Everwood (1 Viewer)

[Nick Martin]

Tell that to George Lucas, or at least fans of his work...

 

[Johnny S]

You all bring up valid points, but to me this is what it all boils down to. TV On DVD is a business. Though it would be nice if instead of releasing Friends in a zillion different ways, they worked harder to release other things that please the minority, that way of thinking is unreasonable. No matter how much "They are here to please the fans." they could care less about pleasing the fans if it dosen't equal $$$ for them. & I don't hold it against them for thinking that way. That's the way the world goes. Deal with it. Think of it this way:

Does a cigarette company care what product they are selling to the consumer? Not at all as long as you are giving them MONEY!

Now I do agree that liscensing the shows to other companies is a great alternitave. But there are also flaws to this idea...

 

[Jay_B!]

one case offhand I can think of that deals with licensing to another company, and has worked is Ellen. Buena Vista owns the show but licensed it to A&E, and season 4 (of 5 seasons) is allegedly coming out in August. It's worked in that case, and I'm sure BV still gets a good chunk from each sale while it also puts money in A&E's pocket.

 

[Magnus_M]

That might be true and your post is surely an accurate description on how they think, but they have forgotten how business are to be conducted over the years.

If no one had risked their neck and fought hard to save Beverly Hills 90210 it would have been cancelled after a few seasons, someone felt that it was worth the risk and he/she was obviously right.
Taking that fight was not a correct business decision beforehand but turned out to be a superb decision in hindsight, running a sucessful movie studio means taking calculated risks.

New Line would surely have been in major trouble had LOTR bombed at the cinemas (and sold poorly on DVD), they did however take a risk and it payed out...bigtime!
This is what moviemaking is, or at least what it has been.

Somewhere along the way someone left some of the vital decisions in the hands of economist, people that might be magicians with money but just another "average joe" in deciding wether or not a movie will be a sucess.
These people have been doing some great work and made lots of money for their companies, but they are also hurting the business with strictly economical decisions on matters that require a much broader understanding.

Every release shouldn't have hold it's own, if the annual profits are a few millions less is irrelevant if customer satisfaction is much higher, satisfied customers give returning business thus making them more money in the end.
Not to mention that it's way less of a loss if a Tv show on DVD tanks then if a motion picture does, coming upp 100k short is much more pleasant than coming up 20M short.

I fully understand that they are not running a charity, but neither am I, when I buy a part of a complete product it's because I expect to be able to buy the other parts thus completing the product.

Some people might say that they don't owe us anything, I'd say they owe us a great deal.
They would be nowhere if it wasn't for us, our money is what keeps them running.
If a studio makes $117M in profit with many more satisfied customers than they would have had if they made $121M in profits it's an easy decision IMHO, it's a slightly smaller profit but a major profit none the less.

But enought with my longwinded rant.
I totally agree with licensing shows to other companies, we get our shows and they hopefully get some money for no work at all.

 

[LuisGar]

You missed my point completely Mark. I perfectly know how some things are done, but that doesn't mean that they are morally acceptable or that you have to accept them. The way things are done is not what some people are trying to debate here, but the way they should be done if customers were given just a tiny bit of the respect they deserve.

Drug dealers are selling their stuff on the streets, and they are not going to change, so following your reasoning regardless of our feelings we have to accept that this is how things are done and get over it.

Well, I maybe a bit naive here but I still believe WHB has some obligations towards their customers not fulfilled so far

 

[Katherine_K]

Morally acceptable? We are talking about DVD sales. Perhaps you are taking this a tad too seriously.

 

[Malcolm R]

Yep, the good ol' days when people cared about people more than money and making a "reasonable" profit was the goal.

Today, if you're not "maximizing" profit out of each and every sale in order to line the pockets of a handful of already wealthy stockholders, you are held up as a "bad business" model.

 

[ElizM]

A poster on another board at www.everwoodmusic.com stated that they had bought the very last copy of Everwood on the shelf at their local Wal*Mart. He or she also mentioned that Wal*Mart had sold out over 40 sets in just the past week @ their location in Colorado.

When was the last time that you actually saw Everwood on a store shelf?

It seems to me that few stores actually have this title out. I have not seen them available in sometime.

I am going to look at a few stores when I am out next.

 

[ElizM]

There's a lot of Everwood info in this article as well as an interview with Greg Berlanti.

Many fans are going to write the WBHV contact noted below in addition to buying the S1 that are currently on sale on Amazon.

http://www.eonline.com/Gossip/Kristi...06/060616.html

She gives this name and address for a contact at WBHV.

Jeff Brown, Senior Vice President
Warner Home Video
4000 Warner Blvd.
Burbank, CA 91522

 

[JeffSchiller]

A studio pays for a show to be produced. That show is not as profitable as they would like. They decide to cancel that show.

The studio is not "morally obligated" to do anything beyond that just because some fans want to see the show again. Are you telling me a studio is morally obligated to lose money to satisfy some fanbase? By your logic, the studio should be "morally obligated" to continue production of the show too, even if it were not profitable. The studio's primary obligation is to its investors/shareholders, which means it has to make money.

