Hopefully some insight to this Split-Season DVD set argument (1 Viewer)

[BobSchneider]

BINGO! I agree, Ive always seen splits season sets as economic move to get more money and nothing else. Example when the S1 V1 of the streets of san francisco came out retailers were charging between 29.95 to 39.95 (yes 39.95 that what my local walmart was pimping it for) so for the S1 both volumns of SoSf would have cost double a normal full season set. Which is BS , and it wasnt till the local Walmart slash the price to 15.95 that the SoSF s1 v1 and v2 begain to sell, Gee image that, the consumers arent such dummies after all and wouldnt bite on a split season rip off

 

[progrocktv]

Again, small vocal minority in the studios eyes. I'm sure this has come up during the studio's Marketing Department research (believe it or not they do quite a bit of it), but the numbers are so insignificant it doesn't really matter to them.

Example is when I was working at my last job we took a certain TV series off one of our channels. Soon afterwards we received a petition of about 3,000 signatures to bring back the series. However, that number was still considered insignificant by upper management and the series was never brought back.

 

[MatthewA]

Then the studios are cockeyed.

 

[progrocktv]

Maybe, but sadly making millions each year.

 

[Joe Karlosi]

It probably is, but I think the studios find it necessary to warrant releasing older TV shows that aren't as high in demand, to make it worthwhile for them finanically.

Take something that's really popular, like THE SOPRANOS. Now, if these were split into seasons (I believe Season 6 was) it would be a move to "milk" more out of the fanbase. Because the company knows that people WILL buy it, because there is a big demand.

But take something relatively less marketable, older, and obscure like THE MOD SQUAD or LOVE AMERICAN STYLE. In this case, there will be far less people interested... do you really think the splitting of season sets here are to "milk" the fan and to make more money? I'm not so sure in cases like this; it seems that this may be considered the best way to make older shows like these profitable for the studio to even bother with a release.

Believe me, I'd prefer NOT paying higher prices to obtain a full run of a show I want in split volumes; but I'd gladly welcome this other than the studios deciding not to release a show AT ALL because they feel they can't make any money on it.

 

[TravisR]

Same here.

And like Joe alluded to, if it was a case of just wanting to bleed the consumers, why are they only doing it on less popular shows? If that was their plan then much better selling sets like Lost, 24, The Simpsons, Seinfeld, South Park, etc would be split in volumes too.

 

[Scott_F_S]

You're assuming, of course, that the studios dictate what the retail stores are going to put on their shelves. I don't think it works that way.

 

[Steve...O]

Scott is right. It absolutely does not work that way. It is up to the retailer what to stock and how many units they will buy from the distributor.

If S1 of a particular series tanks at retail retailers are not going to order S2 or if they do, it will be in reduced quantities. The studio that released S1 thus is not going to put any resources into releasing S2 because they won't have a viable market for it.

 

[David Levine]

Yup. And Barnes & Noble and Borders have a lot less DVD real estate than a Best Buy. They also have a different consumer, usually a higher retail price and very particular buyers.

 

[Corey3rd]

retailers rely more on their websites for older titles.

 

[David Levine]

I agree with that too.

The problem is we have more stuff than ever coming out, so there is less room for the marginal stuff and no room for the poor sellers.

Internet shopping has become the haven of the "niche purchase".

 

[Duane Alford]

You need to read my post again. Fox actually made 3 releases: Season 1 (the complete season), Season 1 Volume 1, and Season 1 Volume 2. While they said they wanted to give the people that buy whole seasons that option and the people that buy split seasons that option. My guess is they wanted to see which sold more. I'd be willing to bet the complete first season sold more.

 

[Duane Alford]

Like I've said before, when season sets usually sell for $30-$40 and Season 1 Volume 1 of The Mod Squad is selling for $35, it'll cost $70 for the complete first season. How is that supposed to get anyone interested in buying it? How do you not consider that milking the fans? IMO, the only people that would shell out $70 for one season of episodes aren't your avarage consumer, but the diehard hardcore fans.

 

[docdoowop]

It's certainly backfired on the studios. And since there's consumer resistance, the half-season sets will eventually have to come down in price to unload the inventory. At which point I'll be a buyer.

(BV season 2 volume 1 is currently a buck more than the complete season 1 on Amazon.)

 

[TravisR]

But there's only a demand among fans of the show. In the case of The Fugitive, it has rarely played on TV in the last decade (so not many people have gotten into the show via reruns) and while it's a great show and was a very popular series when it ran, those same people that watched it 40 years ago aren't all going out to buy it. Paramount is making more money off the volumes but I'll happily spend more to get something rather than save $20 and have them stop halfway through the run of the series because they don't think it's selling well enough to keep season sets going.

I've said it before but if they're only splitting the seasons to get more money out of consumers, why wouldn't they split current shows up too? They far outsell older shows so splitting those sets is alot more profiatble than splitting something that doesn't sell as well.

 

[Glenn Overholt]

There doesn't seem to be any consistancy to what the studios are doing.
If 'X' % of the people around in the '60's watched the 'Fugitive', and say 10% of those viewers (that are still around) want to buy it on DVD, doesn't the studio already have a rough idea about how many people will buy this? They already know their age (baby-boomers) and know their relative income?

All of that flies in the face of any Star Trek fan. Talk about milking the public - and those seasons weren't split (The first run of TOS DVD's being the exception here).

Ya think somebody made way too much profit on them?

...and finally, why doesn't the 'extra' (and I use that word loosely) money made on the profitable releases get used to bring out the 'not so profitable' movies and series'?

Glenn

 

[David Levine]

Because studios don't think like that, and it's hard to explain to Boards of Directors that it's OK to lose money on certain titles because of how much they made on others.

 

[progrocktv]

That's an option and probably the case for The Fall Guy (since they were both released at the same time) Hower for other shows, studios aren't willing to take that chance with full season older shows.

 

[progrocktv]

Marketing departments really need to start from scratch on this. They can use that initial audience numbers for marketing purposes when promoting the series (Originally watched by x-million viewers), but they need to get more of a sure-fire accurate reading since the TV landscape and buying habits have changed so much.

 

[progrocktv]

At least with BV I don't think it's consumer resistance. I just don't think many people of the average public care about the show.

I'm sure they're trying to make up on a shortfall for season 1 losses.