Hopefully some insight to this Split-Season DVD set argument (1 Viewer)

[progrocktv]

Alright I've seen this argued in other threads so I decided to make it's own separate thread with hopefully a little insight I've gotten through experience while working in the "industry" (not directly related to DVD, but we dealt with lots of studios when dealing with TV series and some of it indirectly related to DVD releases) Now to be fair this is not necessarily standard practice with all the studios, as we know each studio have their own way of dealing with things, and these are only various bits and pieces of into put together to make a clearer picture.

First off when a studio decides to remaster a series for a DVD release, they usually have other plans for it as well (for example if a series is ordered by a major cable company, the series might be remastered for the syndication package as well as a potential DVD release to maximise the remastering cost effectiveness, and vice versa) Look at Star Trek the original series.

Now let's say the studio is unsure of the sales potential for a DVD release, so they'll split each season up in two sets, if the first one does not sell, then they cancel the run of the second half (it doesn't sound like much, but DVD releases cost studios MILLIONS to release, and one bad release can sink sales figures for an entire fiscal quarter.) A good example of this is the first release of the Mary Tyler Moore Show, the price was high, sales were HORRIBLE and Fox took a hit on it (in fact I've even heard it used as a buzzword in a few conversations referring to a poor selling release. "Keep it to 10,000, otherwise you're dealing with a MTM")

Next is consumer economics. As stated in another thread a $20-ish price tag is MUCH more appealing to consumers than $40-50. Once you're above, let's say $25 then you're driving the "impulse buy" away. Also many consumers do want to purchase an entire season but let's face it our economy is not at it's best and consumers have less and less disposable income now adays to plop down $60-$100 at one time.

And finally, I know it's sounds illogical and I'm probably going to upset some people on this forum, but many people, who are the hardcore fans of a series, are upset at the split season sets and are refusing to buy. That's all fine and dandy but honestly the hardcore fans aren't the most important customer to most of the studios and most of the time are only considered "a small, vocal minority". It's the "average consumer" they are after for the bulk of the sales most of the time and if a couple of diehard fans are upset, so be it. I've had quite a few conversations with sales departments of some of the major studios and the "Hardcores" as some of them call them, can be bittersweet, even hearing "fans can either be a blessing or a major thorn in the side". In other words they can help with the promotion of a series, which is considered a blessing, or they can be "whiners" which is then considered a burden. In other words if the hardcores aren't buying, but the general public IS, no big loss in the studio's eyes. Again this is NOT standard practice throughout the industry, but just a few pieces of information I've come across in my professional experience.

It all boils down to money, plain and simple. The bottom line is what drives a business and is the #1 priority (even above making people happy) I don't think I've ever meet anyone who is senior management level and above who is still in this business because they are a fan of movies or TV series, and releasing "a cool TV series" or something "for the fans" is still #1 priority. Sure it might have lured them in this industry in the first place, but as time goes by that passion is overshadowed by increasing ratings, profit for the company which in turn saves their ass from being fired (which is THEIR #1 priority). I have seen some GREAT upper-level managers on the programming side, who had a real passion for movies and TV and brought that I thought some cool things to the company I was working for, including some FANTASTIC rare TV shows, but the numbers did not come in, and they were quickly gone and replaced. I saw myself heading that direction, that's why I left the company, because the passion was replaced by survival (and if that's the way it was going to be then I can make a TON more money doing something else).

Anyways most of this is on the programming side, but I would easily see something similar happening in the DVD industry.

 

[David Levine]

Outstanding post.

And as someone who has been working in the DVD industry for over 10 years, I'd say you are pretty much "dead on" across the board.

 

[Jeff*H]

Thanks for the helpful insight. A vocal minority in the forums seems to think that the studios "owe" the fans, but ultimately in this business they have sales projections, spending budgets to adhere to, revenue budgets to hit, opportunity costs (foregoing one release to put out another), execs to answer to and so much careful thought and analysis has to go into every single decision that is made, or it can ruin a business division's fiscal year.