Don't get me wrong, I feel your pain. This has happened with many, many shows, but in time you'll forget about Everwood and move on to another show. If not, there are online communities focused on trading of taped/DVR'ed shows, you'll have to use those to get your fix.

Or you can wait for IPTV to take off, the studio will surely put their archived shows online at some point on a pay-per-view experience, maybe in a couple years time. At least then they don't have to pay for the physical media, transportation, stock fees, etc.

 

[Ethan Riley]

Every time somebody mentions Everwood, somebody posts something like Jeff did above. Jeff, we all realize that dvd is a business, and that a business has to be profitable in order to continue. What we are trying to do is be the voice in the wilderness that says the studios are wrong, and that Everwood does have enough fans to support another dvd release. Think of Everwood on dvd as a sleeper hit; something that took a long time to get off the ground. When the dvd was released, it barely was noticed. There were a lot of other pricey dvd sets released that same day, in fact that whole month was loaded with high-profile tv dvds and movies. Everwood was very overlooked in its initial release. Plus, the price point was very high (I believe full retail was $59.95, before any discounts). These, and other factors, contributed to the slow sales of Everwood initially. But as time goes on, the set is winding up in the hands of those who want it. What we are trying to say in this thread is that Everwood season 2 is not such a gamble as the studio may think. Clearly, the demand is there. We want Warners to rethink the problem and give season two a try. Perhaps it will turn a nice little profit. Perhaps it won't, but you never know until you try.

 

[Malcolm R]

I'm sure the studios are aware of the numbers and the demand. If they're high enough to warrant a release of subsequent seasons, then they'll release them.

You people make it sound like Warner hasn't looked at a sales report since the first week of release.

 

[Beau]

The first season was in the top 10 on amazon around the time the series finale aired some weeks ago. It stayed in the top 100 for two weeks afterwards, and it's still in the top 200. Isn't that pretty good, a supposedly poor selling release being in the top ten on amazon, close to two years after it was first released? Is that much of a sales boost not good enough for Warner to think a S2 release (which, as mentioned before, could be promoted with Marcia Cross somewhere on the cover) could do good? I even read in an article on TVShowsOnDVD.com:
It just seems that considering all the factors, that Everwood deserves a chance at a S2 release.

 

[Ethan Riley]

Well, maybe people know what they want to buy, and get frustrated when they can't get it. Maybe they get frustrated or jealous seeing crap Comedy Central and Nickelodeon cartoons get released left and right, when the good dramas that they like don't come out often enough, if at all. Maybe there's a lot of people out there who'd prefer quality family entertainment in their homes, and we're now discovering that there's a dearth of it.

 

[LuisGar]

Not to beat on a dead dog, but just a couple of comments:

Even though I don't believe this to change the big picture, there's people like me that never got a chance to watch the series other than in DVD, since they are not aired in my country. And the situation is very simple: there are 80+ episodes of an artwork of which I have only been given 24. So far I have only been given a crippled product and I feel I can rightfully demand a minimum respect as a customer.

Like I said earlier in the thread, they should never evaluate "seasons": if they had a minimum amount of respect for the art they produce, they would evaluate "series". If they have doubts, then they should not release a single DVD. The moment they decided to go ahead with S1, they created, at least in my view, a nonwritten obligation to release the complete series.

Your equation "any company's obligation=investors/shareholders" is wrong because it is incomplete. It forgets another at least equally relevant part of it: customers. This is what I think we are talking about here and you are sadly missing. You believe Ford's primary obligation is to make some dollars on every car they are sending to the dealers. I however believe their primary obligation is making sure these cars are safe (and there is actually nothing that should prevent them from getting the two things right at the same time........).

And BTW I don't feel any pain: this is just entertainment, not life. What I really feel is angry and currently cheated as a customer. There is a difference.

 

[Joseph DeMartino]

Too late!

 

[Gord Lacey]

That's the price of about 85% of hour-long dramas that run for 22 episodes/season. It's not high at all.

I think the problem with Everwood is that it has a younger audience that loves the show, but maybe can't afford the DVDs. The show appears to have tons of support, but the sales fall short of that. It's great that the set is selling well on Amazon right now, but that's after the price has been slashed (it's called dumping product).

I'd love to see more sets produced, but I don't see them coming any time soon. The show may stand a chance if Warner replaces some of the music, but I expect them to try releasing some other shows before they revisit Everwood.

Gord

 

[Malcolm R]

Then you should ship your S1 set back to Warner along with a copy of your receipt, and ask them for a refund since it seems unlikely you'll ever get the rest of your "artwork".

 

[LuisGar]

You have a point there.

Only problem is that shipping would be more expensive than the actual S1 set..............

 

[Nick Martin]

Some of you people just love to shoot each other down when it comes to these things.

Customers feel they are cheated, and whenever they convey that, they are instantly shot down with remarks about it all being about cold hard business, and studios never think about customer satisfaction and morals...we get that. Talk about beating dead horses. Seems to be so much more sympathy for the studios than the customers here.