I’ll give you a topic: Is Digital before Physical a Good Thing? Discuss! (1 Viewer)

[Josh Steinberg]

This. Definitely this.

There's been several times where I preordered a Marvel movie from DMC within the first or second week that it was in theaters, but I had to wait until the disc shipped to get it, even when it came out on digital at least two weeks prior.

Walmart tried this with Vudu several years ago, where you’d preorder the disc and Vudu would give you the movie as soon as it hit digital and Walmart would send you the disc when it was released. Demand for this service was low, and the studio wasn’t willing to provide the digital copy to Vudu so they were paying out of pocket to provide the service, and it quietly disappeared after launching with some fanfare.

It kinda sucks but there just aren’t enough buying discs anymore for any of the studios or retailers to bend over backwards for us.

 

[Sam Posten]

Hate it. Wish everything was day and date

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Me too but hasn’t been that way in a decade.

 

[Jake Lipson]

It kinda sucks but there just aren’t enough buying discs anymore for any of the studios or retailers to bend over backwards for us.

This is it exactly. You took the words right out of my mouth. I would watch the digital copy early if I could get it without having to pay twice. But the studios don't see this as a problem they have to solve because it doesn't impact enough people.

I wanted Across the Spider-Verse on Blu-ray so that's what I bought. I would have watched the digital copy if it had been provided to me earlier, but it wasn't. So I waited and bought the disc. Sony didn't lose my money because I had to wait a few extra weeks. I doubt that very many collectors who are insistent on having a physical disc as part of their collection would decline to buy that disc because it comes out later.

If somebody opts to buy a digital version instead of a disc, that makes almost no difference to the studio because they're still getting the buyer's money either way. And if someone wants access to the movie badly enough to buy the digital version and also buy the disc, then that's extra money for the studio. So, as much as it would be nice for those of us who are still dedicated to collecting discs to have such a program, they have literally no incentive to create one.

 

[KeithDA]

We'll get there but it may take longer than any of us would expect as the incentive just isn't there for rural or sparsely populated areas.

It certainly isn't!

We finally gave up on our copper fixed line broadband that was delivering us 1.6mbps. We are now using a 4G router which is delivering us around 30mbps (for 5x as much money!) This is the fastest alternative we can find, but hardly 'superfast'..

 

[Jake Lipson]

Digital will always be a licence. Unless you have something tangible in your hands, that can be played without an internet connection, it's a licence. Anything else can be turned into vaporware with a click of a mouse.

Yes. But "premium digital license to watch as long as we continue to grant it to you" doesn't sound as attractive to customers. Most people think of it as ownership even if it isn't, and it is in the studios' interest to use that term.

 

[Keith Cobby]

I can count the number of films (plus two TV show) I own on digital on one hand, these are those without a blu ray release. As long as there is a disc, it doesn't matter that it follows the digital. Discs feel like proper ownership, something that can't be taken away.

 

[Kyle_D]

So far this trend has been limited to giant blockbuster titles, and I wonder whether some of it can be attributed to supply chain bottlenecks. Specifically, is it possible the few remaining replication facilities simply have longer lead times to meet anticipated demand for these specific titles than the current theatrical-to-streaming window? I honestly don't have a clue as to the answer, and please don't read the question as a reflection of Pollyannaish thinking. It's been clear to me for several years that the overall disc market is dwindling.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

So far this trend has been limited to giant blockbuster titles, and I wonder whether some of it can be attributed to supply chain bottlenecks. Specifically, is it possible the few remaining replication facilities simply have longer lead times to meet anticipated demand for these specific titles than the current theatrical-to-streaming window? I honestly don't have a clue as to the answer, and please don't read the question as a reflection of Pollyannaish thinking. It's been clear to me for several years that the overall disc market is dwindling.

Hey Kyle!

That's an interesting point and not too far-fetched to give consideration to.

It seems like a bottleneck has been created now that several replication plants have been closed down.

There are a few titles that were supposed to be released to 4k this year that have yet to surface. Warner Bros. has had setbacks on release dates with their WAC titles.

There certainly is the opportunity for a studio to get their titles into the hands of consumers quicker through digital availability while being able to jockey their disc release schedule according to possible bottlenecks with the replicators.