The studio does have a responsibility to put out a quality product, but if the product is not hitting their sales projections, they have no obligation to anyone to continue it, in fact it would be folly to continue bankrolling a DVD that generates a revenue deficit if one cares about keeping their job. Yes, on occasion revenue projections can be flawed, but for the most part studios use historical data to drive these projections, which is hard to ignore as long as you are comparing apples to apples.

 

[Jeff Willis]

Phil,

I agree with David's post. You summed it up A+ in your starting post and thanks for the thread. I know it's a big issue on this forum.

Ok, now that I've read it I'll re-post my 2 main issues about this issue that I've previously posted elsewhere since this is the topic here, starting with attempting to "place" myself in one of the DVD-buying categories mentioned by Phil's initial post.

I'd probably have to place myself in the "hardcore/minority" section of the TV/DVD consumer but, IMO, I have a more "flexible" approach than some here on this forum with the s/s releases. I've not yet bypassed a s/s purchase of a release of a series that's on my collector's list but it's become more difficult for me to continue purchasing s/s sets for the reasons mentioned below.

1) Communication. If it were possible for the studios to communicate to the consumer, that would be very helpful to me as a collector. For example, if "Studio A" knew that "Series X" was taken off their release list, after, say, releasing Season 1 of a 3-4 season series, it would help me out with the waiting for that series' status. I wouldn't need to wait for a release announcement that's not going to occur. In this case, I'd have to concede that I'm referring to the TV/DVD collector/hardcore type more than the average impulse/non-online buyer.

2) Consistancy. Regarding the split-season issue, there appears to be no consistancy in some, or the majoriy of studio's s/s release's marketing approaches. There have been numerous examples of specific series that have been posted on other threads on this Bd of some series that see complete-season releases and others that are in the s/s group. Is it a black/white older series issue that dictates the s/s releases? IE, the assumption (or due to the actual sales #'s that we don't have access to) that B/W series don't sell as well as color series? If so, I wonder why some of the color series (Love Boat) are also seeing s/s releases?

It may be just IMO here, but I've got the impression that most here would like to see consistancy in the TV/DVD mkt regarding release trends. Consider a "sports analogy" of an Umpire calling inconsistant balls & strikes during a baseball game, etc. We don't see any clear strategy with these s/s releases. Take the series "Rawhide", for example. Season 1 was released as a complete-season release. Season 2 was released in s/s sets. I assume that it's due to the low sales #'s of S1. Another example is "The Big Valley". Taking BV as an example, if the S1 #'s were below expectations, why did the studio initially release S2 V1 at the same price as the complete-season S1 set? Was it to try to catch up on a revenue shortfall caused by the low #"s from S1 sales?

Just some questions that I've wondered about with the s/s releases.

If we're at the mercy of the "impulse/see it at the BB, Walmart bin's and grab it" consumers, then.....that's how it is. Can't say I like it.

 

[progrocktv]

I certainly agree, it would make things much easier. However there are two factors that get in the way. First off the studios are worried about scaring off the customers if a poor selling series is suddenly cut off (for example if someone is planning on buying Mary Tyler Moore, but heard they only released the first 4 seasons they may be reluctant to make that initial purchase if they, at some point, would like to eventually end up with the entire series.

Also second, management decisions can take a sudden left turn on a dime in this industry. This can be due top shift in direction of the company, change in release priorities, current market trends, change in personnel (sure the last VP wanted to release Barney Miller, and now the current VP who just replaced him doesn't want to, etc) but the door is still left open, stuff like that. Also there can be delays in mastering, finding elements and the like which wouldn't be in the best interests of the studios PR to say "well the well-respected post production house didn't evaluate the elements correctly in the first place and the masters are much worse than originally thought and they can't work fast enough so we're still working on it" which of course would follow badgering of "Is it done yet? Is it done yet? Is it done yet?" from the various retailers, trade publications and (cough) fans So taking the "no news is good news" approach is probably the safest way to handle it.

