Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > DVD Video > Re: Anybody else think DVD's are still Over Priced?

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: Anybody else think DVD's are still Over Priced?

 
 
Justin
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-24-2004
LASERandDVDfan wrote on [24 Feb 2004 04:26:52 GMT]:
>>Of course, people aren't thought of as people by many groups.
>>
>>The govt thinks of the citizenry as Taxpayers. Business sees them as
>>consumers. Media sees them as ratings.

>
> ... or demographics.
>
> Regardless of how it's viewed, it all adds up to one thing: the people,
> whatever they are called, provide the money in exchange for goods and services.


And unfortunately the lowest common denominator is who gets the most
attention.



> In the case of broadcast, higher ratings means the better likelihood that
> sponsors will pay for your airtime so they can advertise their products to the
> viewers.


And if "Look at what I Pooped" gets the highest ratings then they'll
show it, no matter what the quality of it is.


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
LASERandDVDfan
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-24-2004
>Of course, that assumes that a DVD is rewatchable.

Well, in this case, then it's cavaet emptor. If you buy a DVD at full price
without checking to see how the movie is first, then you deserve to be out $15
or more.

What I try to do is see a movie I have never seen before first. I end up
waiting until it becomes available for rental or PayPerView. The rental price
of a new release at the video store ends up being lower than the admission
price of a movie theatre here in Titusville.

Also, not all DVDs are new releases as movies I remember being good but don't
have in my library are also available for sale at reduced prices in places like
Best Buy, Wal-Mart, K-Mart, Circuit City, and even from used resources like
eBay and Half.com.

When you look at the bigger picture and remember how videotapes, CEDs, and
LaserDiscs were priced in the 1980s, a DVD is still a greater value. -
Reinhart
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Justin
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-24-2004
LASERandDVDfan wrote on [24 Feb 2004 04:37:15 GMT]:
>>Of course, that assumes that a DVD is rewatchable.

>
> When you look at the bigger picture and remember how videotapes, CEDs, and
> LaserDiscs were priced in the 1980s, a DVD is still a greater value. -


Most definitely. Hell, even in the 90s when you look at VHS and LD.

I do believe the people with the price issues of DVDs are your regular
non-saleshound type person that just looks in one place for what they
want.
 
Reply With Quote
 
LASERandDVDfan
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-24-2004
>And unfortunately the lowest common denominator is who gets the most
>attention.


Of course.

But that doesn't mean that I have to do what they do. And, just because the
lowest common denominator gets the most attention, that doesn't mean a niche is
totally ignored. Ignoring a niche also ignores an opportunity to make money.

>And if "Look at what I Pooped" gets the highest ratings then they'll
>show it, no matter what the quality of it is.


So, what?

I don't have to watch it, and video formats like DVD allow me the greater
freedom to watch what I want, when I want it. Plus, there's videogames, too.
A session with a "Final Fantasy" game or "GTA: Vice City" is 20-fold in
entertainment value over the excruciatingly crass "My Big Fat Obnoxious
Fiancee" or the ever annoying "American Idol."

Plus, there's still M*A*S*H, The Simpsons, and Star Trek being aired in
syndication. There are other shows I enjoy that are also broadcast in
syndication.

Despite the realities, there are still choices. Formats like DVD help to
provide more choices over what's being shown in the movie theatres,
particularly with movies that aren't worth the trouble to attend, like
"Eurotrip." - Reinhart
 
Reply With Quote
 
John Beaderstadt
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-24-2004
On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 03:44:54 GMT, Thomas Bell <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

> I remember movies on laserdisc used to cost anywhere
>from 25 to 45 bucks and nice box sets would run around 100 dollars.


I remember paying that amount for a box of eight *blank* Beta video
tapes.


--------------
Beady's Corollary to Occam's Razor: "The likeliest explanation of any phenomenon is almost always the most boring one imaginable."


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
 
Reply With Quote
 
Evelyn C. Leeper
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-24-2004
John Beaderstadt wrote:

> On Tue, 24 Feb 2004 03:44:54 GMT, Thomas Bell <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
>>I remember movies on laserdisc used to cost anywhere

>
>>from 25 to 45 bucks and nice box sets would run around 100 dollars.

>
> I remember paying that amount for a box of eight *blank* Beta video
> tapes.


I remember paying about US$22 for *one* blank VHS tape when we got our
first machine.

