dvdshonna

Cable TV programing is the perfect example or analogy. ..I remember paying $25/mo to $30/mo for the complete package with multiple movie channels (HBO, Showtime, Starz, etc.) ..It was up to $100+/mo when I finally canceled it.

I just bought 144 DVDs for $80. ..I don't believe the DVD give away "party" will last. ..Probably as long as the $7.95/mo Netflix party last. (5 years?) ..Up until consumers are paying $50/mo to $100/mo to stream with multiple services.

dvdshonna

If your prediction is correct, I would count on Discs being around for a long time.

When they talk about streaming over taking discs, the numbers are refering to movies viewed (not revenue). .. Online viewing is projected to generate $1.7 billion this year while physical media will surpass the $11 billion mark (2012).

Centralized or not, that's $11 billion the studios would be looking to make up in lost disc sales. Six times the revenue they are currently making from online viewing.

Xiroteus

Have gotten to that point myself for the most part. I'm okay with having a bit more in a digital format as it doesn't take up real space. If shows and movies come and go from Netflix etc.. oh well. They will either be back or a new service will come along. There is even the library. It's just not that important to have everything at arms reach.

Just too much new content to have a wall full of media that will hardly be used.

zyzzle

Exactly why I always seek out physical media. The company / studio can't take away something I have in my possession, like they are doing, in spades, with streaming product. It will just get worst in time, as studios become ever more greedy and charge the companies who offer streaming services (Netflix, et al) more and more for less product.

Shedding thousands of old movies?! Ay, caramba! The death knoll is here more quickly than even I had thought possible...

One could argue that the same thing happens with OOP titles. But, if I actually *own* an OOP title (which is on physical media), I lose nothing by that title going OOP. If I don't have it already, and want it badly enough, I can always find someone selling it, albeit at an insane price. With streaming, and the studios in complete control, to watch that title, will be taken forever away from me.

I don't want them bones... I'll resort to piracy before supporting THAT model, every time.

Alan Smithee

Plus I'm not willing to pay the same money to 'own' a streaming copy than I am for a disc- I 'bought' the movie "Ginger and Rosa" for 99 cents on Vudu a couple weeks ago when it was mispriced, which was a decent deal, but I'd never pay $20 or even $10 for a movie I can't keep on my shelf and that can be taken off-line at any time. In fact, if I decide I really like "Ginger and Rosa" I'll buy the Blu-Ray.

And yes, I'm one of those weird people who looks at their shelves of media. Clicking through "My Movies" on Vudu just isn't the same.

Travis McClain

This is why I made my previous point of the difference between rental streaming (Netflix) and ownership streaming (UltraViolet). There are still vulnerabilities to ownership streaming, of course, that are not present in physical disc ownership, but it's still more stable than rental streaming.

I'm reminded of one of Steven Wright's quips:

"You can't have everything. Where would you put it?"

big e

Or the people could do what I do and stick with the disc-based rental system. I pay for Netflix’s streaming service, but I’ve been thinking about dropping it because I think the selection sucks. I’ve never used Amazon’s streaming service, but it looks like it may be more movie-oriented than Netflix’s, which appears to be more television-oriented (I’ve seen it advertised as being more of a alternative to TV).

I would argue the general public has always viewed movies as disposable. As other posters have said, DVD was surrounded by a perfect storm of elements that made it successful, which is not replicating itself with Blu-ray. But even DVD’s success lasted only a couple years, tapering off around ’06 or ’07. The general public doesn’t seem that enthusiastic toward Blu-ray at all (hell, most of the studios don’t seem that enthusiastic either) except for blockbuster titles and new releases.


One thing you need to remember is alot of these streaming services just popped up in the last couple years so yeah, they're not perfect and some kinks still need to be worked out.

An attitude I've noticed that seems to creep up in threads like this is an assumption that everyone who owns movies is going to rewatch their movies multiple times. I’m sure that’s not the case with a majority of the general public. A large portion of the general public who have bought a lot of movies probably watched those movies once, if that, and never look at them again. I’m a movie buff and there’s stuff in my collection I haven’t watched in 5 or 10 years. I’ll use Cast Away as an example. I bought Cast Away when it was released on DVD in 2001 (I think) and watched the film shortly after. I liked it, but I didn’t feel a need to ever watch it again and it’s sat in my collection for the past 10+ years collecting dust. I think you can be a movie buff or a movie enthusiast and not have to own a bunch of movies. There have been classics I’ve seen that I liked, but never felt a need to rewatch or own. Lawrence of Arabia for example. I liked that movie, I thought it was very well made, but I just never felt a need to rewatch it. As I said in the “DVD sales are down 50%” thread, I just don’t rewatch movies that often. Even movies I consider favorites, I’ve only watched maybe three or four times and that’s it. Evil Dead is one of my favorite horror movies, but I watched it so many times when I was a teenager that I really don’t feel I need to rewatch it anytime soon. The last time I watched it was in 2010 when I bought the new Blu-ray and listened to the commentary track (which I was kind of disappointed with).