Having said that, I do need to classify myself in more of the "Hardcore" area.
It was kind of interesting being a hardcore fan and actually part of the industry. I got a chuckle on the rare occasion when I could tell the sales department of a studio about things they had even the sales rep didn't know about "Yes, there was an unaired version of the pilot with an additional 10 minutes" "Really, there was??? HMMMM let me check the compu....you know there is something here.....yea, you're right, I didn't know we had that!"
But DVD-wise I was near the front of the line pre-ordering the Time Life Get Smart and more recently Man from U.N.C.L.E. sets and just got my pre-ordered Mod Squad season 1.1 set. Sure I would love to get the full season, however by the time I finish up the first part, the second is ready for release, so it works for at least me.

Cheers!
PRTV

 

[progrocktv]

Yes, most likely. However other factors could have come into play as well (more restoration needed for S2, rights owners wanted more money, or .....(everybody, all together now)..... MUSIC RIGHTS ISSUES!

 

[FanCollector]

Phil--
Thanks for the insightful post. It confirmed some ideas and also gave me some new thoughts on the subject, too. I am not as concerned about full seasons and split seasons (though, of course, I prefer the full) as I am about cutting off series.

The only question I still have after your explanation is the one about licensed properties. Let's take Ironside as an example, although I can think of many others off the top of my head. If Shout Factory spent "millions" on the first season release, owed either license fees or royalties to Universal and charged a customer-scaring $60 retail price, how did they find it profitable enough to release a second season within six months? The show was successful in its time, but has been off the radar for many years. Somehow, they managed to work out a profitable formula.

The only explanation I see is profit margin. Let's say Ironside showed a profit of $100,000 (I know that because I just made it up.) A company like Universal might decide $100,000 is too small a profit to warrant the time and consumption of company resources, while Shout might be thrilled with that level of net profit. I am not one of those who feels that the studios owe us tv shows at their own expense, but I am less sympathetic to the complaint that they make money, but not enough. The Fox executive who was interviewed on this subject in, I believe, USA Today, said they didn't believe in licensing shows out (although they are licensing out Burke's Law) because if the shows can make a profit, he believes Fox should be able to figure out how. It seems, though, that Fox and the other major studios can't figure it out as well as Shout, Rhino, Hart Sharp, etc.

I ask you about this because you seem to have an inside view and might know what market factors I am ignoring.

 

[progrocktv]

Now this is purely speculation on my part but using your above example my theory is that since TV Land aired this series a couple of years back, they just used the re-mastered prints Universal sold to TV Land for the DVD release. You're right that it's been a while since the series was around and I'd find it hard to think they would remaster the entire series just for the DVD release. However since TV Land bought the series (and presumably the remastering costs were included in that price) then releasing it on DVD is pretty much "bonus money" for Universal. Plus I'm assuming Shout Factory fit the bill for the DVD production and such, so all that Universal probably had to do is ship them the masters (without really using many company resources). I'm also wondering of the millions that Shout Factory mentioned might include the remastering price (which was presumably absorbed by TV Land)

Again, just speculation but it's not uncommon

 

[Bryan^H]

Great thread Phil.
I have stated in other posts that I don't usually care for volume sets of a season, but I've started to think more about it, and the logic seems right, especially for hour long shows(The Love Boat). If given the choice, I'd still buy a complete season set over a season volume set like The Fall Guy. From what I have noticed the volume sets are becoming more frequent, and as long as sales are good, and the time between releases is adequate I will have no problem buying a series this way.

 

[Jeff Willis]

Phil,

I see where you and I have similar TV/DVD viewing paces I'm usually the same way. I have a lot of series on the shelf where I'm still in S1's or early S2's with an S3 or 4 on the shelf. One thing I know that it takes for me (to keep from marathon'ing through a set, particularly a s/s set) is discipline I'm kidding here as I know that we all have different TV/DVD viewing routines. Take the "Fugitive" for example....thanks to the Bd members here that "hooked" me on this one , I still have about 5 episodes left to view before Feb 26 when S1V2 is released. It'll be close but I think I'll be done about the same time V2 is at the door.

