For Those Who Still Think Physical Media Has No Place in the 21st century… (1 Viewer)

[The Drifter]

I do not see any problem with “eco-cases” at all. My major objection is the cardboard book like ones that have every disc just shoved into a cardboard sleeve. My Alfred Hitchcock set quickly became a giant accordion when the glue failed. I wouldn’t let them of course, but the discs would have merrily jumped out and bounced on the floor.

The issue with the Eco cases is that - due to the holes in the cases - the paper DVD/Blu cover is more likely to get disfigured/tear/etc. due to not laying completely flat against the plastic case. Also, I've noticed that Eco cases - due to being flimsier - tend to break/warp more than regular solid plastic cases. I just find these cheap & a sloppy way to package physical media.

I completely see your point about the cardboard books, but I really like the packaging for some of these. I.e. the Fast & the Furious 7-disk set; the Alien 4-disk set; the 2011 Star Wars Saga (6 films) set; etc. Haven't had any issues with these yet, but will have to keep an eye out for this.

I am thinking of going the binder route because of issues like this.

 

[TJPC]

How about taking a piece of computer paper and cutting it to be the same size as the insert. This can serve as a liner.

 

[The Drifter]

How about taking a piece of computer paper and cutting it to be the same size as the insert. This can serve as a liner.

Good point. I may try this.

But, this doesn't change my opinion that these Eco cases are cheap & flimsy.

 

[Carlo_M]

This is my slim-storage solution. But I will admit: it's pricey. But I have slowly bought them over the years, on sale online direct from them, and the Container Store actually started carrying them a few years ago so I do wait for sales there too.
https://mmdesign.com/

I can literally fit 5 BD/4K in the space of 1 traditional case, and it has room for both front and back art (and internal books). Do note that you have to use the larger DVD variant for Criterion BDs due to the different sizing they use. For those of us with hundreds/thousands of discs, it's a godsend. I also used it for DVD and CD.

 

[OLDTIMER]

As space saver I repackage many of my discs into slimline 7mm Blu-ray cases. Some others I put into paper sleeves (the computer ones with the transparent front).

 

[The Drifter]

As space saver I repackage many of my discs into slimline 7mm Blu-ray cases. Some others I put into paper sleeves (the computer ones with the transparent front).

Great to know - I didn't know these existed. These are far preferable to both the Blu Eco cases & the cheaper CD cases I have. I'm a sucker for the Blu packaging. So, these are perfect in that these are affordable, don't take up a lot of room, and have the distinct Blue plastic - excellent.

This is my slim-storage solution. But I will admit: it's pricey. But I have slowly bought them over the years, on sale online direct from them, and the Container Store actually started carrying them a few years ago so I do wait for sales there too.
https://mmdesign.com/

I can literally fit 5 BD/4K in the space of 1 traditional case, and it has room for both front and back art (and internal books). Do note that you have to use the larger DVD variant for Criterion BDs due to the different sizing they use. For those of us with hundreds/thousands of discs, it's a godsend. I also used it for DVD and CD.

This is also great to know - Thanks for the info./link; I had never heard of these before. I may not use them, but it's good to know they're out there - and they are very space-efficient.

Great to know that The Container Store carries them. They used to be my go-to place for durable plastic storage bins (the late '90's), but I haven't been there in a while.

 

[Bryan^H]

Going by your use of profanity, I hope you're not mad at us for questioning those sales numbers. It was not my intention to challenge you personally, but just those reported sales numbers from that website. My apologies if I offended you.

No apology needed Robert
I'm not mad, just disappointed. I spent a lot of hours over the years using that site as what I thought was credible information. I, and many others believed it to be a reliable source for tracking accurate numbers of units sold of DVD/Blu-Ray discs. I guess I put too much faith in that site (as did many other people).

I just wanted to share some positive news about physical media, for those that are interested.

