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

Discussion in 'DVD Video' started by Justin, Feb 23, 2004.

  1. Justin

    Justin Guest

    Bob Flaminio wrote on [Mon, 23 Feb 2004 09:06:23 -0800]:
    > Toni wrote:
    >>> If I and my partner went to see the same movie twice in a picture
    >>> theater then it would be cheaper to buy the movie on DVD.

    >>
    >> To be honest, for my family of 5, a DVD is cheaper than a
    >> night at the movies.

    >
    > Absolutely -- heck, it's cheaper just for me and my daughter. Last time
    > we went to the theater -- with tickets, popcorn, etc -- it cost me
    > US$25. It's rare that I buy a DVD that costs that much.
    >


    And why do you insist on adding the popcorn when comparing versus buying
    a DVD? Do you include the dinner you may have had beforehand?
     
    Justin, Feb 23, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Justin wrote:
    > Bob Flaminio wrote on [Mon, 23 Feb 2004 09:06:23 -0800]:
    >
    >>Toni wrote:
    >>
    >>>>If I and my partner went to see the same movie twice in a picture
    >>>>theater then it would be cheaper to buy the movie on DVD.
    >>>
    >>>To be honest, for my family of 5, a DVD is cheaper than a
    >>>night at the movies.

    >>
    >>Absolutely -- heck, it's cheaper just for me and my daughter. Last time
    >>we went to the theater -- with tickets, popcorn, etc -- it cost me
    >>US$25. It's rare that I buy a DVD that costs that much.

    >
    > And why do you insist on adding the popcorn when comparing versus buying
    > a DVD? Do you include the dinner you may have had beforehand?


    Because for some people that's part of the movie-watching experience.

    We saw a movie in NYC yesterday that cost $9 each for the movie. We
    also paid $17 for parking and $11.10 in tolls, but I wouldn't count
    those in this case because we also did other stuff in NYC. But if we
    went in *just* for the movie (and we did this once or twice), then I
    would count all those as well.

    A double feature would fill the day and as a result, I would say it cost
    $64.10 for us. But we can probably order the two DVDs for less when
    they come out.

    --
    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
     
    Evelyn C. Leeper, Feb 23, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Justin

    Justin Guest

    Evelyn C. Leeper wrote on [Mon, 23 Feb 2004 17:43:13 GMT]:
    > Justin wrote:
    >> Bob Flaminio wrote on [Mon, 23 Feb 2004 09:06:23 -0800]:
    >>
    >>>Toni wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>>If I and my partner went to see the same movie twice in a picture
    >>>>>theater then it would be cheaper to buy the movie on DVD.
    >>>>
    >>>>To be honest, for my family of 5, a DVD is cheaper than a
    >>>>night at the movies.
    >>>
    >>>Absolutely -- heck, it's cheaper just for me and my daughter. Last time
    >>>we went to the theater -- with tickets, popcorn, etc -- it cost me
    >>>US$25. It's rare that I buy a DVD that costs that much.

    >>
    >> And why do you insist on adding the popcorn when comparing versus buying
    >> a DVD? Do you include the dinner you may have had beforehand?

    >
    > Because for some people that's part of the movie-watching experience.


    Then they should count what they eat and drink at home when watching a DVD
    in the price of a DVD

    > We saw a movie in NYC yesterday that cost $9 each for the movie. We
    > also paid $17 for parking and $11.10 in tolls, but I wouldn't count
    > those in this case because we also did other stuff in NYC. But if we
    > went in *just* for the movie (and we did this once or twice), then I
    > would count all those as well.
    >
    > A double feature would fill the day and as a result, I would say it cost
    > $64.10 for us. But we can probably order the two DVDs for less when
    > they come out.


    See. I'd count tolls and parking, but nobody is forcing you to eat
    popcorn at a movie theatre.
     
    Justin, Feb 23, 2004
    #3
  4. Justin

    Morgan Guest

    > Because for some people that's part of the movie-watching experience.

