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

[Jeff*H]

Based on my experience, $100,000 will not get you any television commercials. To produce a new spot and get it on air with any kind of acceptable reach and frequency requires a much larger budget. A large advertising budget requires a product that is going to move millions of units (like a "Seinfeld" or "Grey's Anatomy").

They might be able to afford a limited print campaign, email or web, which might work for certain types of releases. In fact, I think I've seen something similiar done on several occasions for smaller TV-DVD releases, although who knows what the final price tag was for marketing. I guarantee you it wasn't cheap.

 

[MatthewA]

If, as someone here said, Dallas outsold Dynasty by a wide margin (undoubtedly true), wouldn't the fact that Dallas had TV advertising (at least for the first set) have contributed to that?

 

[Jeff*H]

If WB had the confidence they could move a very large number of Dallas Season 1 units, enough to justify some type of television advertising budget, then it should definitely outsell something that doesn't get television advertising. Each studio has different benchmarks, projection and break-even models and budgeting processes.
I've seen WB run spots for Dallas and Dukes of Hazzard. I don't think I've hardly ever seen Sony or Fox run spots for any of their older TV releases. Paramount has on a few rare occasions (Mission:Impossible comes to mind), as has Universal.

 

[David Levine]

Sure. But not necessarily enough to make up for the advertising costs.

Advertsising is EXPENSIVE. We've advertised late nights on Cartoon Network and it's VERY expensive. Networks are pretty much out of the question. Print ads can be reasonable (depending on the publication), but again, you are often just hitting your die-hard fanbase - so you are advertising to the people that you already know will buy it.

Best Buy/Circuit City/Target circulars are VERY expensive and they come with large minimum shipments. That can mean overshipping to meet requirements and then taking back HUGE returns because of it.

Web is probably cheapest, but again, are you only hitting your die-hard fanbase?

It's tough.

 

[Elena S]

Yes, advertising is expensive. But hell, just make the DVDs available at stores like Barnes & Noble and Borders, which many people frequent. They are missing out on TONS of impulse buys because the DVDs aren't in stores.

 

[MatthewA]

And all of the shows you mentioned by name have sold well. Dukes finished its run on DVD. Dallas passes the halfway point in January. Mission Impossible is not being split into half-season sets. Universal has other problems related to their bloated infrastructure, as do other studios. The new CEO of TimeWarner is considering breaking up the company and spinning off AOL (which they never should have bought in the first place) as well as Time, Inc. leaving them with WB, New Line and HBO.

Sony and Fox never ran a single TV ad, and the results speak for themselves. The Mary Tyler Moore Show had all sorts of resources put into it EXCEPT promotion. And season 1 sold "only" 150,000 copies. How much could they have spent on the set? There are ways to cut costs without cutting corners. Fire unnecessary middle management, outsource telecine work.

Confidence in the product? Apparently only CBS DVD has even heard of the word. They are far from perfect (ask any Happy Days fan) but they are the best of a really lousy lot.

I don't want excuses; we need solutions. Promotion is just one part of it, and it seems to be the weakest link in the chain.

David, I understand that you work at a small independent company so your resources dwarf those of a studio. But the fact that a company like Shout! Factory can pay the bills releasing shows studios wouldn't give the time of day while studios can't even make money on proven hits speaks volumes.

 

[Tory]

In this line of thinking we will probably go back to single disc volumes and then best of's again. I think most people would prefer complete series or seasons but do not care enough to complain or seek things out that they can't find at a local store and will be perfectly happy with whatever they get if they chance to see it.

 

[Jeff*H]

Marketing is critical to the success of any product or initiative. And of all the marketing tactics at a company's disposal, on-air spots can potentially cast the widest net for a product like movies and TV shows on DVD and generate the most money. Hence, those shows I noted SHOULD have had much higher sales, because the studio believed going in that they could justify the marketing expense and move the required number of units needed to satisfy their revenue projection. Had they spent lots of money with commercial spots and generated poor sales, that's when people sometimes get fired (because they could have used that money promoting something else that may have been more successful).

Unfortunately, in the corporate world, marketing budgets are frequently the first ones to get cut by the executives running things, so even though a department may want to promote certain shows with a flight of commercials or a promotion with Best Buy, they may be forced to resort to other, less costly tactics that will generate smaller results.

 

[Charles Ellis]

You know what the REAL problem is? No liason between the studio and the public! Each studio should have someone who is accessible to the public who can answer why some shows are released while others are not, and why some go toward the 'split season' or compilation route. There would be a whole lot less angry posts on the board if the studios were willing to come clean and provide some kind of open dialogue between the studios and the consumers. Some indie firms like Shout! Factory and MPI have toll-free numbers, message boards and e-mails meant for consumers to give feedback and to make suggestions. I say that the majors have to do even better than the smaller indies, and I do mean:

Fox
CBS/Paramount
Warner Bros./HBO/BBC
NBC/Universal
Disney
Sony/MGM

If the majors were willing to be more outcoming with their rationale for certain policy decisions, it may actually make the consumer think more highly of such companies. We may not like what they may say, but if they are willing to communicate with the consumers, it can open a few doors.

 

[progrocktv]

Sadly you're right, and this is the way it is with many things (especially music). The general popular majority tend to have this "it'll do" attitude and take whatever is offered to them without much complaint. Fortunatly this hasen't severely happened to TV DVD (yet).

 

[David Levine]

Shout is very similar to us. They hit on some and they miss on some. But they definitely do not recoup on every deal. You just have to hope the hits outweigh the misses. Shout is also fortunate to have people at the top that really love DVD and pretty deep pockets from their recent distribution deal.

But like any independent, they need to be careful with their balance. Too many mediocre to bad deals can easily sink a small studio. It wasn't that long ago that Rhino was on top of the world. Things can change in a blink.

