1. Join Now

    AVForums.com uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

How long will this tizzy last?

Discussion in 'Movie Forum' started by KRRK, Feb 20, 2003.

  1. KRRK

    KRRK
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    You know the one, Blockbusters and Warners. They are now missing out on 8 Legged Freaks and, soon, the new Harry Potter. Surely one side must crack soon?

    I do enjoy asking for Warner titles at my little BB's though.

    "But it said on telly it was out, where is it?!!!"
     
  2. Adlopa

    Adlopa
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2002
    Messages:
    74
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Ratings:
    +0
    Does BB's "if we don't got it, you get it free next time" deal apply in this situation..?
     
  3. bobbles

    bobbles
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    as they will never have it no

    that offer only applies to certain titles anyway


    it does seem as though BB have thrown their rattle out their pram
     
  4. PoochJD

    PoochJD
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2000
    Messages:
    10,992
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    133
    Location:
    Norwich
    Ratings:
    +1,862
    Hi,

    As far as I know, 1) no one is willing to backdown. Warner's won't unless it starts to affect them significantly financially. The video rental shops won't back down either, unless it starts to affect them significantly financially either. Basically, it seems the only people who will loose out, is the customer!

    As for the Blockbuster "motto" (e.g. If you can't get it now, you'll get it free next time), I severely doubt it will apply in this situation. I'm certain that somewhere in their small-print for this offer, it will say "subject to certain terms and conditions". And, I'm certain that one of those terms and conditions will be "Offer applies, only if we stock the title" or some such.

    Pooch
     
  5. MartinImber

    MartinImber
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2001
    Messages:
    3,851
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    71
    Location:
    Worcester
    Ratings:
    +21
    Block buster are trying to assert a rental window so they can go and get stuffed:mad:
     
  6. Gary D

    Gary D
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2002
    Messages:
    7,770
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +826
    just thought i'd let you guys and gals know something, the ramifications of losing the "rental window" are massive. it could cause the rental market to collapse. Every other studio is looking at how this battle will pan out. if it falls in warners favour and all the other studios follow suit there will be no rental market. I for one dont fancy having to buy every film i want to see, i dont know if anyone else does? i've got too many lemons in my DVD collection that i bought because other people said they were great.

    For the record i think that both sides are being stupid about it, its not all blockbusters fault. Also remember that AOL/Time Warner recently announced that they had lost Billions last year, its just trying to get some of its money back.


    Gary
     
  7. Underscore

    Underscore
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Surely, if enough people feel the same way, there will still be a rental market? Also, if people only rent when they can't buy, BB et al would only be stocking films during the rental window, no? Personally, whether a rental window exists or not makes no difference to my purchasing/renting habits. However, I still hope that Warner wins since I object to the limitation of choice that the rental window provides.

    _
     
  8. Gary D

    Gary D
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2002
    Messages:
    7,770
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +826
    underscore, i think your missing the point here a little, the video rental companies are only in it for the money - its not like social services or the NHS, if they dont make money they will leave the market. therefore your rental/buying habits will have to change because you wont be able to rent.

    the rental window is a smoke screen, the problem is that warners are trying to sell product to the rental market then tell the rental market what it can do with product. Warners have told the rental market that firstly its raising the cost of product then telling those customers what they can and cant do with it.

    let me ask you (and everyone else) how would you feel if you bought something then the seller told you what you can and cant do with it? surely its yours? you bought it, therefore its your property?

    one final question for you, who introduced the "vanilla" dvd rental disk? yes that right WARNERS did!

    i know some people on this forum dont like blockbusters, but as i said its not all there fault.

    Gary
     
  9. KRRK

    KRRK
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    But having discs for sale and rent at the same time pleases both sets of customers. I see no advantages to giving shops like BB an exclusive run at a film as this just pushes people to R1.

    And it was FilmFour and VCI who introduced the plain 'vanilla' rental disc.

    http://www.btinternet.com/~bryan.welsh/Reviews/M/martha.htm
     
  10. Gary D

    Gary D
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2002
    Messages:
    7,770
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +826
    i took my info from this months edition of home cinema magazine, which stated that there former CEO introduced it. Dont have the magazine in front of me to give you the direct quote.

    gary
     
  11. KRRK

    KRRK
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    Maybe in the US?
     
  12. Gary D

    Gary D
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2002
    Messages:
    7,770
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +826
    maybe your right with that one KRRK. i dont like giving misleading information so if i am wrong on that point please accept my apoligises.

    Gary


    Dont want to start people thinking i'm the daily mail or anything.
     
  13. Gary D

    Gary D
    Well-known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2002
    Messages:
    7,770
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Ratings:
    +826
    who decides on the rental window? the video rental companies or the studios?

    Gary
     
  14. zantarous

    zantarous
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2002
    Messages:
    679
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +39
    Sorry, I am going into silly question mode. But whats the prob with no rental window? Surly those that don't buy on regular basis can still rent and those that wish to try befor buying can also rent?
     
  15. KRRK

    KRRK
    Guest

    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0
    No need to apologise! We could both be right? I dont know about the US.

    As for the rental window, it used to be the video distributers, so they could sell more tapes to shops at £60 a pop by promising an exclusive run for a few months. The studios didn't mind as they sold a limited amount of tapes for a vast amount of money and all sides still cleaned up on the sell thru release eventually. I think this is how it used to work. I used to manage a video shop in my unhappy youth.

    This model is now shot to pieces with DVD, primarily a purchase medium, and things like the internet and R1. I think the shops are annoyed because, without them, DVD would never have taken off. I remember huge amounts of money spent persuading shops to carry the format. Now it's established, the studios are trying to boss them about. I don't blame them being annoyed, but I do think they are worrying about nothing.

    Renters will rent, and buyers will buy. There are some people to whom the idea of buying a film is a nonsense, as they will only watch it once. Again, some people will never rent, always preferring to buy. Although there is some crossover, they are largely two seperate markets. I hardly ever rent, as secondhand discs are only a few pounds more than renting, esp if you sell them on. And rented discs are usually scratched

    Blockbuster, though, tried to champion the awful DIVX, a 'self destructing' DVD but happily failed.
     
  16. alle v

    alle v
    Standard Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2002
    Messages:
    211
    Products Owned:
    0
    Products Wanted:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    19
    Location:
    Derbyshire
    Ratings:
    +0
    ...I didn't realise people still rented DVDs that much nowadays! :eek:

    Can't see the point really. Nearly 4 quid to rent a film that within a few months of release might only be twice that to buy.

    Watch at the cinema...buy on DVD if you like it. No need for renting then.
     

Share This Page

Loading...