    I agree, although I don't buy popcorn at the theater anymore. You'd think
    that with the higher admission, the snacks and drinks would come down in
    price. Instead they've gone up. Here in Southern California, a bottled
    water runs you $3.00, a small soft-drink is about $3.50, and a medium bag of
    popcorn (no more tubs unless you get the extra, extra giant size) can run
    you almost $6.50. Over the years here, I've tried bringing in my own sodas
    and candy and have been told I couldn't enter the theater with them (now you
    gotta hide them under your coat or in a purse).

    With DVD (and I guess getting older), I find the whole movie-going
    experience unpleasant. 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. Plus, I don't
    like the fact that where two huge movie theaters once were, they can tear
    them down and build a 95 screen super megaplex! I might as well watch it at
    home, since my apartment is bigger than the average theater. I wait for the
    DVD and I buy it. I can pause it when I want, eat what I want, go to the
    bathroom when I want, and then watch the extras when I want. I don't like
    renting, because I can never remember to return it on time and I like to
    watch the same movie a few days later if I like it.

    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. I think they're priced accurately (for me anyway).
    However, there are older movies on DVD that are way over-priced and a few
    newer ones that never seem to come down in price. Only in the past few
    months I've seen Mallrats, Clerks, the Addams Family movies come down under
    $19.95. A local store now has them for $9.95, which is a fair price for an
    older movie. I don't care what kind of edition it is or special packaging,
    a movie over five years old shouldn't be more than $10, in my opinion.

    Morgan
     
    Morgan, Feb 23, 2004
    #4
  5. Justin

    Lithurge Guest

    "Morgan" <> wrote in
    news::


    > 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. I think
    > they're priced accurately (for me anyway). However, there
    > are older movies on DVD that are way over-priced and a few
    > newer ones that never seem to come down in price. Only in
    > the past few months I've seen Mallrats, Clerks, the Addams
    > Family movies come down under $19.95. A local store now
    > has them for $9.95, which is a fair price for an older
    > movie. I don't care what kind of edition it is or special
    > packaging, a movie over five years old shouldn't be more
    > than $10, in my opinion.
    >
    > Morgan
    >
    >
    >


    The only problem with that is you probably won't see a lot of
    older movies released. If a company isn't going to make back
    the money invested in producing a DVD version then what's the
    point. I'm thinking more of those where they take time to
    restore it, rather than chuck the nearest available transfer
    on.

    I'd rather pay a bit more to get a decent transfer of an
    older film than less & get a crappy one. Extreme example but
    watching the restored Nosferatu dvd compared to the
    unrestored Der Golem is a much more pleasurable experience,
    and these are films that will not sell to a mass audience,
    even at a cheap price.
     
    Lithurge, Feb 23, 2004
    #5
  6. Justin

    Justin Guest

    Lithurge wrote on [23 Feb 2004 19:38:33 GMT]:
    > "Morgan" <> wrote in
    > news::
    >
    >
    >> 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. I think
    >> they're priced accurately (for me anyway). However, there
    >> are older movies on DVD that are way over-priced and a few
    >> newer ones that never seem to come down in price. Only in
    >> the past few months I've seen Mallrats, Clerks, the Addams
    >> Family movies come down under $19.95. A local store now
    >> has them for $9.95, which is a fair price for an older
    >> movie. I don't care what kind of edition it is or special
    >> packaging, a movie over five years old shouldn't be more
    >> than $10, in my opinion.
    >>
    >> Morgan
    >>
    >>
    >>

    >
    > The only problem with that is you probably won't see a lot of
    > older movies released. If a company isn't going to make back
    > the money invested in producing a DVD version then what's the
    > point. I'm thinking more of those where they take time to
    > restore it, rather than chuck the nearest available transfer
    > on.


    Yeah. It really depends what is meant by "older movie". Do you mean a
    movie produced over 5 years go? Or a DVD produced over 5 years ago?

