM
Being a true TV on DVD fanatic, the only thing I despise more then splitting a season is no season at all.

Thankfully, I detest Sex and the City, and wouldn't buy it for pennies on the dollar, but I have many other Season sets from other shows that have never completed their releases, and truly annoyed me (Mary Tyler Moore, Larry Sanders, NYPD BL to name a few).

However, shows like Friends, CSI, Homicide, and even ER and Sledge Hammer are lookng more then promising, so no real complaints here, though I do hope that the complete season is released an not lame split ups, or even worse, Best ofs.

Regarding prices, budget is of course a factor, but the wallet takes it better with things like the DDD 20% coupon where I blew over $700 almost entirely on TV on DVD. I knew that the opportnities to "save" like that are few and far between, so I took full advantage, and don't regret it at all (although I am not too sure why I bought Dukes of Hazzard, a true impulse buy, no doubt).

I just hunt the bargains everywhere I can to make it easier. The Complete X-Files series was procured from a fellow DVD Talker on the Trade forum for a greatly reduced price, and still fell good about that one too, though I have yet to watch a single episode (gotta work to pay for these things!).

I think my limit is about $50 a season for anything. I think CSI was the most expensive single season I have ever purchased at about $52 each from the DDD sale, and I wasn't too happy about it, but the deed it done (and it is worth it as a blind buy!)

I guess my final take on this would be that I would rather pay more for each season then have no season at all, but that is just me.

Easy
07-14-04, 10:18 AM
Originally posted by LasVegasMichael
Thankfully, I detest Sex and the City, and wouldn't buy it for pennies on the dollar

I've never seen a single show. Just using it as an example. Maybe a better example is Wiseguy . One hour drama, season one part 1 $69.99, season 1 part 2 $69.99... and they didn't even use all the original music. Sound good? Maybe to some, not to me.

Peep
07-14-04, 11:28 AM
I may be in the minority here, but I like being able to buy the entire series, over time, without taking huge hits each time a new season comes out. I agree that Sex and The City, Season 6 (part 1 and 2) seem like a big scam, but that's because they are charging the same amount for a half-season that they did for a full one.

Shelling out 50 bucks every 6-12 months is not nearly as appealing as to me as shelling out 25 bucks every 3-6 months. And it is even more appealing if you want to give half season sets out as gifts on birthdays and Christmas. As long is the price is almost the same after the split, why even care?

B4Bishop
07-14-04, 12:55 PM
They are doing this with Farscape. Which is why I have not bought any of them so far. They put out 3 eps per dvd and sell that for 26 bucks 26 bucks!!!!! they are crazy. Although season one is still going for 119 bucks!!!!

Sunday Morning
07-14-04, 01:59 PM
dastards!

jdslater
07-14-04, 04:59 PM
Couple of things I noticed while reading this and the HTF site:
1) some one suggested a "sampler" disc, to me this is one step below a "best of..." release, personally I hate "best of.." discs of tv shows, I thought we all wanted complete seasons.
2) a poster on HTF mentioned "buy from europe" due to the fact we get complete seasons. sort of. Most fox releases are the same as the R1 version BUT are very different in price. Example R1 Simpsons S4, I got from Play.com for 22, but if I bought the R2 version I'm looking at nearly 40, Harsh realm R1 18,R2 28.
I think the worst offender is CSI. R1 full season 35, R2 part 1 & part 2 would be nearly 80.
Admittingly we do get some good stuff, Murder one is out in Sept, but you guys get alot better stuff then we do.
Besides having 2 parts to a tv show really takes up more shelf space!

JIF
07-14-04, 07:23 PM
FOX better not split 24: Season 3......

sracer
07-15-04, 12:19 AM
Originally posted by jdslater
Couple of things I noticed while reading this and the HTF site:
1) some one suggested a "sampler" disc, to me this is one step below a "best of..." release, personally I hate "best of.." discs of tv shows, I thought we all wanted complete seasons.

Actually no... not all of us want complete seasons of every show. That's the same mentality of having to have Ultra-Editions of every film in one's collection.

As much as I hate double-sided discs, I wouldn't mind buying a double-sided sampler disc that was chock-full of episodes chosen at random over the course of a series run. Make the sampler disc $5.

I don't necessarily want the complete series set of "Room 222" or "Streets of San Francisco", but a 4-6 episode "sampler" would be ideal. There's probably about 50 TV shows that I wouldn't mind having on DVD, but buying entire series for each is prohibitive (in terms of cost and space).

Of course some series, like Lost In Space, Prisoner, and Star Trek:TOS are ones that I'd want the entire series.

