$1.50 bluray rental from Redbox

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

[QUOTE=pixelthis][QUOTE=Sir Terrence the Terrible]

No understanding of human nature AT all.

But you are not human........

[Smokey]

This just came off the wire:

Looks like Paramount Picture studios going the opposite direction from other studios and has agreed to provide its movies to Redbox on the same day they go on sale without 28 days delay (no word on Blu-ray yet).

Paramount Home Entertainment President Dennis Maguire said that "“Those people who want to rent are going to figure out ways to rent, and us restricting them from renting isn’t going to turn it into a purchase.”

I guess he mean piracy.

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jun...mount-20100616

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

This just came off the wire:

Looks like Paramount Picture studios going the opposite direction from other studios and has agreed to provide its movies to Redbox on the same day they go on sale without 28 days delay (no word on Blu-ray yet).

Paramount Home Entertainment President Dennis Maguire said that "“Those people who want to rent are going to figure out ways to rent, and us restricting them from renting isn’t going to turn it into a purchase.”

I guess he mean piracy.

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jun...mount-20100616

Actually what he means is that no matter if the studios get that 28 day window to motivate folks to purchase, a renter is going to rent, no matter what. Any delay is not going to change that.

I think that his reasoning is BS. There is this one little tid bid that is kind of glossed over in this transaction - this little detail:

Redbox estimated that it would pay Paramount $575 million over the life of the agreement

$575 million for a 3 year contract. Keep in mind, Paramount (and Universal) are money whores. They would sell out the entire film industry for a buck. The whole format war would have been over after the first year it started if it wasn't for Paramount getting big kickbacks from Toshiba. When they whore out their products like this, they always use flimsy excuses like this to justify their actions. All of the studios know that Redbox hurts DVD sales, which is why all of the studios expect healthy compensation for day and date releases. To say anything less than that is nothing more than a lie.

To give you a little history of how Paramount works(and why I doubt their conclusion seriously). When they switched from supporting both BR and HD DVD to HD DVD alone, they cited their reasons for doing so as "the HD DVD format was easier to work with, had a built in developed infrastructure, and players with a more competitive price. What they didn't tell you is that Toshiba PAID for that exclusive support, and Paramount engineers and marketing staff LOVED the Blu ray format. They were surprised(and from what I could gather) angry as hell that the upper brass sold them out, and lied about it. We found out that it was impossible to include all of the bells and whistles the HD DVD format had, and include a lossless soundtrack as well(See the HD DVD version of King Kong and Transformers, two of the biggest titles). We found out later that(and I knew it at the time) that bandwidth problems dogged the HD DVD format since day one, and the Hollywood authoring houses basically hated the format. They didn't care one bit that they(and Universal) had hurt the industry for prolonging the format war a lot longer than it needed, and now there is nothing to really effectively counter what is happening with the DVD. Had they had stayed the course, the format war would have been over in a year, and there would have been a smoother(not the smoothest) transition to Blu ray.

We provide some of our titles to Redbox day and date, but not all of them. We do have a revenue sharing program with them despite what the article states. Sony has an agreement with them, but it benefits them more than Redbox. I would not have minded if Paramount did sign this agreement, but I just wish they wouldn't lie about it. Sony didn't, and neither did Disney. We made the deals for the compensation we were getting, not because of the flimsy excuse that Paramount states.

You notice they don't say anything about Blu ray?

The bottom line is the studios have written DVD off in favor of Blu ray. They are going to sign any deal they can make on DVD sales and rentals. Don't be surprised if the other studios sign DVD agreements with Redbox in the future. While DVD dies a slow death, they want to make as much as they can from it.

[Smokey]

You notice they don't say anything about Blu ray?

The bottom line is the studios have written DVD off in favor of Blu ray. They are going to sign any deal they can make on DVD sales and rentals. Don't be surprised if the other studios sign DVD agreements with Redbox in the future. While DVD dies a slow death, they want to make as much as they can from it.

Yes, I did see that they only mentioned DVD in the article, not Bluray. I bet other studios soon will follow as far as DVD is concern if they get the same deal Paramount got from Redbox which you said was $575 million contract. Paramount might be thinking ahead of the curve

[kevlarus]

The bottom line is the studios have written DVD off in favor of Blu ray. They are going to sign any deal they can make on DVD sales and rentals. Don't be surprised if the other studios sign DVD agreements with Redbox in the future. While DVD dies a slow death, they want to make as much as they can from it.