    Of course, I picked up Clerks for $10 when it was initially released
    when Buy.com was going coupon crazy. But that's another point entirely.


    > I'd rather pay a bit more to get a decent transfer of an
    > older film than less & get a crappy one.


    I'd rather pay a little more to have a movie I really love, than
    not have one. If there's no profit in making a DVD of say, Rebecca,
    because people think it's an old movie and isn't worth more than $10...
    A lot of people will be missing out on a good movie.
     
    Justin, Feb 23, 2004
    #6
  7. Justin

    Lithurge Guest

    Justin <> wrote in
    news:2go.com:

    > Lithurge wrote on [23 Feb 2004 19:38:33 GMT]:
    >> "Morgan" <> wrote in
    >> news::
    >>
    >>
    >>> 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. I think they're priced accurately (for me
    >>> anyway). However, there are older movies on DVD that are
    >>> way over-priced and a few newer ones that never seem to
    >>> come down in price. Only in the past few months I've
    >>> seen Mallrats, Clerks, the Addams Family movies come down
    >>> under $19.95. A local store now has them for $9.95,
    >>> which is a fair price for an older movie. I don't care
    >>> what kind of edition it is or special packaging, a movie
    >>> over five years old shouldn't be more than $10, in my
    >>> opinion.
    >>>
    >>> Morgan
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >> The only problem with that is you probably won't see a lot
    >> of older movies released. If a company isn't going to make
    >> back the money invested in producing a DVD version then
    >> what's the point. I'm thinking more of those where they
    >> take time to restore it, rather than chuck the nearest
    >> available transfer on.

    >
    > Yeah. It really depends what is meant by "older movie". Do
    > you mean a movie produced over 5 years go? Or a DVD
    > produced over 5 years ago?
    >

    Well the way I read the original posters comments & my
    meaning was movies produced x number of years ago.

    There are a lot of current movies I don't mind having in my
    collection (looking at it, eclectic is a good way of
    describing it) but don't want to pay full initial RRP for.

    One good thing for those of us in the UK at the moment is the
    exchange rate, and the free availability of multiregion
    players. I've added a fair few dvd's to my collection, that I
    may have waited on for sales, or just due to needing to not
    spend all my money on them.
     
    Lithurge, Feb 23, 2004
    #7
  8. Justin wrote:
    > Evelyn C. Leeper wrote on [Mon, 23 Feb 2004 17:43:13 GMT]:
    >>Justin wrote:
    >>>Bob Flaminio wrote on [Mon, 23 Feb 2004 09:06:23 -0800]:
    >>>
    >>>>Absolutely -- heck, it's cheaper just for me and my daughter. Last time
    >>>>we went to the theater -- with tickets, popcorn, etc -- it cost me
    >>>>US$25. It's rare that I buy a DVD that costs that much.
    >>>
    >>>And why do you insist on adding the popcorn when comparing versus buying
    >>>a DVD? Do you include the dinner you may have had beforehand?

    >>
    >>Because for some people that's part of the movie-watching experience.

    >
    > Then they should count what they eat and drink at home when watching a DVD
    > in the price of a DVD


    Well, if you count in the cost of popcorn and soda at home, it's a *lot*
    cheaper than popcorn and soda at the theater. (For iced tea--my
    beverage of choice--it costs about a nickel to make a quart of it.)

