Should early adoptors fully support Fox with their higher priced BRD? (1 Viewer)

[Patrick Sun]

The converse is horribly true as I went nuts last month when the Google Checkout "$20 of $50 order" bonus was in effect, I have probably 6-8 HD DVDs that I now wonder what would possess me to buy them, and then I go, "oh yeah, they were only $13-$14 each."

 

[Paul_Scott]

my first Ld was The Empire Strikes Back (Widescreen YAY!) and it was $69.95.
Fox's Two disc widescreen edtions were generally in that price range when I got in- but within a short time, some discs started to get released with the $50 msrps- I think License To Kill may have been one of them.
The only producer more expensive than Fox was Criterion.

 

[Paul_Scott]

Planet Of The Apes 2001 and Chain Reaction are not an impulse buys. People are going to be camped out at BB for days awaiting those releases.
No cost is too high to upgrade a disc you originally found in the $5 bins 2 years ago.

 

[Robert Crawford]

They're impulse buys to me because frankly, though entertaining, I can do without them not being in my collection in BR. However, nobody is questioning that there will always be certain titles that appeal to some people that have to have such titles in their collection.

Furthermore, there are some titles that I've bought cheaply that I won't buy again in HD/BR and that's not even taking in account the pricing of the disc, but moreso my opinion about the film itself. In most other cases, if the BR disc is $25.00-30.00, forget about it unless it's a definite buy, no matter what the price of the disc. I won't name any titles in that type of situation because it's very subjective as indicated by your comments about POTA and Chain Reaction.





Crawdaddy

 

[Edwin-S]

I think he was being sarcastic. I mean......really......who would actually camp out to pay 40 dollars for HD versions of POTA 2001 and CHAIN REACTION? Films that are so popular they sit in a $5 dollar bargain bin.

In regards to the topic I would have to think pretty highly of a film in order to pay 40 dollars for it. I liked KINGDOM OF HEAVEN and would like to have an upgraded copy of it; however, I didn't like it enough that I would pay 40 dollars for it. In my case, there are almost no movies that I would pay 40 dollars for. That is why I never collected LDs in their day. They were too damned expensive and storing them would have been a PITA.

Right now I am finding that my upper limit for purchasing a movie is about 30 dollars and even at that level I find myself putting them back on the shelf more often than not. The management at FOX need a dose of reality in regards to pricing and the best way to give it to them is to let their product sit on the shelves.

 

[Peter Overduin]

Threee comments:

First, and having been here at HTF since early 1977, the complaints about pricing were entirely different in nature because we wre in the dawn of a new format readically and empirically superior to VHS. That cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, be said about BD/HD to DVD. This time, the early adopter; though willing to invest in the hardware at 500 - 1000 bucks, is not willing to necessarily pay that premium for the software. Chain Reaction and POTA are two good examples of movies that are by no means great, and certainly not compelling films, and not worth the premium to be had in HD "at any price," whereas to upgrade either of them from VHS to DVD in 1977 was perhaps less of a struggle. I paid 750 bucks for the Pioneer DV500 on day 1, and joyously dropped 38 bucks on a DVD I sold in a garage sale last year for 3 bucks (that pirate one with what's her name

Second, is Peter Staddon not the guru of Fox video anymore and a visitor here at HTF anymore?...I would be interested in a defence of this strategy by Peter! (if you aren't..my apologies)

Third, I can only believe that Fox, believing that the early adopter that will spend 1000 bucks on a BD/HD player will not hesitate to drop a premium on software. I share Ron's conviction that one reason I havent bought into BD yet is the software pricing from Fox....I can WAIT!....I have enough very good quality DVDs from Fox that do NOT merit an "at any cost" mentality to upgrade to the BD format - or HD for that matter. I can't imagine Cars or Ice Age looking much better than they do...However, Fox no doubt believes they can capitalize on the early adopter market. For shame!

 

[Yumbo]

I bought the Grinch simply because it was almost half price - building the collection, adding about 4 a week. If prices were lower, I'd buy even more.

 

[TonyD]

peter i thought you were here since 1969

 

[Paul_Scott]

in all seriousness- I would easily pay $40 for just a standard definition dvd, if it were
1) a title that I truly cared about
2) not available on any other format that I was currently using

case in point- John Hodson just posted a snippet from a post in another forum that speculated that Paramount may have licensed out more than just Robison Cursoe On Mars to Criterion. Now if this deal could finally yield gems like Ace In The Hole or Love With The Proper Stranger or Naked Prey- or the countless others they are ignorantly withholding- I would pre-order them so fast it would make heads spin. $30 or $40 msrp? No problem, just show me the listing.

