slop101

Imagine having a piece of art on canvas, by an artist you like up on your wall in a nice frame for, say, $500.

Or for $250, you can have the same art on your PC and have it up on your monitor.

You're still seeing the same image, so what's the difference, and why would anyone want to buy framed art for double what it costs to see it on the PC?

Now, just like all analogies, this one won't hold up too well under scrutiny - but it is just how I see this issue.

awmurray

No. Those price points are complete fiction, of course, but no. Why do you think this hypothetical system which is infinitely more flexible (i.e. it has a complete catalog and is instant access) than current pay-per-view would be cheaper than current pay-per-veiw?

There is a big difference in what Henry Ford did. The car is a better transportation mechanism than the horse (i.e. an improvement). Going from physical media to PPV exclusively is not progress at all. It is taking away from the consumer. Remember, the consumer makes the rules ultimately.

This analogy would fit better if I was opposed to Blu-Ray or HD-DVD vs. DVD. Then I would be opposing a better way. The current way is ownership. I'm just saying that renting isn't better than owning.

Don't you remember DIVX? It is the same proposition. It was soundly defeated. I believe it was like 2-3 dollars to buy a disc and then you payed per view after that. Everyone I knew didn't buy into it because they were not interested in a PPV system.

Henry Ford sold cars... he didn't license them. It wasn't pay-per-mile.

I have to assume the future would yield progress. That's why I'm so sure that this scheme will fail.

NatrlBornThrllr

In the end, it comes down to having something palpable. You used a Henry Ford analogy that didn't particularly fit, but I'll go along with it...taking it a step further. If a teleportation device were invented, you wouldn't see Jay Leno say, "YES, I can finally rid myself of this pesky automotive collection in favor of something new and easier!"

It seems like you've failed to realize that people collect things for different reasons. You're looking at things in a very closed-minded manner, assuming the everybody collects DVDs for the same reasons that you do. You collect so you can watch the movie. As such, Video on Demand would be right up your alley...a space-saving way for your hobby to evolve. However, you fail to understand that to most of us, this hobby is more than the ability to watch movies at home. It's about having something to show off to our friends. It's about having something to collect, like the little pack-rats we are.

Before DVDs, I collected sports memorabilia. Before that, it was coins...and before that, rocks. The ability to own and artfully display a physical product is as big a part of my collection, and my life, as anything else. It always has been. If you take that away, you're stripping my hobby from me. Judging by your posts, it seems that you'll never be able to understand this. I've always encountered people like you. Often, I was met with confused looks when I chattered to people about the thousands of pieces of cardboard I owned, each one featuring the likeness of a professional athlete. They simply didn't understand my hobby, and why it brought me such joy.

This is no different. You don't understand our hobby. You don't understand that part of our joy comes from owning, displaying, and collecting a physical product...and that no VoD system could ever offer to us what our collections currently do. That's fine, we don't ask that you understand. All we ask is that you not support a system that will attempt to rip away something we cherish...and that you not chastise us for failing to understand how potentially great this new system is. We understand that it's great for you. We just wish you could understand that it's not what we want.

-JP

awmurray

Eliminate the double dip!?!? You'd better run this by marketing. Double dipping has to be a huge money maker. Give it up???

Michael Corvin

I think the cons far outweigh the positives in this debate. In all likelihood we will get to a medialess society at some point, but not for many, many, MANY years.

1. People like to own things, plain and simple.
2. Unwatched dvd argument would be a huge blow to sales
3. In a "pay-per-view" method, I only get part of the movie watched because I had a long day at work and fell asleep, or the kids interrupt, what then, I buy it again? I don't think so. The 24 hour window doesn't work for me either. There have been times when I start a movie and get so busy I can't get back to it for a week or more.
4. Do you honestly think the retail stores, rental chains and hardware manufacturers are just all going to roll over and abandon a model that works?
5. Impulse buy. How many sales would be lost because on a shelf of 100 movies at the store, people can see an image of Tom Cruise on a cover and think, oh I wanted to see that. $$ Cha Ching $$ VS a text listing or pages upon pages of dvd covers you have to click through on some kind of service. It is clunky.
6. Big brother: consumers do not want their habits known, what they watch, when they watch etc. A VOD system all but guarantees that is going to happen.

This scenario is the exact opposite in my eye. A medialess model would encourage even more double/triple dipping. There would be no cost to them to manufacture a thing, a huge enticement to put out sub-par material only to have something handy 3 months down the road for people to upgrade to. After all it is just 1s & 0s, won't cost them a dime to offer an upgrade for five more dollars.

This is a HUGE arguement. How many people in the US own a TV? 99% VCR/DVD player? 90+%? A PC and Broadband are a far smaller number. Factor in that only a fraction of those are saavy enough to d/l and stream a movie you are talking a ENORMOUS hit in sales. Going from a market of about 90% of the population to a market of about <10% of the population. We are talking about the same people the find iTunes confusing, and those are 3MB files. How is that a smart business move?