Bottom line is that the DVD format is dead so it's time to get the last dollar they can from it, whether it's selling, renting (to vendors=redbox) or box sets. They know that the dvd players of the last 2-3 years were made pretty cheaply and people weren't paying a lot for them. That also means the life expectancy of the dvd player itself has been shortened and when people replace it, it will be blu-ray.

Watch for ramping up of double boxing blu & dvd together instead of seperate sets. This will appease the B&M stores who don't have to devout double the shelf space for the same movies.

[pixelthis]

Bottom line is that the DVD format is dead so it's time to get the last dollar they can from it, whether it's selling, renting (to vendors=redbox) or box sets. They know that the dvd players of the last 2-3 years were made pretty cheaply and people weren't paying a lot for them. That also means the life expectancy of the dvd player itself has been shortened and when people replace it, it will be blu-ray.

Watch for ramping up of double boxing blu & dvd together instead of seperate sets. This will appease the B&M stores who don't have to devout double the shelf space for the same movies.

There wont be any "b&m stores before long.
I dreive by a movie gallery every day with its big STORE CLOSING sign.
Also, no reason to wait for a cheap DVD player to "die".
Trash that sucker and move on with a Blu player.

[kevlarus]

There wont be any "b&m stores before long.
I dreive by a movie gallery every day with its big STORE CLOSING sign.
Also, no reason to wait for a cheap DVD player to "die".
Trash that sucker and move on with a Blu player.

Walmart, Target and the like will stay as B&M stores. The movie only stores are probably history though.

I'd rather wait for the blu player, since they keep adding features, especially features I never thought they had put any thinking into; ie, wireless access. The gold goblet would be a reasonably priced, easy to use blu/dvd/cd changer so I can replace both pieces or built-in drive that can hold all the cd's (ok, let's say many instead). With the storage feature, I'd give up the 5 disc changer -- and no, not going to load 400+ disc's in a changer that doesn't have a good interface for selecting.

[kevlarus]

There wont be any "b&m stores before long.
I dreive by a movie gallery every day with its big STORE CLOSING sign.
Also, no reason to wait for a cheap DVD player to "die".
Trash that sucker and move on with a Blu player.

And now you can add BlockBuster stores :

"Blockbuster was the national leader in the video rental business for nearly two decades. Now it is contemplating Chapter 11 to eliminate debt. The company lost $65 million last quarter. Its revenue continues to fall rapidly as firms such as Redbox and NetFlix siphon off its revenue."

BB didn't pay out $42+ MM to investors in order to keep cash on hand. BB has over 6,000 stores while Movie Gallery only had around 2,400 stores. BB will convert to online only with the Blu players VOD type content, if they don't trip up in the meantime.

RedBox now has day & date release access to DVD and Blu titles from Paramount. Look for kiosks to provide both dvd and blu or dvd in one vending machine and blu in the other.

http://redboxpressroom.com/releases/...nt_061510.html

[PeruvianSkies]

Redbox will never last. We live in an age of convenience and Netflix put into motion that a long time ago, and with their streaming capabilities and even HD streaming, soon we will be able to get instant access to any movie we want for a moderate price without ever having to leave the house, that's what people desire and Redbox is limited by the size of the box and how many titles it can store, Netflix offers a few packages where you can get thousands of instant streams to either your computer or TV plus 1,2,3,4 or however many Blu-ray or DVD's you wish at a time. Plus, you don't have to drive near a Redbox or wonder if the title is even there.

[Mr Peabody]

There's a place for Redbox, Netflix was here before Redbox, if RB didn't have a place it would have never gotten off the ground. Many people had BDP already before the streaming was offered. I think it's still a nitch and may be growing but it's a way off before it becomes large enough to displace other options. I see streaming features being offered in the TV's now, such as Sony's Bravia LCD. I really hate to see the walk-in rental stores disappear.

[PeruvianSkies]

There's a place for Redbox, Netflix was here before Redbox, if RB didn't have a place it would have never gotten off the ground. Many people had BDP already before the streaming was offered. I think it's still a nitch and may be growing but it's a way off before it becomes large enough to displace other options. I see streaming features being offered in the TV's now, such as Sony's Bravia LCD. I really hate to see the walk-in rental stores disappear.

I don't know if I would agree with that. Redbox made it's entry as a impulse idea for people at the grocery store, etc. But even that has a limited range of people, and by going for DVD-only, they were able to supply a short number of new releases and charge a buck a night, which at the time (along with the decline of the family-owned rental places) and the larger decline of larger rental facilities, it was an easy idea to generate, but long-term it will not last unless it comes up with other ideas to compete with Netflix and on-demand.