    --
    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
     
    Evelyn C. Leeper, Feb 23, 2004
    #8
  9. Justin

    Justin Guest

    Lithurge wrote on [23 Feb 2004 20:08:18 GMT]:
    > Justin <> wrote in
    > news:2go.com:
    >
    >> Lithurge wrote on [23 Feb 2004 19:38:33 GMT]:
    >>> "Morgan" <> wrote in
    >>> news::
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> 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. I think they're priced accurately (for me
    >>>> anyway). However, there are older movies on DVD that are
    >>>> way over-priced and a few newer ones that never seem to
    >>>> come down in price. Only in the past few months I've
    >>>> seen Mallrats, Clerks, the Addams Family movies come down
    >>>> under $19.95. A local store now has them for $9.95,
    >>>> which is a fair price for an older movie. I don't care
    >>>> what kind of edition it is or special packaging, a movie
    >>>> over five years old shouldn't be more than $10, in my
    >>>> opinion.
    >>>>
    >>>> Morgan
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> The only problem with that is you probably won't see a lot
    >>> of older movies released. If a company isn't going to make
    >>> back the money invested in producing a DVD version then
    >>> what's the point. I'm thinking more of those where they
    >>> take time to restore it, rather than chuck the nearest
    >>> available transfer on.

    >>
    >> Yeah. It really depends what is meant by "older movie". Do
    >> you mean a movie produced over 5 years go? Or a DVD
    >> produced over 5 years ago?
    >>

    > Well the way I read the original posters comments & my
    > meaning was movies produced x number of years ago.


    Right. That's what I'd assumed as well, thus my comment about rather
    being able to own a copy at a little more expense than not being able to
    own a copy.


    > There are a lot of current movies I don't mind having in my
    > collection (looking at it, eclectic is a good way of
    > describing it) but don't want to pay full initial RRP for.


    True enough. There are also quite a few older movies I have no problem
    paying RRP or MSRP or close to that for.
     
    Justin, Feb 23, 2004
    #9
  10. Morgan wrote:

    >>Because for some people that's part of the movie-watching experience.

    >
    > I agree, although I don't buy popcorn at the theater anymore. You'd think
    > that with the higher admission, the snacks and drinks would come down in
    > price. Instead they've gone up.


    That's because the money from the tickets goes almost entirely to the
    distributor, with the theater making its money almost entirely from the
    concession stand.

    > ... Over the years here, I've tried bringing in my own sodas
    > and candy and have been told I couldn't enter the theater with them (now you
    > gotta hide them under your coat or in a purse).


    I usually bring in a package of crackers and peanut butter if it's going
    to run into my usual meal time (like a movie that starts at 5PM).

    > With DVD (and I guess getting older), I find the whole movie-going
    > experience unpleasant. The theaters are a quarter of the size they used to
    > be,


    We saw ROBOT STORIES yesterday in a theater which sat 71.

    (In San Francisco we saw a couple of films in theaters which sat 34 and
    51 people.)

    > I don't care what kind of edition it is or special packaging,
    > a movie over five years old shouldn't be more than $10, in my opinion.


    However, the higher cost is necessary to help recoup new cleaned-up
    transfers, commentaries, etc. I have no problem with paying US$25 for
    an older film that I'll watch many times which has lots of extras as well.

    --
    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
     
    Evelyn C. Leeper, Feb 23, 2004
    #10
  11. Justin

    Mike Kohary Guest

    "Justin" <> wrote in message
    news:2go.com...
    > Bob Flaminio wrote on [Mon, 23 Feb 2004 09:06:23 -0800]:
    > > Toni wrote:
    > >>> If I and my partner went to see the same movie twice in a picture
    > >>> theater then it would be cheaper to buy the movie on DVD.
    > >>
    > >> To be honest, for my family of 5, a DVD is cheaper than a
    > >> night at the movies.

    > >
    > > Absolutely -- heck, it's cheaper just for me and my daughter. Last time
    > > we went to the theater -- with tickets, popcorn, etc -- it cost me
    > > US$25. It's rare that I buy a DVD that costs that much.

    >
    > And why do you insist on adding the popcorn when comparing versus buying
    > a DVD? Do you include the dinner you may have had beforehand?