I'm a huge fan of Shouts, and if I ever decided to leave my job, they are one of the few places that would top my list.

 

[Peter M Fitzgerald]

On the subject of marketing, I find it odd how little cross-promotion of classic tv series occurs on the dvds themselves. With all of the vintage series being released by CBS/Paramount lately, I think I've only seen "trailer" promos of MISSION IMPOSSIBLE on a few other CBS/Paramount discs. You'd think it would make marketing sense to put together a promo for, say, THE UNTOUCHABLES, and include it on the FUGITIVE, PERRY MASON, GUNSMOKE and RAWHIDE sets, and vice-versa. Or GREEN ACRES and MR. ED promos on MGM's ADDAMS FAMILY releases, etc. I've never seen any kind of DVD promo for THE WILD WILD WEST, even though the series will soon be complete on the format.

Fox often cross-promotes their "film noir" line, offering a batch of trailers on each "film noir" disc of the other "film noir" titles currently available, or coming soon, but I haven't seen anything like that done with their Irwin Allen series dvds, for instance, advertising the availability of LOST IN SPACE, LAND OF THE GIANTS or TIME TUNNEL on their VOYAGE TO THE BOTTOM OF THE SEA discs.

Even just a quick, catch-all "classic --your studio's name here-- tv" promo, featuring several/all of a company's available tv series, included as a trailer on their other dvd releases (not just on other tv-on-dvd releases, but featured on recent and catalog film discs, too). There would obviously some cost involved in doing this, but my guess is that it would be far less of an expense than buying commercial time on TV networks, or for print advertising in major newspapers and magazines.

With very few exceptions (I think I've seen a BEWITCHED tv-on-dvd promo, but that was likely exclusive to the disc of the Will Ferrell/Nicole Kidman movie of a couple of years ago), I've only seen this sort of "trailer promo" thing done with more recent tv series, most of which get heavy advertising/exposure on tv already.

I'm mainly taking about the big studios here; the indies, as usual, do a better job at cross-promotion on their discs.

 

[Steve...O]

Phil, your post was excellent and should be required reading for anyone interested in this topic.

As others have posted, it amazes me how many posts in this forum think that studios "owe" them releases and that anytime a series doesn't perform well at retail that it is the studio's fault. It is definitely a different mindset than one sees on the theatrical forum where people seem to be much more in tune with the economic realities behind releases. There are various series that I would love to collect but am not holding my breath for simply because I know the sales potential just isn't that great. Full page ads and commercials aren't going to make people buy sets if they don't have an interest in the show in the first place.

My biggest frustration with split seasons is a lack of understanding as to why CBS/Paramount splits some series but not others. In an ideal world a CBS/Paramount rep would provide some insight into this to a journalist. In my opinion, if consumers could be educated as to the logic behind their strategy that would go a long way to alleviating some concerns consumers have expressed on this forum about that topic.

Steve

 

[David Levine]

I could not agree with you more.

It's a VERY inexpensive way to get info into the hands of your target consumers.

We do it all the time.

On all of our "Ink and Paint" releases, we have a section that has all the openings to every other related property. And we'll put an entire bonus episode of a related show on a set whenever we have the chance (Flash Gordon on Defenders of the Earth, Live Action The Ghost Busters on Animated Ghostbusters, etc.). Heck our Grindhouse line has trailers for other movies we'll be putting out in the middle of the double-feature.

 

[Corey3rd]

It's more inexpensive for films since trailers have already been paid for - you don't have to sit for hours editing, pay for the announcer and getting folks to sign off. Just transfer and go with a theatrical trailer. I did like the Ink and Paint just going with the openings of the shows - that's what lured me into buying Isis and Ark II.

 

[David Levine]

Proof that it works!

 

[Duane Alford]

On some of the sets now out, I could be considered an "average consumer". I've never watched The Fugitive, I vaguely remember The Mod Squad, but do you think I'm going to spend $35 on a half season set when the whole set usually sells for the same price? Instead of enticing me to buy those sets, all they've done is ensure that I WILL NOT do a blind buy with them. And what is the reason to do that to The Fugitive? I'm sure the studio knows the fan base for that show is there. It's clear to me that it's not a case of splitting the seasons to lower the price, as it's been shown the price is still the same whether it's half a season or a whole season. It's simply the studios are trying to milk us for all they can.

I guess I can be considered a "hardcore" fan, but I will not buy split sets. I planned on buying The Streets Of San Francisco & The Untouchables until word got out the seasons were split. That was when I deleted them from my list of shows to buy. If they sell well enough to get everything released and then the studio decides to do a complete series box set, then I'll jump on them.

If anyone can get numbers, I'd love to see what the numbers were on the Fall Guy Season1 as opposed to the Volume 1 & 2. I'm willing to bet the complete season outsold the volumes.

 

[Mark Talmadge]

Not everyone is all up for these half season sets. While there have been dozens of sets released in this fashion studios have been breaking up a 26 episode season into two sets trying to squeeze as much money out of fans as possible. I can't see spending $35 for a 13 episode set when these season sets ran for 26 episodes. The studios can fit the entire season on a single set.

I think the studios are trying to offset the losses they've been incurring on the drop in sales for home video.

 

[MatthewA]

But for further seasons they don't take into account the losses from people who consider it a ripoff and don't buy it. That happened with The Big Valley. If they were charging only $20 or even $25 it wouldn't be as bad.

 

[progrocktv]

I'm sure the numbers for the first season of Fall Guy were below expectations, that's why they split the set. If the studios were truly trying to milk the market, you'd see half season sets on ALL TV releases, but for the most part looks like they're splitting the sets for the "higher risk" older properties.