[Mr Peabody]

Even if RB was majority impulse rentals it's working, you think Netflix or On Demand will do something to kill this impulse? On Demand/PPV has been hear since back when VHS was renting if it hasn't become a force by now I don't think there's anything to worry about now. Streaming has such a small market share I still think it will take time to make a difference. The tech savvy are out of touch with what "Average Joe" does in home entertainment. I'm sure it may also depend on the area you live in but I'm still surprised at how many people I meet that still don't have a HDTV. I'm at the end of my line so I can't even get the fastest DSL.

[PeruvianSkies]

Even if RB was majority impulse rentals it's working, you think Netflix or On Demand will do something to kill this impulse? On Demand/PPV has been hear since back when VHS was renting if it hasn't become a force by now I don't think there's anything to worry about now. Streaming has such a small market share I still think it will take time to make a difference. The tech savvy are out of touch with what "Average Joe" does in home entertainment. I'm sure it may also depend on the area you live in but I'm still surprised at how many people I meet that still don't have a HDTV. I'm at the end of my line so I can't even get the fastest DSL.

You bring up an interesting point, which refers to technology advancements vs. the consumers ability to keep up. We always knew that DVD was a bridge that would gap us between analog and true digital, that it would take us into the HD generation and in the meantime provide us with widescreen presentations of film, better transfers than VHS and often Laserdisc, and ultimately demand greater satisfaction from the consumer on what to expect when watching a movie at home.

This in turn sparks up a whole new level of questions regarding that very fact alone. Rarely would anyone gripe back in the days of VHS about picture quality, sound, etc, but DVD revolutionized (Laser did it first, but in a niche sense) the world of home video to the point where expectations are greater and now Blu-ray has taken us to a higher ground altogether with true HD picture and sound, yet at the same time there are so few out there (even still) that have the hardware to truly enjoy that (even if they are practically giving away HDTV's at Wally World).

And now we have the advent of 3D making some progress again as yet another gimmick, just like when it was used by theaters the last time, to boost sales, interest, and fascination in the world of movies yet again. This time though, TV's are being designed to go toe-to-toe with that very fact, which makes for a landmark where two mediums are utilizing the same technology to compete with one another instead of developing competing forces to try and out-do each other.

But also, let's face it....we here are among the minority of people who really appreciate picture, sound, and the art of movies/music. Which means, we are more or less doomed by what the majority of people really attach themselves too and what is able to make the largest amounts of profits for the companies at large.

For my money, Netflix offers the best options, best price, most convenient, without any sacrifices in overall quality in order to deliver what I want within my home at a minimum. Now if only Netflix would offer one other little feature - purchase.

I think that it would be really cool if they send me a Blu-ray titles that I have never seen before and after seeing it, I decide that rather than send it back, I'd really love to own the movie, and be able to log onto their site, click "purchase title" and for a rather decent price (say $10-15) buy the film and they send me the packaging for it with my next title from my cue.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

You bring up an interesting point, which refers to technology advancements vs. the consumers ability to keep up. We always knew that DVD was a bridge that would gap us between analog and true digital, that it would take us into the HD generation and in the meantime provide us with widescreen presentations of film, better transfers than VHS and often Laserdisc, and ultimately demand greater satisfaction from the consumer on what to expect when watching a movie at home.

This in turn sparks up a whole new level of questions regarding that very fact alone. Rarely would anyone gripe back in the days of VHS about picture quality, sound, etc, but DVD revolutionized (Laser did it first, but in a niche sense) the world of home video to the point where expectations are greater and now Blu-ray has taken us to a higher ground altogether with true HD picture and sound, yet at the same time there are so few out there (even still) that have the hardware to truly enjoy that (even if they are practically giving away HDTV's at Wally World).

And now we have the advent of 3D making some progress again as yet another gimmick, just like when it was used by theaters the last time, to boost sales, interest, and fascination in the world of movies yet again. This time though, TV's are being designed to go toe-to-toe with that very fact, which makes for a landmark where two mediums are utilizing the same technology to compete with one another instead of developing competing forces to try and out-do each other.

But also, let's face it....we here are among the minority of people who really appreciate picture, sound, and the art of movies/music. Which means, we are more or less doomed by what the majority of people really attach themselves too and what is able to make the largest amounts of profits for the companies at large.