    If popcorn is a regular, predictable, expected part of the theater-going
    experience for him and his daughter (as it is for me and my daughter), then
    it makes sense to include it. When we watch a DVD at home, we fix popcorn
    there too, only it doesn't cost us $5.75. ;)

    Mike
     
    Mike Kohary, Feb 23, 2004
    #11
  12. Justin

    Justin Guest

    Mike Kohary wrote on [Mon, 23 Feb 2004 14:05:26 -0800]:
    > "Justin" <> wrote in message
    > news:2go.com...
    >> Bob Flaminio wrote on [Mon, 23 Feb 2004 09:06:23 -0800]:
    >> > Toni wrote:
    >> >>> If I and my partner went to see the same movie twice in a picture
    >> >>> theater then it would be cheaper to buy the movie on DVD.
    >> >>
    >> >> To be honest, for my family of 5, a DVD is cheaper than a
    >> >> night at the movies.
    >> >
    >> > Absolutely -- heck, it's cheaper just for me and my daughter. Last time
    >> > we went to the theater -- with tickets, popcorn, etc -- it cost me
    >> > US$25. It's rare that I buy a DVD that costs that much.

    >>
    >> And why do you insist on adding the popcorn when comparing versus buying
    >> a DVD? Do you include the dinner you may have had beforehand?

    >
    > If popcorn is a regular, predictable, expected part of the theater-going
    > experience for him and his daughter (as it is for me and my daughter), then
    > it makes sense to include it. When we watch a DVD at home, we fix popcorn
    > there too, only it doesn't cost us $5.75. ;)
    >
    > Mike
    >


    So, when you go out to dinner beforehand to you include that as well?

    And why did you fix the popcorn, was it broken?
     
    Justin, Feb 23, 2004
    #12
  13. Justin

    Stan Brown Guest

    It seems "Evelyn C. Leeper" wrote in alt.video.dvd:
    >Justin wrote:


    >> And why do you insist on adding the popcorn when comparing versus buying
    >> a DVD? Do you include the dinner you may have had beforehand?

    >
    >Because for some people that's part of the movie-watching experience.
    >
    >We saw a movie in NYC yesterday that cost $9 each for the movie. We
    >also paid $17 for parking and $11.10 in tolls, but I wouldn't count
    >those in this case because we also did other stuff in NYC.


    Movie popcorn savings: $4
    Parking savings: $17
    Toll savings: $11.10

    Getting to watch the damn movie without twenty solipsistic morons
    yammering through it: Priceless.

    --
    Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cortland County, New York, USA
    http://OakRoadSystems.com
    DVD FAQ: http://dvddemystified.com/dvdfaq.html
    other FAQs: http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/faqget.htm
     
    Stan Brown, Feb 23, 2004
    #13
  14. Justin

    Mike Kohary Guest

    "Justin" <> wrote in message
    news:2go.com...
    > Mike Kohary wrote on [Mon, 23 Feb 2004 14:05:26 -0800]:
    > > "Justin" <> wrote in message
    > >>
    > >> And why do you insist on adding the popcorn when comparing versus

    buying
    > >> a DVD? Do you include the dinner you may have had beforehand?

    > >
    > > If popcorn is a regular, predictable, expected part of the theater-going
    > > experience for him and his daughter (as it is for me and my daughter),

    then
    > > it makes sense to include it. When we watch a DVD at home, we fix

    popcorn
    > > there too, only it doesn't cost us $5.75. ;)

    >
    > So, when you go out to dinner beforehand to you include that as well?


    No. That's dinner, not a movie.

    Mike
     
    Mike Kohary, Feb 23, 2004
    #14
  15. Justin

    Shrivel Guest

    "Justin" <> wrote in message
    news:2go.com...
    > So, when you go out to dinner beforehand to you include that as well?
    >
    > And why did you fix the popcorn, was it broken?


    It doesn't matter whether we include popcorn in the cost of the movie at
    home, at the theater, or both. DVDs are still WAY cheaper than going to a
    movie no matter whether you count the popcorn.