Thanks for the posts. Good info. I agree about the "communication" issue. I posted that one as one of my "perfect-world" wishes. I know that most of the info is proprietary to the studios. I suppose it would be analogous to my employer posting all of their Co info on a forum.

I guess I can look at TV/DVD collecting as a challenging hobby. One thing that I enjoy (not having all of the pre-release info) is that I can check TSoD for surprise news posts from Dave. Just this week, another Miniseries news post that I've been waiting for big-time ("Holocaust" '78).

I've been fortunate over the last 3 yrs to see several series released that I'd never have guessed would see TV/DVD releases: Combat!, Time Tunnel, Twilight Zone (orig), Get Smart, Dick Van Dyke, Addams Family, Black Sheep Squadron, Columbo, Hardy Boys/Nancy Drew (it's complete enough for me), Lois & Clark, New Avengers, Danger Man ("Secret Agent"), The Saint complete B/W set, most of The Rifleman. Those are most of my complete-series sets. Plus, I have a lot of series that look like they'll finish or are at least halfway done. All in all, I can't complain since I've been surprised a lot at TSoD during the past 3 yrs.

Sometimes, as the consumer, I also tend to emphasize the "negative" slant here, but all in all, it's been a great ride for me since '04 when I started to seriously collect TV/DVD. Some of these series, I'd never have guessed that the studios would have gambled on the release recovering initial expenses.

 

[Aryn Leroux]

Very Nice Informative post...

I would just say this the shows they are indeed losing money on and stop releasing is because they try to release everything the same exact way and in most cases zero advertising. The popular shows of today get a ton of advertising when they do not need it. The industry is backwards, people know the new shows will be out on dvd likely around the time the next season starts. That money has to be used towards lesser known shows of the past, that people would buy if they knew were there. These shows in stores i have to dig to find half of the time. From what i have been able to gather aswell is when i talk to many people they have no idea an old favorite is even available or they would have bought it. I have struck up conversations about old classics and had people buy them when i dug it out for them. So all i am saying as a studio you need to be creative there is a way to make money off just about everything if you go about it the correct way.

Maybe Studios should have stores setup their tv releases as decade aisles. The 60's tv aisle, 70's, 80's etc.. and have the great classics of each decade on display. Yeah wishful thinking i know because space is limited but that in part is due to the studios own fault. 10 releases of this thing, 10 releases of another thing all taking up space. Split season sets taking up even more space and so on. And they wonder why something sells bad so often. Well, c'mon reality check your not making the consumer aware it is there and your retail stores are not displaying that older product half of the time.

 

[Elena S]

This would be an ideal set-up, and one that makes a lot of sense. It would be easier for the consumer as well as for the retailer.

One big problem is lack of promotion for older shows. For instance, I haven't seen "Family" in one single brick and mortar store, yet the show won Emmys and would probably sell very well if only more people knew it was out there. I really don't understand the reasoning behind releasing a show on DVD if you're not going to do your darndest to let people know it's available. It's ridiculous.

As for a company like Shout! Factory versus one like Universal, I'd bet they'd be much happier with a smaller profit because they most likely have fewer employees.

 

[progrocktv]

Ya know I always thought the cable channel TV Land really missed the mark on this. The network started up just as TV DVDs started appearing. I thought it would have been a great idea to partner up with as many studios as possible and do one huge cross-promotion. TV Land shows the series and airs tons of commercials for DVD releases, and return at the beginning of most of these releases feature TV Land commercials. I know there's a TON of red tape and politics involved (in reality probably more of the latter) but it's a nice dream.

Instead we have TV Land showing Andy Griffith non-stop (not a bad thing, but not after 1,000 times) and tonight they're showing the movie Wall Street, alright movie but what the **** does that have to do with TV?!?!?!

Okay rant over

 

[David Levine]

This is absolutely true. The smaller independent studios don't have the high mandated sales numbers that a major has.

But there are some disadvantages. First an independent needs to license the show from a major. That means a large advance of money upfront and a significant % of each unit sold as a royalty. The amount of that advance combined with getting less per unit can make it difficult for that small studio to recoup it's costs - let alone turn a profit.

