«

I hear your reasoning below, but I don't think much of it has merit. I seriously
doubt they will replace purchasable and archival DVD's and I don't think the
disposable DVD's are going to be very popular anyway. They are merely a
convenience item that will garner the publishers a few extra bucks from the
crowd that doesn't mind paying a bit more for the added convenience of not
having to return something. I really think many of you are working your brains
too hard on this one especially on the environmental issue. A year's worth of
disposable DVD's in the US probably won't even equal a day's worth of plastic
drink lids from McDonalds alone.



"keved" <> wrote in message
news:BB778A59.1C6A7%. ..
> in article DJidnaBHRLc7vM-, Charles Tomaras at
> wrote on 8/31/03 9:26 AM:
>
> > "Joey Jolley" <> wrote in message
> > news: om...
> >> Are these new one-viewing, throwaway DVDs going to replace regular
> >> DVDs? What are the chances of this happening?
> >
> > They won't replace them because many of us buy DVD's and don't rent. I can
see
> > a
> > nice niche for the disposable products in the travel industry at airports
and
> > near hotels and motels for people who don't want to deal with returns.
> >
> > Quite frankly I don't understand what all the fuss is over it. These
companies
> > should be able to market their products in any fashion they see fit. If you
> > don't like there are many other alternatives. I see this as giving us more
> > choice and not hampering us in any way.
>
> Actually, there are many reasons for the fuss. Part of the fuss has to do
> with the fear that, like Divx, this has potential to take away the
> alternatives and choice.
>
> Here are some of the reasons for the fuss:
>
> There's a huge environmental issue. Flexpay manages to use the word
> "recycle" in just about every sentence of every press release they send out,
> but just because they have smart PR people doesn't mean they have smart (or
> honest) logistics people.
>
> Here's why the recycling won't work...
>
> Nobody is going to purchase an envelope and pay for the postage to send
> these disks. Flexpay acknowledged this and says that mailers will be free
> for sending the disks. What they don't say is that the mailers won't be a
> part of the packaging of the disks. The reason for this is obvious.
> Flexpay knows that if they included the mailer, they would have to provide
> pre-paid mailers that were paid for mailing from any location in the US to
> the recycling center. This is much more expensive then paying as Netflix
> does...where they only pay postage from your location to the nearest
> distribution center.
>
> Furthermore, Flexpay would have the expense for the pre-paid mailers even if
> they are never used. Many people won't use the mailers.
>
> So...to save lots of money, Flexpay will require users to go online and
> request a mailer. This extra step will prevent even more people from using
> it.
>
> Well besides the environmental issue, there's also the issue that it is
> likely that many of these titles will be exclusive to throw-away versions.
> There's a hard core base of DVD fanatics who would rank "ownership" of the
> movie in a permanent high quality media format pretty high on the list for
> why they bought into DVD. Now they're looking at a possible situation where
> they can no longer own movies.
>
> There's also the "Backstreet Britterny Nsynch BoyZ" syndrome. This is where
> the music industry in the late 90s wanted to focus on a smaller list of acts
> and milk them. This is why they would invest millions of dollars on the
> "next" Brittarny SpearZ while potential other artists could get no support.
> No effort was made whatsoever to expand the amount of titles available even
> though there were advances in technology as well as huge advances in
> distribution methods. Part of what let the genie out of the bottle in the
> music industry was the lack of choice due to them only focusing on the Top
> Ten acts which were lowest common denominator artists.
>
> Throw-away DVDs are very much this same long term mistake. These are
> designed to be POS (double use acronym, point of sale and piece of ____).
> They will be placed at supermarket checkouts, gas stations, vending
> machines, etc... This means a focus on the top ten movies. Batch produce
> them. Produce them exclusive on this format. Put them on the shelf. When
> the shelf life expires, they're gone for good. This means titles will
> disappear, never to be seen from again.
>
> There's a bit of this mentality with regular DVDs, but those top ten titles
> at the supermarket check out or blown out at Target/Walmart/etc remain
> playable, so while they will go out of print and may never be re-issued,
> those that are released can always be resold.
>
> Oh, did you know that the titles are only good in their packaging for 1
> year? This means stores can only stock the disks for a short time. What
> will happen with the overstock? Unlike regular DVDs which get cut-out and
> sold in bargain bins, these will be "disposed"...gone forever.
>
> Another thing high on the list of what the hard core DVD fanatics like about
> current DVDs is that many/most of the movies they buy come chock full of
> extras. Many DVDs have more extras than movie. This will not happen with
> disposable DVDs. Part of the reason is that they have to keep the cost
> down, so they can't afford to do a double-layer DVD packed full of extras,
> and even if they could afford to produce the extras, the disposable DVDs are
> single layer.
>
> Even if they could produce extras, the disks are only good for 48 hours.
> Many people who go into the extras don't do so immediately after watching
> the DVD the first time.
>
> Another factor is that on a "per-rental" basis, this is more expensive than
> existing options. At $4-$6 each, this is good for the studios, but not for
> consumers.
>
> These disks are going to encourage piracy...actually it may in fact legalize
> it to some degree. Currently you are not allowed in the US to backup a
> rented DVD. It's a fuzzy area that hasn't been tried yet, but as time goes
> by, it's becoming more generally accepted that you can back up a DVD that
> you own. Thus, the disposable disks being something that you own, would be
> legal to back up.
>
> These disks will be extremely easy to back up since they will be single
> layer. Currently they could be copied with less than 60 seconds of user
> time and about 30-45 minutes of computer time...all for less than $1. Soon,
> it will be more like about 5-10 minutes of computer time and less than 50
> cents. The cost of equipment is currently only a matter of adding a DVD
> burner to your Mac or PC at under $175. Soon that price will drop to under
> $50.
>
> Knowing that they'd have to re-purchase a DVD at $4-$6 for each viewing
> window, there would be lots of incentive to copy these disks...and even more
> incentive knowing that if they don't make copies of these disks they may
> never be able to view them in the future because they won't be able to buy
> them again...remember no storing of the disposable DVDs for more than a
> year.
>
>
>
>
>