Michael Corvin

Excellently put. Differentiating between a hobby and a mere way to watch movies. Drastically different markets.

You can also add "finding" to that second sentence as well. Internet purchases fuel the majority of my collection, but you can't leave out the fact that people like going to buy things, hunting them down, and just getting out of the house. Being able to hit Best Buy on my lunch break to get the new release is a good thing.

awmurray

It's also common for me to go on long trips and bring along 6-10 DVDs for people to watch on my laptop while in the car. This is a simple thing now, but presents problems for the medialess/PPV/VOD model.

TimeandTide

Ditto to the arguments made above. VODs or any other sort similar method of getting film content into the home will not replace DVDs or video tape or whatever else movies will come packaged in at Target in 2067. How do I know this? Because there's plenty of literature available on the internet (just downloaded a novel to my iPod the other day), but people will always prefer holding the texts in their hands, turning the pages, adding to their booksshelves and browsing the titles at Borders. There MAY be a day when book reading is primarily done online (consider how this trend might explode if the final Harry Potter book were only released as a downloadable text), but it's not gonna happen in MY lifetime and hopefully not in my child's.

DiscGuy

Please accept my apology for dipping into the hyperbole. However it was to illustrate a point. There are folks here who are saying "if the future (and no matter what that future holds) does not contain a DVD product for media mass distribution, then count me out." I was trying to show that without knowing the shape of the future, that’s a pretty rigid mindset. Like saying the automobile will never replace the horse.

I am not saying a new delivery system in and of itself is inherently better, just one piece of a new product. A new delivery system could be packaged with additional features, higher quality, and/or lower pricing thereby replacing the current DVD marketplace. Something for the consumers: lower costs, expanded selection, immediate access at home. Something for the industry: better copyright protections and control, elimination of inventory, manufacturing, and distribution costs. The technology may leap frog right over HD-DVD and Blu-Ray. It’s happened before: remember digital cassette tapes.

Product delivery is only one piece of the complete product. Since DVDs are essentially a very long string of ones and zeros, mass delivery technologies is a ripe area for advancement. It’s happening now. Wal-Mart is experimenting with delivering CDs to the customer using a method that still delivers a disc in-hand but without the inventory issues. It's a small example but a huge savings for Wal-Mart as all inventory issues become moot.

And what about Netflix. Netflix doesn’t want to send physical discs back and forth through the mail. They never did. Read their business plan. It’s all about delivering content without media since day one. The arguments of bandwidth, Internet connections, and hard drive restrictions are issues with the current technology. Nobody is saying DVDs will go away today! But it most likely will come soon with technology advancements. What you perceive as potential constraints and limitations may be outweighed by the joy of using the next technology. illennium has stated the point more eloquently than I ever have: “And you can make it really cheap compared to owning, so that people are willing to give up the ownership interest.”

For awmurray: Can VOD be cheaper than today’s product? YES!...because of reduced distribution costs! No disc manufacturing, shipping, etc. I agree: the car is better transportation system than a horse so the car survives. So isn't it possible to build a VOD system that delivers better overall value than clunkly DVD discs. DIVX failed? Agreed! Not the right product at the right time…however that does not mean that all VOD products will fail.

For NatrlBornThrllr: Today there are laser disc collectors...but don’t expect to see the Lord of the Rings LD box set anytime soon. If transporters replace cars, there will still be car collectors. If we switch to a cashless society, there will still be coin collectors. And when technology overcomes the limitations of DVDs, there will still be DVD collectors. Mass distribution of entertainment media will be handled through a different technology. There won’t be any new cars, coins, or DVDs...but collecting them may still be a pleasant pastime.

Guys! Let me be clear here. When everyone else was buying tapes, I bought a huge collection of laser discs! Loved them! Still do! I’ve got a whole room full of them. Now I’m buying DVDs left and right….much faster than I can watch them. So don’t get me wrong: I love this format. I’m just saying that there is more technology to come! Exciting stuff too. And soon we won’t be able to buy Peter Jackson’s latest opus on DVD….simply because technology will make the DVD obsolete. It’s surprising how many people here can’t fathom that concept.

I was saddened when Pioneer abandoned the laser disc format. It took me some time to embrace the “new” DVD format. And while I will also mourn the passing of DVD, at the same time I will rejoice in the next advancement of home media entertainment.

bboisvert

Riiiight. This has nothing to do with the fact that past growth was due to new households adding players and major releases. Now that (a) everyone has a player and (b) they've released all of the "must have" films... things have peaked. No shit.

