Just How Much Is A Slipcover Worth To You, Anyway? (1 Viewer)

[Colby]

I don't exactly like slipcovers, but I can never bring myself to buy a disc without a slipcover when I know that there is one out there.

 

[Brent M]

I always take the slipcovers off my DVDs before I put them on the shelf. For me, they're just one more thing in the way between me and actually watching the disc.

 

[Ocean Phoenix]

The title of this thread is a good question for the people on e-bay bidding on the "alternate" slipcover for the sixth season of The Simpsons.

 

[BrandonJF]

Universal and Sony had already pushed the jewel case back in the beginning. They ended up being out there by themselves as the larger size cases ended up dominating. 2-3 waves of releases in and they gave up. I still have the jewel case versions of Backdraft and Waterworld.

 

[Holadem]

What in the name of wonder is a slipcover??!!!

--
H

 

[JeremyErwin]

It's the little cardboard (or in the case of some editions of Terminator 2, metal) bit that slides over the DVD case. In many instances, the artwork is different. For instance, my edition of the "Royal Tenenbaums" has a reproduction of the one sheet (or movie poster) on the slipcover (and it also the effect of making the whole package look like a hardcover book with dustjacket) The keepcase within has a Eric Anderson line drawing of Mordecai and Ritchie Tenenbaum (done in the style attributed to Ritchie).

 

[Mark Zimmer]

I'd pay a couple extra bucks for a lenticular slipcover. I'm a sucker for those things. :b

 

[MichelleB]

I don't really care for slipcovers. They just get damaged too easily and then look stupid. I guess what I am trying to say is I could live without 'em. I would much rather have a chapter insert then a slipcover that's for sure. But as far as throwing them away...nah, I figure, I paid for it so I might as well keep it.

But I have to say that the only slipcover I like, is the one off of SAW. Because without it, it would just be one blank see through case. Plus it nice and plastic.

 

[Greg_S_H]

I'm a little too OCD for a slipcover. Who KNOWS what the previous customer was doing before he handled it? Outside of the factory workers, the shrinkwrap cuts way back on that. And, I pretend: a) the factory workers wore gloves; b) the factory is automated; c) anything is dead by the time it gets to me. :b

Seriously, haven't had a slipcover yet. If I ever do, it'll probably get piled somewhere for a few months before I finally decide to throw it away. That's similar to how I kept the stupid Star Trek:TNG/DS9 glue-on inserts for a while, but they ended up gone.

 

[Malcolm R]

Slipcovers are the biggest waste of money and resources, not to mention hypocritical as the studios likely stopped including chapter inserts in the name of cost-cutting. Then they turn around and create a cardboard slipcover with all sorts of metallic inks and such. They must cost 5x whatever the old chapter inserts cost.

I can't really bring myself to throw them away, but I would prefer they go back to chapter inserts.

 

[Andrew Bunk]

Question: Did 28 Days Later have a slipcover when it first came out?

I don't think it did, but now when I see it at Target on the 9.44 shelf, they all have reflective slipcovers. So not only did they pricedrop the DVD, they apparently added to the cost.
Strange.

Malcolm,

I agree it seems hypocritical, but the only thing I can think of is that maybe the studios have data that slipcovers sell more DVD's because they're "attractive", whereas chapter inserts don't really add any "shelf appeal".

 

[MarkHastings]

Guys, the slipcovers are to make theft harder. You can easily slice the shrink wrap and pop open a DVD case (in the store) and pop the disc out. The slipcovers make it tougher to do this. Basically you have to slide the cover off before being able to open the case or slice the entire side of the slipcover with a knife (which would be harder to do).

And while I kind of agree with you guys, I don't think it's hypocritical of the studios, because I'm sure they're willing to pay for theft protection as opposed to inserts.

 

[Jesse Skeen]

It would be harder to do that if the damn things were shrinkwrapped, but since they're not all you have to do is take the case out then open it. If the slipcover has the barcode right on it, they can put a higher-priced title in it and buy it for a lower price. One of these days I'm gonna switch a porno disc with a Disney title just to show my hatred of this packaging trend

 

[MarkHastings]

Oh, my bad! I thought the slip covers were shrink wrapped over the whole case.

Damn, now I'm at a loss. :frowning:

 

[seanOhara]

The only time that ever happens is with digipaks, where the slip cover keeps the whole thing folded together.

 

[TonyD]

i guess slipcovers are the new inserts.

stores dont cut the upc out that is done when they are made so the dvd upc can show through.

 

[MarkHastings]

I've seen thieves take car stereos out in less than 5 minutes...I've never been able to do it in less than 2 hours

 

[Steve Y]

Slipcovers are a marketing tool. They're like in-store displays, only smaller and surrounding the actual product. They are used as an extra incentive for buying the DVD -- they somehow make DVDs seem more "deluxe" to the average consumer. They are, of course, without any practical value to the consumer. Their redundancy is astounding - often they're identical to the plastic disc beneath, only made of cardboard. The flashy cardboard, according to market research, must really make a difference.

Some of them allow you to open the front flap and see more screen shots and deluxe features of the disc. This might be the deciding factor for people who weren't convinced by simply reading the back cover or (gasp) actually wanting to buy the disc ahead of time.

Disney's slipcovers appear during the first print runs but disappear after the studio has stopped the advertising blitz. It's like they don't have to try so hard after they've sucked in their first million units...

I'd be lying if I said I don't prefer buying a version with a slipcase, but I can't think of any reasonable rationale for it.

 

[ZacharyTait]

The only slipcover I've kept is the Kinsey SE one because it is different from the cover art. All of the other ones, I've given away.

 

[Al (alweho)]

Actually a recent article in the L.A. Times explained the reason behind the slipcases - in a retail environment they help the product "read" better.

It seems that shrinkwrap reflects too much glare from the overhead lighting in stores dulling the impact of the cover art. Since the slipcase has no shrinkwrap it reads better to shoppers during that first week or so the title is displayed full face in aisle endcaps.

A DVD title's sales pretty much are concentrated in those first few weeks, before other new titles rotate into place on those front display areas. Later runs don't require the slipcases since the are not likely to be displayed up front as they are considered catalog items.

The article was a very interesting read, as the writer followed two Fox Home video execs around local retailers on a new release day.