in article iamdne95Ic7Ils6iU-, Charles Tomaras at
wrote on 9/1/03 2:03 AM:

> I hear your reasoning below, but I don't think much of it has merit. I
> seriously doubt they will replace purchasable and archival DVD's and I don't
> think the disposable DVD's are going to be very popular anyway.

I never suggested they would replace conventional DVDs or would be popular.
In fact the basis of my reasoning was that they are doomed to failure.

This though doesn't mean that studios won't attempt to replace conventional
DVDs. This is were the similarity between Flexplay and Divx is dead on.
Studios, especially Disney, want more control over their library. It is in
their interest to be able to pull titles from the market to build demand for
them.

Divx said that it would be an extension to DVD, not a competitor, but there
were titles that were released exclusively on Divx, and had the format taken
off, there would've been a lot more, if not a majority more.

> They are merely a convenience item that will garner the publishers a few extra
> bucks from the crowd that doesn't mind paying a bit more for the added
> convenience of not having to return something.

Copy and pasted from the Divx vs. DVD threads?

> I really think many of you are working your brains too hard on this one
> especially on the environmental issue. A year's worth of disposable DVD's in
> the US probably won't even equal a day's worth of plastic drink lids from
> McDonalds alone.

I'm not a big pro-environmentalist. I think most of them are out-of-touch
whackos who are more often than not terribly misguided and misinformed.
However, they will be a force, just like they were in the death of Divx, in
terms of killing of Flexplay.

My only problem with Flexplay is that I do know the studios want to do
disposable DVDs exclusively. I do know this means fewer extras and in some
cases inferior quality (due to fitting long titles to single layer disks).

I like being able to own disks, and I know all it takes is a little traction
for these things to take off enough for studios to go exclusive with them.

The biggest problem is the thought that given a 1 year shelf life of the
titles, movies not in the top-list will not be easily available, if at all.

"keved" <> wrote in message
news:BB792661.1CAA8%. ..
> > They are merely a convenience item that will garner the publishers a few
extra
> > bucks from the crowd that doesn't mind paying a bit more for the added
> > convenience of not having to return something.
>
> Copy and pasted from the Divx vs. DVD threads?

No, I actually came up with that myself!