I don't have a clue either but the fact that disc release dates are constantly getting pushed back does give the impression there are a lot of replication issues.

 

[Alan Tully]

I can't say I've noticed. It never really occurs to me to download a film...I tell a lie, a couple of months ago checked how much it would be to download a new film (my nephew was coming to stay for the night & I thought he might enjoy Dungeons & Dragons: Honour Among Thieves), but when I saw that it would cost me as much as buying a Blu-ray, I didn't bother. With all the films I have on disc & all the films that are available to me, there's no great rush to see a new film (no rush at all for nearly of them). I'd like to see the new M.I. film, but no urgency, I'll buy the Blu-ray when it's released & probably watch it over Christmas.

 

[Sam Favate]

I'm old enough to remember the advent of home video in the early 80s, and how the studios fought the idea that people could simply record their shows or movies. They wanted to control when their content was seen. Then, of course, they realized that there were billions of dollars to be made in selling prerecorded videotapes (and laser discs and so on), so they preferred money to control.

I see some of the same attitudes now that we're in the streaming world. Studios once again realize they can control when their content is seen, so they might be inviting an early demise for physical media. But their premise is faulty because as we see, streaming has yet to turn a profit for most of the studios. (I think only Netflix has truly made money.) And demand is still there for physical media, as we see with Disney's recent announcement of UHD/Blu-ray releases for their shows that were previously exclusive to streaming.

I see the trend of announcing the digital version of a film before the physical to be an enticement for audiences to join the digital realm and put physical media aside. Maybe they are counting on the people who skipped the theater and only want to see the movie, so they'll pay $20 for a digital copy. They are not concerned about enthusiasts like us who want the best picture and sound, and who want to build and maintain our own libraries. They're happy to sell us premium product, but they'd be just as happy if we went away.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

I can't say I've noticed. It never really occurs to me to download a film...I tell a lie, a couple of months ago checked how much it would be to download a new film (my nephew was coming to stay for the night & I thought he might enjoy Dungeons & Dragons: Honour Among Thieves), but when I saw that it would cost me as much as buying a Blu-ray, I didn't bother. With all the films I have on disc & all the films that are available to me, there's no great rush to see a new film (no rush at all for nearly of them). I'd like to see the new M.I. film, but no urgency, I'll buy the Blu-ray when it's released & probably watch it over Christmas.

As someone who is retired, I watch my expenses and have become very frugal with my disc and streaming needs.

It's rare that I'll buy any disc day-and-date release. I was willing to wait months to buy a 3D film I was interested in just because Amazon had the better price but would be delayed in getting the shipment. That's okay. I don't need to pay a premium to own a film on day one.

Digital releases used to be a decent alternative as they were priced lower than a disc release. That no longer seems to be the case.

So, I tend to sit and wait to buy stuff until it's at a price point that makes sense to me.

I see the trend of announcing the digital version of a film before the physical to be an enticement for audiences to join the digital realm and put physical media aside. Maybe they are counting on the people who skipped the theater and only want to see the movie, so they'll pay $20 for a digital copy. They are not concerned about enthusiasts like us who want the best picture and sound, and who want to build and maintain our own libraries. They're happy to sell us premium product, but they'd be just as happy if we went away.

Completely agree, Sam

 

[Chip_HT]

I know that's the horror story that constantly gets repeated, but until/unless it becomes more of a reality than discs that become unplayable, it will remain mostly an urban myth.

I feel like right now, I'm more likely to lose a movie due to a broken disc caused by mishandling than a studio revoking a license.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Here's something that may further the concern I was expressing in my original post.

Our friend Allen Hollis sent me this screenshot of an order he placed with Amazon for the upcoming BD release of BARBIE.




Notice the date of February 28th.

Now, in defense of Warner Bros., this title hasn't been announced for physical disc release yet so this could just be some inane Amazon placeholder for an estimated date.

On the other hand, if it's true that we have to wait till February, that seems a new wrinkle in the way studios release their Summer titles. Usually, anything released in early Summer is out on video by Q4 of that same year.

