Scorpion Releasing to Limit Blu-Ray Titles (1 Viewer)

[McCrutchy]

On the one hand you say that demand is "absolutely artificially inflated" by limited editions (i.e., higher than it should be), then in the very same post you admit that the net increase in terms of items sold is zero, and that all it does is increase the speed with which the company sells the product, and the profit they make. A point I've already made myself, and have explained that this appears to be necessary to make releasing of certain movies on Blu-ray viable. What exactly is wrong with a company reducing their risk exposure by selling a product more quickly and making a profit?

You seem to be confusing net demand with initial demand. Initial demand for limited editions is indeed higher, as people rush to grab a copy before the product sells out. But net demand is the same, it isn't higher because people bought copies more quickly. Ultimately, the same number of copies go to those who wanted to buy the movie, whether directly, or eventually through scalpers and the like.

Then, you once again turn to a common argument which is that somehow, simply because something is limited edition, it causes a lot of people who would otherwise not buy something to buy it. Yet the example you provide proves nothing of the sort. Why did 4,000 people hurry to buy a limited steelbook edition of Rush? Because they wanted the movie, thought the fancy packaging was worth the extra money, knew that if they waited for discounting it might run out, so they bought quickly. Once again, you're confusing the speed of demand with the total amount of demand. In the absence of limited edition marketing for that steelbook, it would probably sell just as many copies, but over a greater period of time.

I'm going to drop this debate as I think we're just going to go round and round in circles unless someone proves that a significant number of people who would otherwise not buy something at any point in time, are somehow now going to buy that same item just because it's labelled "limited edition". And we're not talking about scalpers, who are just middle men. We're talking about end consumers who are supposedly buying movies they don't really want on Blu-ray, just because they're labelled as limited edition, thereby "artificially inflating demand"...? I just don't buy it (unless you make your argument a limited edition ).

To be clear, I am not confused by anything.

You seem to imply that "overall" demand is just as important as initial demand, but this is not the case.

While titles that have "legs" and sell steadily for long periods can be valued, companies want to sell as much as they can, as quickly as they can. So, yes, the "speed" of demand, as you say, is very important.

The use of limited edition branding usually does create an inflated artificial demand for a product, because it is demand that would not be present otherwise. Again, you seem to say that because everyone who buys a copy would/could buy a copy at some point in the future, then demand is somehow the same, and this is what does not make sense. While I will grant you that Title A moving 10,000 units is just as good as Title B moving 10,000 units, if Title A takes ten years, and Title B takes ten months, then Title B is going to get another pressing, double-quick, and Title A will quietly go out-of-print.

If you prefer then, you could think of it as limited edition branding "increasing" the "speed" of demand. But please don't think that overall demand is somehow equal to initial demand. Initial demand is what everyone pays attention to, and is, for better or worse, far more important.

I also can't agree that this branding does not make people buy things they would not otherwise. I might buy a limited edition Blu-ray now, of a title I might loathe in five years, and perhaps would rather I never bought. On the other hand, I might kick myself every time I am reminded of missing out on a limited edition of a movie that went OOP five years ago, and which I did not purchase out of ignorance (tastes can change, after all). The latter scenario has occurred to me dozens of times, and the former has occurred more than I care to admit...

 

[cineMANIAC]

I believe what's happened is that ordinary people are buying into the collector mentality so anything that they deem is in danger of disappearing quickly they'll want in on. Steelbooks are increasing in popularity, as evidenced by quick sellouts of the specialty packaging at online retailers and even in B&M stores like Best Buy, where they go like hotcakes. Limited Edition marketing always appealed to true collectors but now it's a mainstream phenomenon. But I think we're at a point where every physical disc release now could be considered a limited edition. How many copies of SORCERER will Warner release? 10,000? 20? Compared to DVD at it's peak, where 100,000 units wasn't unheard of, 10 or 20K copies is paltry. And Sorcerer is far from an A-list title, so even if they release 10K copies it still feels like overkill.

 

[Ethan Riley]

I don't get steel books....they look like crap on the shelf and they get dented. And that's the end of that.

 

[TravisR]

I don't get steel books....they look like crap on the shelf and they get dented. And that's the end of that.

I don't like steel books either but they definitely have their fans.