For my money, Netflix offers the best options, best price, most convenient, without any sacrifices in overall quality in order to deliver what I want within my home at a minimum. Now if only Netflix would offer one other little feature - purchase.

I think that it would be really cool if they send me a Blu-ray titles that I have never seen before and after seeing it, I decide that rather than send it back, I'd really love to own the movie, and be able to log onto their site, click "purchase title" and for a rather decent price (say $10-15) buy the film and they send me the packaging for it with my next title from my cue.

While I agree with many of your points, I have to say your comments regarding 3D utilize a very poor choice of wording. First, 3D is far from a gimmick.....far far from a gimmick. 3D movies have collected a total of close to $4 billion(yes billion folks) dollars in revenue since 2006, and over one billion since last year. 3D movies that also have a 2D releases have collected anywhere from 40-60 percent of the total box office of that movie, as 3D houses(and IMAX) continue to outperform their 2D counterparts in the theater. These are not gimmick numbers for sure.

For hometheaters 3D sets are selling quite briskly in spite of the fact there is such limited software choices out there. The first shipment of Panasonic 3D plasma's and Samsung's 3D set sold out the first two shipment in less than two weeks, with the first shipment selling out in less than three days. The 3D version of Cloudy with a chance of Meatballs is selling very well for the small amount of 3D sets that are out there.

For Broadcast and cable you have one 3D channel already launched(and the world cup got excellent ratings for their 3D format broadcasts) and several others on the way.

With all of these facts in mind, gimmick is a very poor choice of words to describe what 3D actually is.

In terms of 3D on Blu ray - what you see now is the BDA slowly building out the Blu ray format with 3D, and high resolution multichannel music being released right now. This was something that was basically unachievable and inconceivable with DVD. The Blu ray format is slowly but surely showing how smart the BDA was in setting standards for the Blu ray disc format. You can now see how truely flexible and expandable the Blu ray format really is.

[PeruvianSkies]

While I agree with many of your points, I have to say your comments regarding 3D utilize a very poor choice of wording. First, 3D is far from a gimmick.....far far from a gimmick. 3D movies have collected a total of close to $4 billion(yes billion folks) dollars in revenue since 2006, and over one billion since last year. 3D movies that also have a 2D releases have collected anywhere from 40-60 percent of the total box office of that movie, as 3D houses(and IMAX) continue to outperform their 2D counterparts in the theater. These are not gimmick numbers for sure.

For hometheaters 3D sets are selling quite briskly in spite of the fact there is such limited software choices out there. The first shipment of Panasonic 3D plasma's and Samsung's 3D set sold out the first two shipment in less than two weeks, with the first shipment selling out in less than three days. The 3D version of Cloudy with a chance of Meatballs is selling very well for the small amount of 3D sets that are out there.

For Broadcast and cable you have one 3D channel already launched(and the world cup got excellent ratings for their 3D format broadcasts) and several others on the way.

With all of these facts in mind, gimmick is a very poor choice of words to describe what 3D actually is.

In terms of 3D on Blu ray - what you see now is the BDA slowly building out the Blu ray format with 3D, and high resolution multichannel music being released right now. This was something that was basically unachievable and inconceivable with DVD. The Blu ray format is slowly but surely showing how smart the BDA was in setting standards for the Blu ray disc format. You can now see how truely flexible and expandable the Blu ray format really is.

A gimmick can be successful as well, it's anything that is used to entice people into something that they may normally be less inclined to try or participate in. 3-D does offer some cool features over the 2-D, but overall it's still the same movie, same similar experience, just one is enhanced in such a way, much like surround sound, smell-o-vision, Cinerama, the list goes on.

And just because something may start off as a gimmicky attraction does not mean it's not a viable thing, some of the best things came from their origins, like widescreen for example.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

A gimmick can be successful as well, it's anything that is used to entice people into something that they may normally be less inclined to try or participate in. 3-D does offer some cool features over the 2-D, but overall it's still the same movie, same similar experience, just one is enhanced in such a way, much like surround sound, smell-o-vision, Cinerama, the list goes on.

And just because something may start off as a gimmicky attraction does not mean it's not a viable thing, some of the best things came from their origins, like widescreen for example.

The problem with using the word "gimmick" is its negative connotation. 3D as you said is an enhancement, not a gimmick. It was a gimmick in the 50's, 70's, and early 80's. It was never a gimmick with IMAX, it was a huge enhancement.