Consider this a "wait and see" situation

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

Walmart tried this with Vudu several years ago, where you’d preorder the disc and Vudu would give you the movie as soon as it hit digital and Walmart would send you the disc when it was released. Demand for this service was low, and the studio wasn’t willing to provide the digital copy to Vudu so they were paying out of pocket to provide the service, and it quietly disappeared after launching with some fanfare.

IIRC one of the sticking points is that people were buying the digital to disc copy, redeeming the Vudu advance code, and then selling the digital copy inside the case of the disc copy. So studios weren't necessarily wrong in thinking that it would be costing them a sale if they'd signed on.

 

[Alan Tully]

Yeah, I reckon that's just a place holder for Barbie, Warner surly won't want to miss the lucrative Christmas market. It looks like the days are over of having a standard Blu-ray included with your 4K & a digital code included with your Blu-ray.

I like the UK Amazon placeholder date for Mission Impossible, 31st December 2028! The site that lists forthcoming German releases has it as an early November release, which sounds about right to me.

 

[Jake Lipson]

Now, in defense of Warner Bros., this title hasn't been announced for physical disc release yet so this could just be some inane Amazon placeholder for an estimated date.

I think this is the case. I have had Barbie on pre-order with Amazon. They previously showed a release date of October 3 for Barbie. A few days ago they showed January 1. I think their system just doesn't know what's happening yet. Bill Hunt at Digital Bits reported recently that they still expect the disc on October 3. Even if it is later, I would be absolutely stunned if the biggest film of the year isn't available on physical media by December in order to take advantage of the holiday shopping season.

You can't really gift wrap a digital copy. I'd imagine that for those who still like physical media, Barbie will be a popular gift option this upcoming holiday season.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

You can't really gift wrap a digital copy . I'd imagine that for those who still like physical media, Barbie will be a popular gift option this upcoming holiday season.

Sure you can. We buy my mother books for her Kindle as gifts quite often. I just print out the order page, black out the price, and wrap it up or put it in a card. You can purchase movies as gifts on iTunes and do something similar.

 

[Jesse Skeen]

I’ve been saying for YEARS that early digital releases are the new DIVX. There were a few movies that came out on DIVX with the DVD either several weeks away or not announced at all, and people saw that as an attempt to push people to that format (whether it actually was or not.) I’ve been disappointed that with all the outspoken hate for DIVX back in the day, there’s been very little condemnation of this practice of pushing the market to digital by releasing movies a long time before the discs come out. I get that some people prefer digital over discs, but it shouldn’t need this unfair advantage to become successful. People who like digital will buy that regardless of the release date, but right now people who prefer discs are being punished by having to wait several more weeks and likely those who don’t care have been pushed more towards digital because of this.

Right now disc sales are in the toilet, and they’re constantly getting harder to find in stores. It seems that’s what the studios want though. Indiana Jones might have normally still been a good seller on disc, but since they’ve put that out on digital without even a release date yet for disc it’s likely many will just get it that way and the discs will collect dust as a result. If the studios wanted to boost the disc business, they could easily put a high profile title out on disc for a few months before it hits digital but they would never do that.

As others have stated, you never really own a digital copy. Some may still like that better, but no reason to give it such an unfair advantage unless you really want to hasten the demise of discs altogether.

 

[cineMANIAC]

Yes. But "premium digital license to watch as long as we continue to grant it to you" doesn't sound as attractive to customers. Most people think of it as ownership even if it isn't, and it is in the studios' interest to use that term.

I suspect a majority of the folks who only stream don't care that the "license" is never permanent. I, however, do care, which is why streaming will always remain just a "side girlfriend" to me. I'm going to need to actually own a tangible copy of my favorite films for as long as I stay alive. I'm OK with testing the waters with a new film by streaming it first, as I did with Wonder Woman 1984 when I had HBO Max. In that sense, streaming is useful for test driving all the disposable junk Hollywood throws at us but it's not even an option for those of us who want to own physical copies of our favorite films.

As for the piracy thing, they need to come up with a camera that shoots and adds a "filter" to the images that makes it unwatchable if someone tries to pirate it. I guess paying customers would have to "unlock" the filter with a code to remove it.