And it has nothing to do with VOD, piracy, legit downloads, or the Easter Bunny. It's just a logical economic progression.

awmurray

It could be cheaper, but I don't think it will necessarily be cheaper. The cost to manufacture/deliver a product doesn't necessarily set the price point. The market does. It's all about how much money people will be willing to spend on a given product. For example, what does it cost to make and deliver a cup of Starbuck's gormet coffee? 50 cents? Yet it costs $4. Why? Because people will pay it. If Starbucks found a way to minimize their costs and make that same cup for 43 cents, would they reduce the price? Not necessarily.

Who do you suppose pays for the distribution and manufacturing and shipping costs of DVDs and CDs? Us-- the consumer.

I don't think so. Because whatever you provide via VOD, you could just as well provide via a physical media like DVD.

Again, we're not talking about a jump from LD to DVD or VHS to LD. Those are just different mediums (and improvements, BTW). We're talking about a philosophical change from ownership to renting. That's what dooms the whole thing. And I don't see a difference in DIVX and the hypothetical VOD system except with VOD you don't even get to pretend to have something tangible.

I think any system which tries to impose renting vs ownership will fail. It doesn't matter what you call it (VOD, DIVX, whatever). There are probably good uses for VOD (for example, on planes), but as a general replacment for DVD, I don't think so.

LD to DVD is still owning to owning, though. And DVD offers better features (size, content, capacity, picture quality).

Christi P

I really can't imagine that there will ever be a complete catalog of movies and TV shows on one VOD system. The Adam West Batman series isn't even on DVD yet because the studios that own parts of the show are bickering, and there are quite a few other classic shows where 'legal delays' prevent a DVD release.

If Paramount had a choice between putting Star Trek on a VOD system for $1 an episode, or charging $90-100 for around $26 episodes on DVD, which would they rather do?

Also, most of us who collect DVD's already have most of the movies and TV shows we love, so if a VOD system were launched tomorrow, who would care? I have my favorites movies/TV shows readily available on DVD - I don't need a VOD system.

And they still sell vcr tapes at wal-mart, so even if VOD became popular, there would probably still be a way to get DVDs - DVDs would probably be seen as a 'collector's item'.

bboisvert

Exactly... I think VOD may appeal to people who are primarily renters and primarily interested in big box office releases.

But the more obscure films? Those often change hands a lot. Some go OOP on VHS/DVD for years while rights are exchanged/decided. How does that make sense in the VOD world?

Would you want to go years without being able to watch a film because your VOD system says it's "unavailable"?

For someone who just wants to watch Star Wars, or Aeon Flux, or Desperate Housewives, VOD may make sense. But to people who go beyond seeking a simple night of entertainment, it makes no sense.

DiscGuy

Exactly my point! Electronic distribution is much more cost effective for US-- the consumer.
Been there….heard that. When the first discs systems were being released do you remember what the biggest argument for their failure was? “Can they record?” Pioneer spent tons or training dollars preparing sales people on how to address this deal-buster. Tape supporters stood firm claiming a disc system would never replace tapes as the #1 format….because they couldn’t record. And yet various videodisc systems overcame that obstacle…with better quality and lower pricing. That was a MAJOR philosophical change.

This is not about renting vs. ownership. As stated before, you don’t “own” the movie you buy on a DVD. You own a licensed copy. For me, a VOD system is exactly like the jump from LD to DVD…it is just a different medium. Now you’ve got your bits in a box, or on a chip, or on a disc, or who know where. It’s the same bits, just in another form. Will you be able to “save” that bitstream and replay it as often as you like? I certainly hope so. Will you be able to put the bits on a flash memory chip and move them into your car player? I certainly hope so as well. I should be able to select ANY content I want….not just the titles the studios choose to send to the disc replicators. I should be allowed to purchase a single viewing, or a lifetime license. You want special features with that? How about a small fee to make a 14 day copy for trips and such? Or maybe you can just pay a one-time fee to download directly to your car. There’s no way to know what the future holds or how they might structure it…but has been said here several times…if it’s priced right with better selection, more choices, and higher quality, then I don’t see your issue here. If you can download a lifetime license for a new HD digital movie for $20 at home, what’s the problem?

DiscGuy

Which is interesting because I can imagine exactly that. Just think if the Netflix library were suddenly available on-line for instant access to all.
Pricing is a big factor, but these are not the only two options. How about $80 for lifetime access to all the episodes in a bit-stream? Saves Paramount all physical costs. Pricing has to be set to encourage people to move from DVDs to VOD.
You missed the point. In the future, DVDs become obsolete. New movies, TV shows, etc. are delivered via a VOD system.
Unless studios decided to deliver all content via media-less distribution channels.

ctyankee

Such nonsense. Some industries would kill for a nine percent return in 2006.

Rather than talk about video on demand in a straight forward manner they spin this crap.