--
Evelyn C. Leeper
http://www.geocities.com/evelynleeper
Separate is not equal. The right time to do the right thing
is always now. Those who say "wait" usually mean "never."
--Bonnie Tinker and The Rev. Cecil Prescod







 
Reply With Quote
 
LASERandDVDfan
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-24-2004
>I remember paying that amount for a box of eight *blank* Beta video
>tapes.
>


How about press materials promising that DiscoVision discs would cost less than
a blank video cassette? - Reinhart
 
Reply With Quote
 
Morgan
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-24-2004
Cost of admission where I live is $9.50. So for two people, $19.00. I
don't factor in gas mileage as it's almost as far to the theater as it is to
a store that sells DVD's. On average, most DVD's (newer & not on sale) are
about $19.95 + tax; so for a few dollars more, I get to watch the movie over
and over again. Also, most of my DVD purchases are blind purchases (never
seen the movie, maybe heard about it from someone, read a review
somewhere)--and that's the same as seeing a film in a theater to me. I can
pay $19.00 for my partner and I to see a movie we may not like, can't pause,
and have to listen to other people eating, breathing, talking, etc. Or for
$20, and patiently waiting a few months, see the same movie we may or may
not like at our leisure, and maybe grow to like. Or just sell it to someone
and make some of our money back if we hate it. The other reason DVD's are
much cheaper (for me), is that I tend to add theater admission to the cost
of the disc--in a non-literal way (if that makes sense). If we pay $20 to
see "The Lastest Horror Movie", then buy it on DVD, I've spent $40 on this
movie. If I buy it blindly, I've spent half the money and may make $7-10
back selling it if I hate that much.

When I said a movie over five years old shouldn't be more than $10, in my
opinion, someone argued that we wouldn't see a lot of older movies released
on DVD. I don't 100% buy that argument. The movie "The Old, Classic Film"
made 50 years ago isn't generating much, if any profit due to it's age,
death of VHS, being shown on TV. So if they remaster it and add some
extras, it'll revive interests and make the studio more money (more than
$0). I think the studio would still come out ahead financially even after
investing loads of money in a new transfer, DVD authoring and production,
etc. Plus the fact that it's on a newer format will automatically get
consumers to buy it, replacing old VHS copies. I'm not saying "The Old,
Classic Film" would be a best-selling DVD, but it would be making money
where there wasn't any for a long time. I'd like to see figures on
something like this: what a studio spends on cleaning up and older film and
the profit it makes after it's DVD release, compared to the last 5 years of
income the movie generated through all other media outlets.

I'd also like to know what studios lose on older DVD's. For example they
release a bare-bones version of a movie, then a year later the Special
Edition comes out (sometimes at the same or an even cheaper price). What
does a studio lose on the bare-bones version if most stores carry--, and
most people buy the Special Edition? What do they lose on the discs that
don't sell? And are studios losing money on DVD's they keep re-releasing?
Any thoughts?

Morgan


"LASERandDVDfan" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> >Not at all. I got to the movies for two people for 11.50
> >

>
> Of course, the cost of ticket prices varies depending on locations.
>
> If you live in small cities, the admission is going to be lower.
>
> If you live in a metropolis (like NYC, LA, or Miami), you will pay through

the
> wazoo on admission.
>
> In Titusville, FL., the average admission price is around $7.50 at the

United
> Artists Searstown 10. (crappy)
>
> In Oveido, FL. the average admission price is $8.50 at the Oveido

Marketplace
> Regal Cinemas.
>
> In Orlando, FL. the average admission price is around $8.50 at the

Downtown
> Disney AMC or the Loews Cineplex Universal Boardwalk.
>
> The admission prices are for evening admission during the weekend (which

is
> also when most people are actually able to attend a screening).
>
> In addition, you must factor the price of resources that must be used to

get to
> the theatre. The further away the theatre, the more fuel you have to use

or
> the higher fare you may have to pay for transportation to get there. -
> Reinhart



 
Reply With Quote
 
Goro
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-24-2004
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) (LASERandDVDfan) wrote in message news:<(E-Mail Removed)>...
> >You'd think
> >that with the higher admission, the snacks and drinks would come down in
> >price. Instead they've gone up.

>
> Well, of course.
>
> For movie theatres, the big profit does not come from ticket sales but from
> concessions.
>
> The movie theatre is really nothing more than a snack bar with a dining area
> that also has a projector and a screen.
>
> >With DVD (and I guess getting older), I find the whole movie-going
> >experience unpleasant.