Now, if for the last 3 years I could have gone into Wal-mart and fished out Ace In The Hole from their $5 bin, would I be enthusiastic about buying the Criterion at $40? Probably not, but depending on the value added content I might consider the upgrade. But the irressitable pull is no longer there when there is at least something filling the void.
And that's the point.

Fox will probably be happy enough with the sales of the new release titles on Bd- unless they feature starve them compared to the sd dvd issue. In that case it would be interesting to see how many owners with Bd capable players, opt for the less expensive but more feature laden dvd over the Bd.

One other thing that will be interesting to see- will B&Ms be stocking all these titles? It's gone over two weeks now, and I still can't find a copy of The Deer Hunter locally. When there are 5 x more Bd releases, with many titles of dubious appeal, are retailers going to making shelf space for them?
Especially titles that have been clogging the arteries of their discount racks for years?

 

[Brad HP]

One of the problems of looking back to 1997 SD DVD pricing is that back then, many people didn't already have copies of these titles in their collection, and if they did they were probably pan & scan VHS. As such, paying the early Sd DVD prices was somewhat justifiable for the incremental value received.

Faced with $28-35 BD prices from Fox on titles that we own perfectly good SD DVD versions of will give many people reason to hesitate. I know I can wait on upgrading 80-90% of my collection until prices drop to $18-20. There are some titles that to me are not sensitive to price, but Fox hasn't announced many of them yet.

 

[Tim Glover]

Excellent point Brad.

 

[Chris Dugger]

As an owner of both formats here, purchases in software are very price driven IMO.

My SD collection runs in the 1700 disc range and my HD-DVD runs in the 30 - 40 range.....

My Blu currently sits at 6.....

I am not afraid to spend on software.... But until Fox sobers up and prices accordingly, I will be taking a pass.....

Dugger

 

[Paul Arnette]

I agree Fox's prices are too high. I've ordered only one Fox title and the only reason I did was that I had trade-in credit to spare. I will order another one shortly, but, again, only because I will be receiving an Amazon reward certificate from my Chase credit card.

Bring back reel.com for BD and HD DVDs, please!

 

[Rolando]

Oh man those were the days!
I am in Canada and back then the change rate was horrible for us and I got nailed with paying taxes, duties and even a $5-$10 handling fee on every order from them I picked up at the post office. IT WAS STILL CHEAPER THAN GOING TO THE STORE LOCALY!!!

Ah, we do need a reel.com

 

[Matt Hough]

I saw an Amazon ad at the top of a webpage on a site (not this one) advertising Fox's next slate of offerings including MR & MRS. SMITH, and each disc was Amazon priced at $35+! These are even more expensive than current Fox Blu-rays like THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA and FANTASTIC FOUR. I couldn't believe my eyes! Are these new Blu-rays going to have some kind of interactive features that are making them even more expensive at discount than current Blu-rays?

 

[MarekM]

I saw those too hmm, it's strange that amazon is discounting just 10% of those new titles... because list price is same 39.98 and on some other site have them cheaper... 28-31$

I just checked amazon.com I can't find some of those titles ? hmm, I found ice age......

Marek

 

[GordonL]

Once the pond has been cleared of the fishies who are willing to nibble at the $39.99 price, the price will drop to $34.99 and the cycle repeats. That's how you maximize profits.

 

[Manus]

Its a hard one to call , who is the greediest ?? Sony or Fox ??

I should imagine the sensible thing to do ( especially if you are an 'Upscaling-capable' Hd-Dvd player owner ) is continue to enjoy your dvd collections and only stump up for those 'special' titles when they become available. Also some Bd exclusives are available overseas on Hd-Dvd.

I never collected Vhs. My collection started with Sd and I have no intention of paying extortionate prices to upgrade all of them again.

As Thomas mentioned earlier , you only pay once for your player but continually for your software. Fox have gone to hell since Peter Staddon and the 5 Star Collection days ( they were on their way with Divx anyway ). They do not seem to appreciate the value of word of mouth . And word of mouth begins with early adopters.

~M~

 

[Movie Madness]

i think they are both as bad as each other Sony and Fox make a good Couple

 

[BrettB]

It's like Billy told The Kid in Purple Rain; This is a business! If no one is digging Fox and Sony's shit then they will be singing Lisa and Wendy's tune in short (pun intended) order.

Fox and Sony's goals are the same as the other studios, maximize profit.

(Edited to achieve a less confrontational tone)