 

[Kyrsten Brad]

Brad here. Those who know me on this board know I've been an advocate for the retention of physical media as a alternative to streaming, when online vendors aren't carrying a particular film title, Of course I've followed the market trends and nowadays our home has a pretty dynamic streaming platform (three Rokus, one Apple TV all 4K).

I can definitely say that online entertainment has affected my purchases of physical media. The biggest example being my 3 year subscription to Disney+ has pretty much put the kabosh on DMC disc purchases (with a few planned exceptions when those come around to Blu-ray or UHD Blu-ray). Most of (but not all) of my favorite Disney classics are now available in HD or near HD on Disney+. That and I can now go ahead and catch up on viewing MCU titles that I'd like to watch maybe once and that would be all.

As for classic titles outside of the Disney domain, that's a bit of a different story. There are quite a few classic titles on Blu-ray / UHD Blu-ray that are not yet available online or if they are online, image quality is definitely inferior for whatever reason. So I'll still be buying Blu-rays & UHD Blu-rays. Just not quite as many as I have been over the previous 10 years.

Along another tangent mentioned in this thread, I'm open to some forms of alternative storage for my current Blu-ray / DVD collection with the goal to conserve & open up space. So I might just be in the market in the future for this.

Finally from what I've been reading, physical media is headed for that niche marketplace we all believe its headed to but I believe that niche market may end up a bit stronger than what doomsday scenarios for physical media have been advanced.

Godspeed DVD / Blu-ray / UHD Blu-ray!

 

[Ronald Epstein]

As for classic titles outside of the Disney domain, that's a bit of a different story. There are quite a few classic titles on Blu-ray / UHD Blu-ray that are not yet available online or if they are online, image quality is definitely inferior for whatever reason. So I'll still be buying Blu-rays & UHD Blu-rays. Just not quite as many as I have been over the previous 10 years.

Brad, in the same light, you would be absolutely amazed at what IS available in HD and 4K that hasn't been released to disc.

I have been buying up many "most wanted" Paramount titles that the studio will probably never release to Blu-ray. There's even a 4k release of Star Trek II: Wrath of Khan: Director's cut. Oh, Lawrence of Arabia is available in 4k as well. The more I look on the Cheap Charts app the more my mouth just drops wide open at all the stuff that's available digitally that probably won't see the light of day on BD or 4K.

And you know what? You can buy most of this stuff for $5 (HD) if you wait for a sale with 4k titles at about $13.

I don't see any diminished quality with BD or 4K digital. However, if you have a slow Internet connection in your home that is going to affect the picture quality.

 

[Todd Erwin]

You do see the regular cases from the boutique labels who cater more to the collector than the mass market. Twilight Time, Kino, Criterion, Olive, Warner Archive, ClassicFlix and others like them see using the nicer sturdier cases rather than the eco ones. They’re targeting the much smaller enthusiast market which means they tend to look at their products from a collector’s point of view.

Both Sony and Universal have moved away from the more traditional eco cases (the ones with the recycle logo and spokes cutouts) to cases that are slightly thinner but still solid. I really prefer these cases over the traditional ones that Warner still uses.

 

[Todd Erwin]

Speaking of packaging, I still have an utter hatred for Warner's "snapper" DVD cases....

 

[Keith Cobby]

I intended to buy Angel Has Fallen on 4k but streamed it on Prime. If i had liked it, i would have bought the disc but thought it was awful. I won't be buying downloads although many of you are. Streaming will kill disc sales because most people aren't collectors and will watch what is available.

 

[The Drifter]

Agree with all of this. They're obviously saving money by producing Eco-cases (i.e., each case uses up less plastic), to the detriment of the consumer/collector.

Just to clarify my above statement, in light of Josh's explanation re: the real reasoning as to why Eco cases were produced:

When I first saw Eco cases with the plastic "holes" in the front & back of the case, my first thought as to why these were produced was as a cost-saving process. I.e., since the cases obviously use up less plastic than a normal case because they're not completely solid, the plastic from the "holes" (think doughnut holes) are then being used to put towards the plastic needed to make more cases.