DiscGuy

They are exactly the same! OOP on the shelf is no different from OOP for an electronic transfer. Buy the license while the content is available. Save a local copy. You don't have a disc but you've got the bits!

Inverse

The main reason DVD sales growth is slowing is that the vaults are getting bare--the prime plums from the existing catalog have all already come out. People just aren't going to rush to the stores to buy Super Train: The Complete First Season the way they did to buy Indy or The Wizard of Oz or Titanic.

But the article headline is misleading: the article itself doesn't predict a decline in DVD sales, merely a slowing of sales growth from a whopping 17% to a more-than-respectable 9%. Most industries would kill to have that sort of "problem."

Christi P

How can they possibly sell a lifetime license to a bit-stream, since technology is changing all the time? I have the physical DVDs for Star Trek : The Original Series, and chances are I will always be able to buy a DVD-compatible player. I essentially have a lifetime license in the form of my DVDs.

But if I buy a 'lifetime license' to access a bit-stream that would send Star Trek to my computer, what happens if they change the technology for the bit-stream? What if they upgrade the bit-stream tech, and my computer isn't compatible?

There are always threads on DVDTalk saying 'DVD will be obselete soon, it will all be Blu-ray' or 'Blu-ray will be obselete, it will all be VOD'. Well, what happens when VOD is made obselete by some future tech? The 'lifetime license' would be void, and even if you could burn everything onto some kind of media, your burned copies would likely not have the same quality as store-purchased DVDs.

I like science fiction books, and SF newsgroups often break out in discussion over e-books. Some people say paper books will be obselete in ten years. I really don't think so.

When they started talking about VOD about 10-15 years ago, I thought 'Wow! You mean, I could watch any episode of Mary Tyler Moore. or Star Trek, or Remington Steele whenever I want to? Fabulous!'

But now, all of my favorites have either been released on DVD, or probably will be within the next two years, so I am essentially building my own private VOD library at home. I think the availability of almost everything interesting on DVD is making VOD unnecessary.

DiscGuy

A one-time view license would erase itself after viewing. A lifetime license would allow you to access the data whenever you wanted -or- store a permanent copy on your local hard disc....just like your DVD. You own a copy of the movie in digital form.

We're talking about a different way to purchase, store, and view your media with possible enhanced choices and features. Bits is bits.

bboisvert

Netflix can continue renting a disc after it goes OOP. What is the VOD model for that?

When Disney (or Lucas or whoever) decides to pull a film out of circulation, I can still find it at my local Blockbuster or rent it via Netflix (and, obviously, watch the copy that I own). However, in this theoretical VOD system... it'll just not be an option.

Sure, there could be a ton of features available via VOD. Thousands of films and programs. But it won't be tailored to my tastes like my DVD shelves are... I'll take being able to pull Condorman off my shelf andy day vs. praying that it's available on some random VOD menu.


EDIT: And I'd love for a detailed explanation of how a "lifetime license" would work. For one thing, there's no way in hell a studio would sell a lifetime license to anything -- you're talking about companies that have double-, triple-, and quad-dipped things on just the DVD format. You think they'll be satisified to take $20 and then go away forever?

And "lifetime" for whom? If I buy a physical item (DVD), I can keep it forever... give it to a friend... sell it on eBay... or put it in my will for my heirs. When does the license for this 'bitstream' end? And who gurantees that before I shell out my $$$?

It's an unworkable system. I'm sure VOD will replace the current rental model. That makes sense. But it won't replace ownership.

matome

When your hard drive crashes.

NatrlBornThrllr

Don't expect to see the Lord of the Rings LD box set anytime soon? Okay, and I guess I shouldn't expect to see this or this, either, right? I'm not saying that DVDs will be the format of choice in 60 years. Trust me, I'm not that naive. However, what I am saying is this: there will always be a physical format. As shown in the links above, there are still VHS tapes being produced and sold. These are geared at people who simply refused to upgrade from VHS to DVD. If that sect of collectors is strong enough to keep things going, imagine the whole lot of home video collectors. You're fooling yourself if you think we'll see a day when there are no forms of palpable home video.

Exactly.

-JP

Xytraguptorh

I don't see why both VOD and some version of DVD can't both be succesful. I can see VOD being a substantial part of the rental market, but there's just no way it's going to take the place of a physical collectible format. I don't care about the credentials of those arguing that it will, common sense wins out in this case. Just one example, since it's the holiday season. How do you wrap up a movie on VOD and put it under the tree? People want something physical to purchase, and no matter what the studios prefer, they'll put out what the public will buy. And if they did away with a physical format, they'd be losing a ton of money, which they can't afford to do now that home video is even more important than box office revenue.

gutwrencher

I can say that with 2,200 titles....I'm still not even fucking close to what I need.