    "Forget about the fat lady. You're obsessed with the fat lady." ;-)
     
    Shrivel, Feb 24, 2004
    #15
  16. Justin

    Justin Guest

    Shrivel wrote on [Mon, 23 Feb 2004 21:10:58 -0500]:
    >
    > "Justin" <> wrote in message
    > news:2go.com...
    >> So, when you go out to dinner beforehand to you include that as well?
    >>
    >> And why did you fix the popcorn, was it broken?

    >
    > It doesn't matter whether we include popcorn in the cost of the movie at
    > home, at the theater, or both. DVDs are still WAY cheaper than going to a
    > movie no matter whether you count the popcorn.


    Not at all. I got to the movies for two people for 11.50
     
    Justin, Feb 24, 2004
    #16
  17. >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!

    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.

    I don't know about anyone else, but suddenly the notion of using resources to
    get to the theatre and back (gas costs money, not to mention wear and tear on
    your vehicle) plus spending mucho dinero on the admission is very unappealing
    because of these points.

    >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.

    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.

    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!

    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.

    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
     
    LASERandDVDfan, Feb 24, 2004
    #17
  18. >Well, if you count in the cost of popcorn and soda at home, it's a *lot*
    >cheaper than popcorn and soda at the theater. (For iced tea--my
    >beverage of choice--it costs about a nickel to make a quart of it.)


    Plus, you may be able to concoct delicious kinds of popcorn flavors instead of
    plain old butter. One person, I forget who, had suggested experimenting with
    popcorn shaken with parmesan cheese.

    It may also be more healthy to prepare your own snacks. Although there are
    movie theatres that use hot air to pop kernels, they also still use coconut oil
    which is very unhealthful. - Reinhart
     
    LASERandDVDfan, Feb 24, 2004
    #18
  19. >And why did you fix the popcorn, was it broken?

    You know exactly what he means, yes?

    It was a figure of speech which suggests the preparation of popcorn.

    You've ever heard of the term "I'm going to fix me up something to eat?" -
    Reinhart
     
    LASERandDVDfan, Feb 24, 2004
    #19
  20. Justin

    Thomas Bell Guest

    Just throwing my two cents in here, I don't think dvd movies are
    overpriced at all. I remember movies on laserdisc used to cost anywhere
    from 25 to 45 bucks and nice box sets would run around 100 dollars.
    Even worse, back when vhs was just taking hold of the marketplace in the
    early 80's, movies regularly ran about $80.00.

    Now look at album(cd) prices. They've steadily gone up from when records
    ran only a few bucks to now running about $14 to $18+ for a cd which is
    actually cheaper to mass produce than a vinyl record. And you can't
    tell me *any* artist has ran up 100 million or more to record an album.
    Even today, most albums even by superstar rock bands rarely cost more
    then 1 or 2 million ( and many far under that cost) yet *still* cost
    $18.95 list.

    I can pick up the classic movie "Spartacus" on dvd for under 20 bucks
    which cost over 20 million to make back in the 60's while the first
    Black Sabbath record which cost less than $1,000.00 and 2 days to record
    goes for about the same price on cd. It's an even larger monetary
    difference comparing say, The latest Nora Jones cd vs Terminator 3!

    I don't think I need to even mention the huge disparity of film vs. the
    stereo sound medium in terms of production cost and difficulty.

    What's wrong with this picture?

    T.B.
     
    Thomas Bell, Feb 24, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Arminio Grgic
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    385
  2. Adamm Starkk

    Anybody else think 2&3 packs are a Waste?

    Adamm Starkk, Sep 10, 2004, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    17
    Views:
    719
    Video Flyer
    Sep 12, 2004
  3. teem
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    451
    JoeBloe
    Nov 24, 2006
  4. Dan Warren
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    428
    Heinrich Galland
    Aug 15, 2007
  5. Theo Markettos

    VOIP over VPN over TCP over WAP over 3G

    Theo Markettos, Feb 3, 2008, in forum: UK VOIP
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    921
    Theo Markettos
    Feb 14, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page