However, Josh's explanation as to why Eco cases actually cost more money/time/effort to produce than regular solid cases makes more sense, given that making holes in a case is obviously logistically more difficult than just producing a solid plastic case. I know next to nothing about the manufacturing process, but I do know about efficiency. And, producing Eco cases definitely sounds inefficient.

 

[Sam Posten]

image quality is definitely inferior for whatever reason.

No, it's not.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Thinking of Paramount...

The more I think this over the more I realize the brilliance of Paramount skipping discs and releasing their big catalog titles to streaming.

Paramount doesn't have to pay for replication or packaging. Paramount doesn't have to worry about unsold inventory in stores.

They put out a title for $12 HD (with it occasionally going on sale for $6) and they still make the same profit per purchase (if not more).

This is the reason why, in my opinion, the disc market is doomed. It seems to me there is a bigger profit in skipping all the overhead, offering a title that costs LESS to buy digitally (which entices more purchases) and the studio still makes the same amount of money (if not more).

Now, I warn, this is all off the top of my head and I welcome factual numbers to back this up, but it makes sense.

 

[Carlo_M]

I don't view it as an either/or. Companies will focus on the areas that make them the most revenue (which currently appears to be streaming) but in general, if something else also makes them money, they'll likely continue that in some fashion until it's no longer financially advantageous to do so.

Ironically, the trend to shoot and project digitally (I don't know if any of the dozens of multiplexes near me even have film projectors anymore) means everything is already in a digital format (even if it was shot on film). So creating a digital file for disc/streaming is not the undertaking it once was on DVD, for new releases anyway. And replicating processes are already well refined and established, so the cost of creating a disc is likely what it used to cost to make CDs and DVDs. Couple that with how we're now all used to paying $25 or more for discs (meaning stores pay about $12-$14 to the distributor), there is still a healthy profit margin for companies.

But I agree, they'll focus more on streaming for now, because that's where the market growth is. But never underestimate corporate bean counters. If there's money to be made elsewhere, they'll do it.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Thinking of Paramount...

The more I think this over the more I realize the brilliance of Paramount skipping discs and releasing their big catalog titles to streaming.

Paramount doesn't have to pay for replication or packaging. Paramount doesn't have to worry about unsold inventory in stores.

They put out a title for $12 HD (with it occasionally going on sale for $6) and they still make the same profit per purchase (if not more).

This is the reason why, in my opinion, the disc market is doomed. It seems to me there is a bigger profit in skipping all the overhead, offering a title that costs LESS to buy digitally (which entices more purchases) and the studio still makes the same amount of money (if not more).

Now, I warn, this is all off the top of my head and I welcome factual numbers to back this up, but it makes sense.

The numbers back you up. Ten years ago, sales of physical media totaled about $20 billion domestically. In 2019, sales of physical media came to a total of $3 billion. Digital sales had a total of $3 billion. Streaming subscriptions (services like Netflix) had a total of nearly $16 billion.

So not only has consumer spending on physical shrunken by a gigantic degree, but for the most part, that money isn’t being moved to digital sales, it’s being moved to digital subscriptions. Long term, Paramount having good digital assets will allow them to make their money back by licensing that content to different services or one day starting their own. Short term, the digital sales are an easy way to get them out to customers without being responsible for the overhead for physical items. They might be leaving some physical sales on the table but their bean counters must be making a determination that it’s not worth the risk.

 

[jcroy]

Another option is Paramount outsourcing to that Universal/Warner joint venture distributing dvds/blurays.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Another option is Paramount outsourcing to that Universal/Warner joint venture distributing dvds/blurays.

Paramount did that several years ago with Warner Bros.

It was a very short-lived relationship and a very small amount of titles were released out of that deal if I remember correctly.

I don't think Paramount will repeat itself. It has found its niche in digital.

 

[Worth]

Was anything new even released in the Paramount/Warner deal? It seemed like it was all repackaging already released titles.