[b]Gimmick:To add gimmicks to; clutter with gadgets or attention-getting details. A device employed to cheat, deceive, or trick[b]

3D in the theater or on Blu ray is not what I would call a "gimmick".

A better choice of a word would be enhancement.

[pixelthis]

The problem with using the word "gimmick" is its negative connotation. 3D as you said is an enhancement, not a gimmick. It was a gimmick in the 50's, 70's, and early 80's. It was never a gimmick with IMAX, it was a huge enhancement.

[b]Gimmick:To add gimmicks to; clutter with gadgets or attention-getting details. A device employed to cheat, deceive, or trick[b]

3D in the theater or on Blu ray is not what I would call a "gimmick".

A better choice of a word would be enhancement.

A better choice of word would be FLOP.
Peeps get tired, the novelty wears off, the headachs get old( I'll read a talky post iffen
I want a headach), the equipment wont sell, etc.
Dead in the water.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

A better choice of word would be FLOP.
Peeps get tired, the novelty wears off, the headachs get old( I'll read a talky post iffen
I want a headach), the equipment wont sell, etc.
Dead in the water.

Flops don't outsell 2D presentations. Peeps aren't all that tired - the number one movie in terms of tickets sold for two weeks is Despicable Me in 3D. It grinded the second place film(a 2D picture) to death the last two weeks. So much for flop. The only thing around here that is a flop is your attempts at thinking with no brain.

You keep saying the same stupid things over and over, and reality continues to make a fool out of you over and over again.

[PeruvianSkies]

Flops don't outsell 2D presentations. Peeps aren't all that tired - the number one movie in terms of tickets sold for two weeks is Despicable Me in 3D. It grinded the second place film(a 2D picture) to death the last two weeks. So much for flop. The only thing around here that is a flop is your attempts at thinking with no brain.

You keep saying the same stupid things over and over, and reality continues to make a fool out of you over and over again.

I am torn on this issue, really.

Mainly because I personally don't feel that 3-D really enhances the overall experience enough to warrant the extra price, and I think that in order to really figure out long-term who the winner is, we really need to see the new 3-D go head-to-head against 2-D in a longer term battle. Sure, right now 3-D is the hottest thing and is certainly being aimed at the younger kids, and parents figure...well, for a few dollars more...why not. But what if the novelty wears off? It did before, it can do it again. Although this time around, I like the fact that the theater and home experience are hitting consumers at the same time, so therefore they are not nearly in as much competition with one another, but will this really be the way of the future....OR....just another gap?

Only time will tell.......right Divx? right Beta? right 12" Laser? right Digital Compact Cassette?

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I am torn on this issue, really.

Mainly because I personally don't feel that 3-D really enhances the overall experience enough to warrant the extra price, and I think that in order to really figure out long-term who the winner is, we really need to see the new 3-D go head-to-head against 2-D in a longer term battle. Sure, right now 3-D is the hottest thing and is certainly being aimed at the younger kids, and parents figure...well, for a few dollars more...why not. But what if the novelty wears off? It did before, it can do it again. Although this time around, I like the fact that the theater and home experience are hitting consumers at the same time, so therefore they are not nearly in as much competition with one another, but will this really be the way of the future....OR....just another gap?

Only time will tell.......right Divx? right Beta? right 12" Laser? right Digital Compact Cassette?

So you understand, the novelty didn't wear out before, it was the cost of doing it that chased the studios away from it. Folks continued to flock to 3D movies back in the day, but it was just too expensive to released them and do it right.

Back in the day, you needed two film two projectionist, two projectors, and two film prints that wore down exactly the same way. You had nothing to sync the two projectors, so often they would get out of sync, and start introducing crosstalk which gave headaches.

You have none of these issues now, and 3D presentation are going as strong as ever. This incarnation of 3D is now 5 years old, and 3D back in the day never lasted longer than two or three years, or just a few movies.

3D today has already proven that it has more legs than previous attempts at 3D. One thing that I realize, you are not going to convince anyone of that. Peoples minds are pretty much made up it will fail because they are quite frankly stuck in the past.

[Tarheel_]

I take advantage of 3D...

- let the "3D / 3D ready" components sell for higher prices while i look just below for deals, plus cheaper movie tickets vs 3D

Same thing with HDMI equipped AVRs...sure made some very nice units 'legacy' overnight and the prices plummeted.

My only experience with 3D was taking my girls to see the Jonas Brothers. The glasses were nasty and unsanitary. And the video? I was not impressed.