 

[bruceames]

I don't get steel books....they look like crap on the shelf and they get dented. And that's the end of that.

Steelbooks are huge in Germany. I think that's where the craze originated from.

I like digibooks myself, but would prefer to have simple packaging since that means it'll be cheaper.

 

[Bryan^H]

How many copies of SORCERER will Warner release? 10,000? 20? Compared to DVD at it's peak, where 100,000 units wasn't unheard of, 10 or 20K copies is paltry. And Sorcerer is far from an A-list title, so even if they release 10K copies it still feels like overkill.

I'm curious about this also. This would be regarded as a " deep catalog title" in a really nice package. My guess is that popular online sites like Amazon will be the bread, and butter for this release finding it in the wild at walk in stores may be difficult.

 

[bruceames]

To be clear, I am not confused by anything.

You seem to imply that "overall" demand is just as important as initial demand, but this is not the case.

While titles that have "legs" and sell steadily for long periods can be valued, companies want to sell as much as they can, as quickly as they can. So, yes, the "speed" of demand, as you say, is very important.

The use of limited edition branding usually does create an inflated artificial demand for a product, because it is demand that would not be present otherwise. Again, you seem to say that because everyone who buys a copy would/could buy a copy at some point in the future, then demand is somehow the same, and this is what does not make sense. While I will grant you that Title A moving 10,000 units is just as good as Title B moving 10,000 units, if Title A takes ten years, and Title B takes ten months, then Title B is going to get another pressing, double-quick, and Title A will quietly go out-of-print.

If you prefer then, you could think of it as limited edition branding "increasing" the "speed" of demand. But please don't think that overall demand is somehow equal to initial demand. Initial demand is what everyone pays attention to, and is, for better or worse, far more important.

I also can't agree that this branding does not make people buy things they would not otherwise. I might buy a limited edition Blu-ray now, of a title I might loathe in five years, and would perhaps have rather I never bought. On the other hand, I might kick myself every time I am reminded of missing out on a limited edition of a movie that went OOP five years ago, and which I did not purchase out of ignorance (tastes can change, after all). The latter scenario has occurred to me dozens of times, and the former has occurred more than I care to admit...

The limited edition model does indeed work. Most catalogs released by the major studios have paltry sales, probably less than 2000 units. They take forever to sell, especially since many consumers are saavy enough to wait for the inevitable price drop.

Twilight Time presses 3000 copies of every title and sell them like hot cakes AND for double the price (that catalog normally debut for on Amazon) because people (including myself, I have over 50 of them now. Oops!) are lured by the "get them now before they're gone" model.

I think Scorpion would do well to emulate their model in the limited fashion they can, and given the success of the TT model and the state of catalogs on Blu-ray today, this will eventually be the rule rather than the exception. Catalog on disc will become increasingly a collector's market as the studios move to digital.

 

[bruceames]

I'm curious about this also. This would be regarded as a " deep catalog title" in a really nice package. My guess is that popular online sites like Amazon will be the bread, and butter for this release finding it in the wild at walk in stores may be difficult.

I don't think they'll press that many copies. Catalog sales as a whole on Blu-ray are very poor, whether they're from Scorpion or Fox or Warner.

 

[ROclockCK]

Digibooks, specifically from WB, are a special case - literally, pardon the pun - because they offer custom manufactured 1st edition packaging with enhanced collector content (the bound 40+ page book of photos with essay) as an added incentive for 'core fans to buy early. However, once that initial run of bound digibooks has sold through, I've yet to see one get re-run and re-released, even though the title itself will often remain available in standard disc case without any custom collector presentation...basically, just like any other Blu-ray.

For this reason, I'm not sure Digibooks and Steelbooks are germane to this discussion about Scorpion's adoption of a limited model, because typically, they get produced for more mainstream titles anyway, which aren't limited in terms of the total number of discs, just this custom collector-targeted packaging for early adopters.

 

[bluelaughaminute]

That might be the case with some titles, but it's not always true with other titles.