>
> I'm 22, and I find the whole experience of going to a movie theatre
> increasingly annoying mainly because of the fellow patron's inability to shut
> up during the movie!


a HUGE annoyance for me is when people decide to make watching a
movie, a dining experience! i was at TOUCHING THE VOID and this
couple sat down in front of me. They had popcorn and cokes (no big
deal), two hot dogs, and a small pizza! Now it wouldn't bother me,
except (a) it smelled and (b) *Chomp* *Chomp* *SMack* *smack*
*crinkle*

add to that, the theatre didn't have stadium seating and so the guy's
head kept blocking out part of the screen for me...


> Plus, your additional points here:
>
> >The theaters are a quarter of the size they used to
> >be, way too expensive, and not worth going when you have stupid kids playing
> >with laser-pointers and cell phones ringing during the film.

>
> ... are also totally true.


and it seems that the movies that *I* want to see always get stuck in
the converted broom-closet. i was so psyched to see that TRIPLETS OF
BELLEVILLE was showing ehre in scottsdale, then i entered the theatre
and it was like walking into someone's basement... only smaller!

> >So to get back to the original topic, no I don't think most DVD's are
> >over-priced. They're cheaper than admission for two (no refreshments), and
> >you get the extras.

>
> Plus, particularly if you have a great setup that's rigged properly, you will
> be able to see the movie in a manner that your system is capable of.


it's also fun to invest in nice equipment and then use it to its
fullest. my modest set up sounds far better than a great majority of
theaters to which i've been.

> Compare this to going to a movie theatre, where the presentation quality may
> not be guaranteed. The projector might be out of focus and they may only play
> the Westrex track in mono fashion. This has happened to me before when I've
> went to theatres.


agh! when i went to BIG FISH, the audio took a dump and went from
DD5.1 to stereo in the middle. i missed a few minutes to go tell
someone and then waited another 20min for them to fix it. ugh, stereo
in a living room is alright, stereo in a movie theater sounds just
horrid.

> I went to see a movie once a couple of years ago and the sound was Westrex
> mono, the damn EXIT light kept glaring the screen, and the blasted projector
> light had this annoying flicker that would happen every few times. As for the
> audience, there was the ocassional chatter but, suprisingly enough, most kept
> their mouths shut, their phones off, and their laser pointers holstered.
>
> Needless to say, I never went back to that theatre again. As a matter of fact,
> I've never watched a flick in a theatre for about two years now as I've been so
> utterly disgusted by the whole experience as it is today, not to mention the
> non-stop flow of idiot films ("You Got Served," anyone?) that makes the whole
> experience even more of a hassle!


i still like to go see movies at the theater. a nice theater. Here
in Scottsdale, there is the Cine-Capri, which has 2 70' screens. I
saw PIRATES there adn it was glorious. the sound was marvelous and
the video presentation was first rate. the best part? NO ADS BEFORE
THE FEATURE! They did do one of those ad-slide presentation deals
while th elights were up, but when the lights went down, the trailers
played.

i do think that a great movie-theater experience is still far bette
than a home theater one, though. unforteunately, a bad movie-theater
expereience is just absolutely terrible.

> All I have to say is "THANK GOD FOR VIDEO!"
>
> As for the schmucks who think that DVD prices are too high, you obviously have
> never seen the pricing of a VHS movie when they were out in the early 1980s.


which is why many of us bought Laserdiscs...

> Of course, I was too young to remember that time, but I've got a collection of
> movies on VHS and Beta from that era with their price tags of $39, $49, and
> even $75 still intact and stuck on their packaging. - Reinhart


.... but they were $39/movie or so, $100+ for the Criterions. not as
bad as vhs, but still...

-goro-
 
Reply With Quote
 
Goro
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      02-24-2004
(E-Mail Removed) (LASERandDVDfan) wrote in message news:<(E-Mail Removed)>...
> >You'd think
> >that with the higher admission, the snacks and drinks would come down in
> >price. Instead they've gone up.

>
> Well, of course.
>
> For movie theatres, the big profit does not come from ticket sales but from
> concessions.
>
> The movie theatre is really nothing more than a snack bar with a dining area
> that also has a projector and a screen.
>
> >With DVD (and I guess getting older), I find the whole movie-going
> >experience unpleasant.