I don't think anyone here is saying that streaming, or the rental services in general, are flat-out replacing their collections. What I’m hearing more of is that these services are allowing people to not have to blind buy titles and not buy, as another poster said in a different thread, fringe titles, which are titles that you want to check out but don’t necessarily want to own. I owned my fair share of fringe titles because at the time I wanted to see those movies, purchasing them was the only way I could see them. I only had two or three local video stores in my area and the nearest Blockbuster was 30 miles away, so if I wanted to see something that was obscure or old, I had to purchase it. Unfortunately, that resulted in me amassing a large amount of movies that I had no real intention of watching again.

Ultimately, my philosophy on this subject is this: if you like a movie enough that you want to watch it multiple times, then buy a physical copy of it. If you just want to check out a movie or if you're not sure whether you want to own a movie or not, then use Redbox, or Netflix, or Amazon's VOD system. I don't think there's ever going to be a be-all end-all system for viewing every single movie ever made. Fifteen or twenty years ago, if you wanted to see a movie, you were bound by what the video stores in your area had available. Today, you’re bound by what Redbox or Netflix or one of the other online rental services has. There’s always going to be one movie you want to see that’s not available. There's always going be that Maltese Falcon of a movie that you just can't get your hands on.

Travis McClain

Not for long, it seems:

big e

Ah crap. Well, they better ramp up what they offer on streaming. I have slightly over 90 movies in my DVD queue and only 7 of them are available for streaming.

Alan Smithee

I can't see their disc rentals going away completely, as the only alternative to that in most areas is Redbox which only has the latest stuff. My parents always rent older movies through Netflix as well as new ones.

Travis McClain

Unfortunately, Netflix's shareholders don't likely care what alternatives may exist in a community. For right now, though, they do care about the $109 million they made off DVDs this year and that will keep it alive for awhile, but they're very aware that the $151 million they made from streaming is more money.

But, hey, the good news is that maybe in the future we could organize a consortium to operate some brick and mortar rental stores!

Josh-da-man

Some Disney/Pixar films have been pulled from iTunes:

Travis McClain

UGH. Unlike the Netflix situation, this really is troubling for digital owners. No one expects every title to remain "in print" for rental, but revoking download rights for a purchased title is precisely the kind of move that will only undermine consumer confidence.

When Disney announced last year they were closing their own digital streaming service, the hope was that they were going to commit to UltraViolet. That hasn't happened yet. This news is not encouraging at all, since there's no reason for Disney to sever ties with iTunes in case they are going to join UV; every other studio sells both, so there's no reason for Disney to burn bridges with iTunes customers.

Alan Smithee

I've always wondered what would happen to purchased titles that are in limbo as one company loses the rights to them and haven't yet been picked up by another? Case in point many United Artists movies bounced between CBS/FOX Video and MGM/UA in the 1980s, and since DVD came out many older movies have also gone from one label to another. If I bought one of those movies on Vudu, would I even be able to access it in between ownership changes? I know Star Wars isn't on Vudu now, but what if I bought it while it was still under Fox and later Disney got the rights to it and made some more changes to it? And what about Disney's world-famous moratoriums? Would they keep stuff like Snow White still online right now for people who had bought it earlier, and what if they use a different master next time it's reissued? (And if the new version is better, usually Disney hopes people will buy the new disc, but will Vudu customers get access to the new master right away, or be stuck with the old one and be expected to re-buy the new one, or will they take the old master off-line and not grant people who bought that access to the new one?) Just MORE reasons why I can't switch to buying movies that way.

Xiroteus

That's what I have moved to be. I love watching new content yet hardly rewatch anything over the last couple years. There are just too many movies and shows I have never seen to spend a couple hours watching films I have seen. I'll see my favorites again I just need to give it more time.