You also have to factor in that if an independent licenses a series with a number of seasons, it's often an "all or nothing" type of deal. The studio isn't going to give away just the "prime" seasons and be stuck with the later ones. So if an independent licenses all 7 seasons of a show, and it stops getting profitable after 3, they only have 2 choices.

1) Stop putting it out and "eat" the advance money they paid for seasons 4-7. Which pretty much makes it a horrible deal - unless somehow S1 exceeded all expectation by a mile and then tanked with S2 and S3 (doesn't tend to happen).

2) Throw good money after bad and keep putting out seasons, even if it means making a bad deal worse.

Now, if they have a good enough relationship with the studio, they may be able to work out something where they trade the "bad" seasons for another (lesser) property that they can sell, or something like that. But that's not a given, and it has to be done after the fact. You can't go into a deal with the attitude that you might not be able to succeed. The major isn't going to give you that "out", they'll just make a deal with the next guy.

I know we've walked away from a lot of deals for properties that we absolutely loved but couldn't see the numbers working. 8 times out of 10, we're proven right because we know who ended up getting them, for how much, and what they sold.

 

[Corey3rd]

Forget the aisle arrangement at the B&Ms. The charges for such action are more than they are worth.

The first thing any studio needs to do is fill up as much info on the Amazon listings. Season 4 of Wild Wild West is coming out. Somebody from Paramount should post info on each episode on the set and if there's an major (future) guest stars. Also remind folks of the previous seasons that are still in print. Is that asking too much from the folks in marketing?

Retro TV Network is much better than TVLand.

 

[Hank Dearborn]

American Life is better than either of them, although they took off all of the old Warner Brothers shows recently.


But getting back to the topic at hand, it really is funny to me how a show that has made it's money back 50 times over. Yet it is still expected to make a certain DVD profit. That's like buying stock for $1000 and having it turn into $100,000 and then taking some of that $99,000 profit and being pissed if it doesn't make enough more profit. Even if it loses a little bit you are still so far ahead of the game it's not funny. But hey, I'm not a greedy corporation, I don't work for corporate America and would shoot myself if I ever had to.

And yes, they are right. You don't have to worry about the diehards. You have them no matter what. It's the casual fans you need to get. I don't really know anything about the store situation as I order all of my DVDs online as soon as they are announced. I have no desire to waste my time running around to stores looking for items I can have delivered to my doorstep. Not to mention an aversion to having to pay tax and wait in lines. But hey, to each his own.

 

[MatthewA]

Problem is, Hollywood is corporate America at its worst. They don't see entertainment as such. To them, I Love Lucy, The Andy Griffith Show, Bewitched, All in the Family, M*A*S*H, The Golden Girls, and The Simpsons are no different than Tide, Doritos, Pennzoil, iPod, Viagra, Buick, and Big Mac. They are brands. A brand that does not sell because another brand does what it does and does it better gets discontinued. Trouble is, entertainment doesn't work that way. On a side note, if Congress ever investigated Hollywood, the hearings and what they would find would make Enron look like a traffic court hearing.

If they want to keep making money on the shows they need to come up with a new business plan. These shows do have tangible value, otherwise they would have been destroyed immediately after airing, and some shows were (mostly daytime from up to the late 1970s). And as I've been saying, ADVERTISE, ADVERTISE, ADVERTISE!

 

[Jason Seaver]

It's not hard: If a million advertising dollars only adds two hundred thousand sales dollars, it's not worth it. Unfortunately, that's proven to be the case more often than not with second- and third-tier products for some time.

 

[David Levine]

The sad truth.

 

[MatthewA]

That's why you don't spend one million on a "second or third tier product". But to spend $100,000 in advertising and gain an additional $250,000 in sales is not a loss. You don't have to even spend that much. It's about how many people see the ad.

Unfortunately I never, ever pre-order TV DVDs anymore and I never will because there have just been too many releases revealed as travesties after their releases.

I have trouble feeling sorry for studios that lose money on a bad business plan.