>
> I'm 22, and I find the whole experience of going to a movie theatre
> increasingly annoying mainly because of the fellow patron's inability to shut
> up during the movie!


a HUGE annoyance for me is when people decide to make watching a
movie, a dining experience! i was at TOUCHING THE VOID and this
couple sat down in front of me. They had popcorn and cokes (no big
deal), two hot dogs, and a small pizza! Now it wouldn't bother me,
except (a) it smelled and (b) *Chomp* *Chomp* *SMack* *smack*
*crinkle*

add to that, the theatre didn't have stadium seating and so the guy's
head kept blocking out part of the screen for me...


> Plus, your additional points here:
>
> >The theaters are a quarter of the size they used to
> >be, way too expensive, and not worth going when you have stupid kids playing
> >with laser-pointers and cell phones ringing during the film.

>
> ... are also totally true.


and it seems that the movies that *I* want to see always get stuck in
the converted broom-closet. i was so psyched to see that TRIPLETS OF
BELLEVILLE was showing ehre in scottsdale, then i entered the theatre
and it was like walking into someone's basement... only smaller!

> >So to get back to the original topic, no I don't think most DVD's are
> >over-priced. They're cheaper than admission for two (no refreshments), and
> >you get the extras.

>
> Plus, particularly if you have a great setup that's rigged properly, you will
> be able to see the movie in a manner that your system is capable of.


it's also fun to invest in nice equipment and then use it to its
fullest. my modest set up sounds far better than a great majority of
theaters to which i've been.

> Compare this to going to a movie theatre, where the presentation quality may
> not be guaranteed. The projector might be out of focus and they may only play
> the Westrex track in mono fashion. This has happened to me before when I've
> went to theatres.


agh! when i went to BIG FISH, the audio took a dump and went from
DD5.1 to stereo in the middle. i missed a few minutes to go tell
someone and then waited another 20min for them to fix it. ugh, stereo
in a living room is alright, stereo in a movie theater sounds just
horrid.

> I went to see a movie once a couple of years ago and the sound was Westrex
> mono, the damn EXIT light kept glaring the screen, and the blasted projector
> light had this annoying flicker that would happen every few times. As for the
> audience, there was the ocassional chatter but, suprisingly enough, most kept
> their mouths shut, their phones off, and their laser pointers holstered.
>
> Needless to say, I never went back to that theatre again. As a matter of fact,
> I've never watched a flick in a theatre for about two years now as I've been so
> utterly disgusted by the whole experience as it is today, not to mention the
> non-stop flow of idiot films ("You Got Served," anyone?) that makes the whole
> experience even more of a hassle!


i still like to go see movies at the theater. a nice theater. Here
in Scottsdale, there is the Cine-Capri, which has 2 70' screens. I
saw PIRATES there adn it was glorious. the sound was marvelous and
the video presentation was first rate. the best part? NO ADS BEFORE
THE FEATURE! They did do one of those ad-slide presentation deals
while th elights were up, but when the lights went down, the trailers
played.

i do think that a great movie-theater experience is still far bette
than a home theater one, though. unforteunately, a bad movie-theater
expereience is just absolutely terrible.

> All I have to say is "THANK GOD FOR VIDEO!"
>
> As for the schmucks who think that DVD prices are too high, you obviously have
> never seen the pricing of a VHS movie when they were out in the early 1980s.


which is why many of us bought Laserdiscs...

> Of course, I was too young to remember that time, but I've got a collection of
> movies on VHS and Beta from that era with their price tags of $39, $49, and
> even $75 still intact and stuck on their packaging. - Reinhart


.... but they were $39/movie or so, $100+ for the Criterions. not as
bad as vhs, but still...

-goro-
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
VOIP over VPN over TCP over WAP over 3G Theo Markettos UK VOIP 2 02-14-2008 03:27 PM
FF 1.5 refuses to start, anybody else? Greger Firefox 0 01-24-2006 10:09 AM
Discount-Hosting: Anybody else have billing problems? Tina - AxisHOST, Inc. HTML 2 07-06-2005 04:20 AM
Anybody Else Burned By Internic/Verisign? (Pete Cresswell) HTML 0 04-05-2005 11:08 PM
Anybody else think 2&3 packs are a Waste? Adamm Starkk DVD Video 17 09-12-2004 08:25 PM



Advertisments