The theatrical window is immaterial, really. Most renters are interested in seeing new releases; they want to see them at home. Where you see them having already foregone the chance to see the movie for three or four months, they see a three or four month longer wait than the folks willing to go to a theater to see the movie. Of course it's a personal choice; no one is barring them from theaters (at least, I assume that's the case). My point is that people have different priorities and preferences, and theatrical runs aren't necessarily relevant to a lot of renters.

As for why the one month delay is a big deal for Redbox, there's the sense that by the time they get to stock the title, interest--and awareness--will have already waned. Think about it. No one is going to pay to run commercials on TV advertising a Blu-ray or DVD release a month after it's already come out.

What Redbox got out of it was an agreement with Warner that they would still be able to get discs from Warner--unlike Fox and Universal. There are legal disputes going on between Redbox and those studios, and in the interim, Redbox has had to resort to buying their titles from retailers the same as you or me. It isn't so much a victory as it would have been a loss for them had they not reached some kind of agreement with Warner.

My guess would be because Blockbuster probably owes WB several million dollars. WB has a vested interested in keeping them afloat even if it means an unfair advantage. If Blockbuster goes chapter 11, WB will have to wait months or years to recover any of what they are owed and it will likely be a reduced amount. I don't think the studios like or dislike redbox - they just want to sell dvds. The studios don't really care how much the buyer rents them for - they already got their money. At the moment, Blockbuster is probably their biggest customer, so they will do whatever it takes to keep selling them lots of product.

Well, I have three Redbox kiosks within a 5 mile round trip of my home and a rental is $1. The nearest blockbuster is a 25 mile round trip and a rental is $5. Easy decision. I doubt that is the result Warner had in mind.
This bullshit only fuels my growing hate for studios in general and Warner in particular.

Exactly what I thought - so I have to wait a bit longer ... no big deal.

The reason it's important is perception: The public will know when something has come out, and they'll begin to feel that Redbox is behind the times. It diminishes Redbox's credibility with the public as a provider of current releases. Surely, we cannot expect the average renter to be as committed to knowing why new Warner titles aren't available at Redbox--or that they're even movies from Warner Bros. in the first place!

I am sure you are right, especially about people not knowing which movies are WB movies.

Blockbuster costs a lot more than Red Box or Zip (my rent by mail service in Canada). Perhaps people will assume you get what you pay for - release day is a non-issue for me, as it takes a lot longer before I get movies from my list mailed out. I assume most rent-by-mail people are as apathetic as I am about the delays - when I average $1/movie, I don't fuss about delays in availability.

If this situation were reversed - Netflix was a month ahead of Blockbuster - it would seem very strange. Or if the major vendors all announced the same policy on the same day. But as WB appears to be acting first, and the pricier option is now the faster one, all seems as it should be.