Philip Reuben
07-15-04, 12:32 AM
Originally posted by sracer
Actually no... not all of us want complete seasons of [b]every show. That's the same mentality of having to have Ultra-Editions of every film in one's collection.

While you're entitled to your own opinion about complete seasons, I think this is a really bad analogy in any case. Wanting a complete season is more equivalent to wanting the entire movie, as opposed to just the "best" scenes of the movie. (How many extras are included on the DVDs, for movies or for TV series, is a different issue entirely.) Of course, there are holes in my analogy too.

tanman
07-15-04, 03:23 AM
I don't like the idea and won't defend the studios. Plain and simple it is a SCAM to get more money. The whole reasoning behind is is that people will pay 30 + 30 rather then 50. Yeah companies are there to make money but I hate it when they intentionally scam customers with subterfuge and banking on the fact that they won't pay attention. Sure there are extra costs with packaging and all but all the production costs pale in comparison with the price that they are selling it for. I think and I hope that the whole idea will backfire.

And what's with this whole "well its either our way or none at all". I fail to believe that TV on DVD is not a highly profitable endevour even if they sell entire seasons at $20. If they have trouble moving stock then cut the price. Every other industry (including the movie section of DVD) knows this. Why don't they follow suit?

fitprod
07-15-04, 03:39 AM
tanman....

When studios slash prices on movies, they've already sold hundereds of thousands, if not millions, of units.

When studios are dealing with television, they are estactic when the move 50,000 to 100,000 units.

Slashing prices on these units might help them move, but it probably wont help the studio recoup thier production costs.

fitprod

moocher
07-15-04, 08:46 AM
What I don't get about this is that this "solution" assumes that there is a problem to begin with. From all I read, the studios are cleaning up on TV sets. Yes there are a few sets that don't sell as well but isn't that to be expected? Not everything put on a disk is going to sell like hotcakes.

Production costs? The content has already been produced for TV so how much does it really cost to transfer the ready made content to disk? Not much I would think. Yes, extras will cost some but I would not think it is prohibitive.

No, this to me all smacks of greed. How can we make even more money off this booming business of TV on DVD? Why else would they be trying to fix something that isn't broken? Greed, that's why.

sracer
07-15-04, 09:02 AM
Originally posted by Philip Reuben
While you're entitled to your own opinion about complete seasons, I think this is a really bad analogy in any case. Wanting a complete season is more equivalent to wanting the entire movie, as opposed to just the "best" scenes of the movie. (How many extras are included on the DVDs, for movies or for TV series, is a different issue entirely.) Of course, there are holes in my analogy too.
I never said that it was an analogy... I said that it is the same mentality. The "all or nothing" mentality that drives people to get the absolute best/feature-rich disc for every movies is the same "all or nothing" mentality for TV shows... that one must buy every episode of every season of a show... or buy nothing.

This was in response to the comment that "everybody wants season sets".

jdslater
07-15-04, 12:23 PM
Just a question to sracer, what if the "sampler disc" of your tv show that you were willing to buy didn't have the particular episode you wanted to see?
I suppose you are right in this "all-or-nothing" mentality, but it could be said that it depends on the tv show. Something like 24, Alias and Profiler have a common story thread running through out the season to tie up a story thread. But like I said in my post CSI part 1 & 2 is a very big strain on my wallet. Also I like to think I buy certain tv shows just based on the fact they have the complete series. I bought dead like me because I missed the second half of the season, now if that was available in 2 parts I probably would not have bought it.

Peep
07-15-04, 12:54 PM
Originally posted by moocher
What I don't get about this is that this "solution" assumes that there is a problem to begin with. From all I read, the studios are cleaning up on TV sets. Yes there are a few sets that don't sell as well but isn't that to be expected? Not everything put on a disk is going to sell like hotcakes.

Production costs? The content has already been produced for TV so how much does it really cost to transfer the ready made content to disk? Not much I would think. Yes, extras will cost some but I would not think it is prohibitive.

No, this to me all smacks of greed. How can we make even more money off this booming business of TV on DVD? Why else would they be trying to fix something that isn't broken? Greed, that's why.

Obtaining the rights to the music used in some TV series can be cost-prohibative.

Philip Reuben
07-15-04, 01:55 PM
Originally posted by sracer
[B]I never said that it was an analogy... I said that it is the same mentality.

Then replace "bad analogy" with "bad representation of the mentality", and my point still stands. I maintain that wanting a complete TV season is only an "all or nothing" mentality in that same sense that wanting a complete movie is. Wanting every episode of a series is not in any way equivalent to wanting lots of bonus features with a movie.