This is the main reason owning them is just not that important to me anymore. Now when I find two dollar blu-rays I will think about it yet I still doubt I want to go down that path again. It becomes about why own this and not that so I rather avoid it all together.

dvdshonna

More hype than reality. ..Digital sales has been an abject failure. ..The only digital "success" has been subscription based services of older content and TV shows. ..94% of legal streaming is with monthly subscription services

..And for every $1.00 the studios make on these subscription services, they lose $1.50 on disc sales and rentals (conservative estimate). ..The studios should include all new releases in the subscription packages and declare total "success" while they file for bankruptcy.

dvdshonna

"Weeds" Complete Collection 8 Seasons (Bluray + Digital Copy) $69.99 ...All 8 seasons are also available on Netflix. ...This is why I no longer buy TV seasons at any price (new or used).

dvdshonna

For myself it's more about "pricing" than feeling "tangible".
8 Seasons of "Weeds" for $69.00 compared with 8 seasons of "Weeds", along with 1700+ TV seasons, and thousands of movies on Netflix for $7.99/mo, is like the studios saying we can make a profit at $7.99/mo per household, but if you're stupid enough to pay $69.00 for just "Weeds" on disc, we'll be happy to RIP YOU 0FF with overpriced DVDs and Blurays.

Alan Smithee

That's actually a good price for 8 seasons- it might be fine on Netflix if you just want to watch it once, but they could take it offline before you've seen every episode, and even then you'll want to buy the discs if you want to watch it repeatedly. I STILL don't see how they make much money licensing stuff to Netflix.

dvdshonna

Relatively speaking ....they're not. These Hollywood CEOs have to be the biggest buffoons in U.S. history.

For the year 2012:
Kiosk Rentals: Up 31% - Brick & Mortar Rentals: Down 29%
Bluray Sales: Up 19% - DVD Sales: Down 20%
Subscription Services: Up 94% - Digital Sales: Down 1.3%

The biggest "success" is the subscription services, where the average consumer pays about 25 cents per title viewed. ..Nothing like digging your own grave.

dvdshonna

Yes, some titles are pulled after months/years ...And replaced with different titles, so the average household is accustomed to paying $7.99/mo for thousands of movie titles and TV seasons that are updated with new content.

Ask these consumers if they would prefer watching "Weeds" 5x to 20x or if they would rather have different content to watch. ..How many of these consumers are going to pay $69.00 for "Weeds" on disc when they have an endless selection of movies and TV seasons, and barely have time to watch everything at $7.99/mo ???

Boo Hoo ...our DVD sales have been declining for 5 straight years and our digital sales isn't working. ...Try removing your heads from your ass.

Travis McClain

Like most of you, I've been checking out the Black Friday ads the last week or so. I find myself entirely uninterested in just about everything I've seen. I've decided this year, instead of gifts, I'm going to take my cousin and my niece to a University of Louisville women's basketball game (so long as my health permits, anyway!), and I've already bought the tickets for that. My shopping list is down to just two other people now, and I may find something for them, but as for myself? I don't see any blind buys that tempt me, and no upgrades that feel exciting.

If Amazon price-matches everyone, I might use my credit to get The Boondocks: The Complete Third Season ($9.99 at some regional place we don't have here). Maybe The Dark Knight Rises at $3.96 (Walmart's ad). Even Star Trek Into Darkness - which I enjoyed - doesn't really tempt me even in the $8 range.

This year of auditing my library has disillusioned me with disc ownership more than I realized.

Alan Smithee

I've got stuff from 10 Black Fridays ago that I still haven't watched ("fear dot com", anyone?) but I'm still up for more. I'll keep collecting discs til I drown in them!

The Man with the Golden Doujinshi

I've been doing the same since the summer. I've finally focused on watching the thousands of unwatched stuff I have and trimming things down. Going along with this, I've been cutting back on buying too.

Still, I never going to invest money in digital copies/itunes/amazon/etc. If I want to do something like that, I'll just download it off a torrent site and then throw some money in the garbage. At least with a torrented version, I can get things like subs, bonus features, multiple language tracks, and commentaries that I'll never listen to.

BobO'Link

A coworker and I were talking about this very thing yesterday. When I told him I had enough *unopened* product (movies and TV seasons) to last 3 or more years at "standard" viewing levels (2-3 hours per day) I stopped in my tracks. I'd never really given it much thought until then. I'm pretty sure I could go 10 years or more with *no* repeats on a 3 hour per day schedule if everything was taken into account. It really makes me wonder *why* I continue to add to the stacks when the current possibility of repeat watching is fairly slim and likely to be restricted to absolute favorites. Still... I have several items planned for purchase over the next couple of weeks and will likely go through with those purchases.
This exactly. At least with physical copies I can hand it down when I'm gone (not that any of the kids/grandkids will want them but it'll then be *their* problem).