A study in contrasts-or-someone needs to fire their marketing director (1 Viewer)

[Paul Arnette]

That's right, it was you, and I thank you for it. I'll be honest, I didn't notice your emphasis on the HD DVD PRG the first time I read it. Sorry. I don't think you'll find anyone other than the most ardent HD DVD supporter, who will argue that the HD DVD PRG has done a better job promoting their format than the BDA.

 

[Jason Seaver]

See also: Fox, Twentieth Century. Man, I hope the BD people didn't pay cash for them to be exclusive for some amount of time.

 

[Eric F]

Also, most people with HDTVs are watching the syndicated TOS episodes with updated CG FOR FREE and probably don't know the difference between 480p SD and True HD (and don't care).

I DVR every Sat evening, it looks excellent, and while I'd like the HD version I probably won't bother.

 

[Douglas Monce]

Yes I do actually. Star Trek is a new commodity for CBS and I think they are trying to figure out what the market place will accept. I don't think the press release with the $217 price tag is anything more than a fishing expedition. You have to remember that yes Paramount has been charging a premium for Star Trek for 30 years. But CBS is not Paramount and I think they are trying to figure out just what they have on their hands.

Doug

 

[Paul Arnette]

Well, it seems like a pretty steep drop to me regardless. Your MRSP's would have it retailing from anywhere between $75 and $100. I would probably bite on that. However, I think it will probably wind up retailing between $125 and $150.

BTW, when did ownership transfer from Paramount to CBS? This first time I remember consciously noticing something had the CBS logo on it was Prime Cut. This is relatively recent, no?

 

[Jason Seaver]

I think it was last year that Viacom reorganized, making CBS and Paramount two more autonomous companies than they had been since the original purchases.

 

[Douglas Monce]

CBS and Paramount merged in 2006 (this was also the demise of UPN). Paramount handles the feature films and CBS handles all television products. The upshot being Paramount will release the Star Trek features on Paramount Home Video, and all future Star Trek TV shows will be released on CBS home video.

Doug

 

[Douglas Monce]

In 2006 CBS television and Viacom split, CBS television inherited Paramount's TV program library, with Viacom keeping Paramount's films. The Parent of both companies is CBS corporation.

Doug

 

[ppltd]

No one is denying that Combo's cost more, but rather that the SD version will not be included with the BD set. If the SD is to be included in the HD version, then it will probably be included in the BD version. Combos in the HD, separate SD disks in the BD. Why would you think that feature set would be any different? If this happens, there should be no price differential. In fact, the Combo's may be cheaper than two separate disks.

BTW, I am talking about the ST release.

 

[Paul Arnette]

Oh, I see where you are coming from now. As to why I think it would be different, there are literally tens of examples of HD DVD Combo Format releases where the BD counterpart does not included the SD DVD version. I don't forsee them doing the same for a BD ST: TOS release if for no other reason than BD buyers aren't accustom to it.

This is a bit hard for me to comment on objectively because I really don't see the added value for CBS in releasing this in Combo Format only apart from driving up the price. All the other benefits lie with encouraging HD DVD adoption, which is why I think there's more going on behind-the-scenes with this release. There's a lot of synergy for HD DVD if they can get a Combo Format-only release of a coveted propety like ST: TOS series, but it would seem to me that overall sales for release itself would perform better for CBS if it were broken out into two separate releases (SD and HD DVD).

 

[bigluigi]

I, too, am at a loss to explain why Paramount would choose the HD-DVD format to initially release StarTrek at a SRP of $217 a pop for only 1season. Hell, Blu-Ray should be the natural choice because those people paid $500 to $1,000 for their players and could more easily afford it! As it stands right now...this "set" would cost more than what I paid for my HD-DVD player.
Maybe, I'll just rent it from NetFlex.

 

[Rob Young]

How people can slam hd dvd for something paramount decided is beyond me but I guess I shouldn't be shocked by stuff I read regarding these formats.

Should I slam blu-ray for Fox charging 40 bucks for catalog discs (that often are lacking in features) when other studios are at 30 for their catalog titles and actually slap in more "stuff" which could justify a higher price?

Seriously...

 

[ppltd]

???????? Are you saying because someone spends more on a player, they are more willing to spend on disks??? The reality doesn't match your argument, as has been proven wrong with releases like Matrix and Planet Earth.

 

[Rachael B]

For $217, I'd expect all three seasons. Even at that price I wouldn't be hot to buy. There's so much other Trek to choose from and I can always watch TOS on LD's or DVD's on my bedroom TV.

$217 a season, tisk, tisk...."eddie are you kidding"....not about the starship Enterprise, apparently!

 

[justinslot]

It better come packaged in a scale replica of the Enterprise to be worth $217.