I've found it difficult to find any HD version of a movie on the PS Store where the download is cheaper than buying a Bluray.
Prices can be comparable when the title is brand new but a few months down the line when the BD is discounted the download won't be.
And who wants to pay even close to the price of a physical disc for a download that could vanish in a second and be blocked from downloading again at any point - as Disney have been known to do

 

[jcroy]

This happened a lot during the early life of the 'Net, with studios often misinterpreting what you call an "echo chamber effect" as the mere 'tip of the iceberg' in terms of wider market interest in a particular title.

More often than not though, in the hard light of subsequent sales, that vocal 'tip', turned out to be almost the entire 'floe'.

Are there any famous documented cases of this?

(ie. Insiders or former insiders admitting something like this on the record).

Or was most of this stuff mentioned off the record and/or as off-the-cuff remarks, by insiders or former insiders?

 

[Robert Crawford]

I've found it difficult to find any HD version of a movie on the PS Store where the download is cheaper than buying a Bluray.
Prices can be comparable when the title is brand new but a few months down the line when the BD is discounted the download won't be.
And who wants to pay even close to the price of a physical disc for a download that could vanish in a second and be blocked from downloading again at any point - as Disney have been known to do

Then you're not looking at the right titles.

 

[sidburyjr]

Well it worked on me. Somewhere upthread someone said that House of Wax 3D was no longer available. I had this and Dial M on my want list waiting for the price to go down. And it didn't seem to be going down. So I checked with Amazon and it wasn't available except for some third party who wanted 69 dollars or some such. And Amazon UK did not have it either.

I immediately went to WBShop and found both for about 55 dollars and with a RetailMeNot 20% off coupon both will be on their way to me sometime soon for 44 plus change. And with the coupon, I thought both were close to my desired price (no more than 20 for 3d BR).

 

[ROclockCK]

Are there any famous documented cases of this?

(ie. Insiders or former insiders admitting something like this on the record).

Or was most of this stuff mentioned off the record and/or as off-the-cuff remarks, by insiders or former insiders?

All of the above. Primarily anecdotal. And kinda/sorta off the record...yet nevertheless an open secret. But all from insiders on some level, invariably posting in this and other fora or message systems, mainly just expressing their dismay over the drastically changed landscape for packaged media, specifically Blu-ray.

Just one notable example:

"...the title that sold 4 million copies on DVD but would sell less than 6,000 on Blu-ray."

In any case, it's a 'smoking gun' type of comment. The evidence is defacto: the gradual shift of vintage catalogue titles from big box shelves to web-only availability...the increasingly low key release of new catalogue titles except for evergreen performers...the puny "3000 - 4000" range for Blu-ray first runs ("rarely going to a 2nd run") by companies who once upon a time would not have considered stamping less than 25,000 - 50,000 DVDs.

Our enthusiasm in these and other threads skews the picture considerably. At a glance, it would appear that there is widespread demand for some vintage titles, but you're really looking at the epicentre of interest.

Not hopeless of course...just niche...requiring a more right-sized delivery model, which the limited release addresses.

 

[jcroy]

The only semi on-the-record account which tangentially documents this (which I can think of offhand), would be the book "Sleepless in Hollywood: Tales from the New Abnormal" by insider Lynda Obst.

Here's an excerpt from that book tangentially discussing this issue,

http://www.salon.com/2013/06/15/lynda_obst_hollywoods_completely_broken/

 

[ROclockCK]

Like I said, 'smoking gun'. All sources, however tangential, have created this industry-in-transition picture.

But like I also said, I'm not ready to despair as long as smart, creative cottage labels are willing to explore more sustainable delivery models for vintage collector media.

Although some folks continue to see this move to Limited as de-evolutionary, I'm decidedly more of a glass half-full rather than half-empty kinda guy. To me, delivery models are less interesting than the actual movies. And it was always thus, which is why I had no problem with Laserdisc during its heyday, despite the "you snooze, you lose" availability and expense.

 

[Ed Lachmann]

I've found it difficult to find any HD version of a movie on the PS Store where the download is cheaper than buying a Bluray.
Prices can be comparable when the title is brand new but a few months down the line when the BD is discounted the download won't be.
And who wants to pay even close to the price of a physical disc for a download that could vanish in a second and be blocked from downloading again at any point - as Disney have been known to do

Plus, the downloads look like crap, at least the ones I've seen and you store them on a hard drive which could falter abruptly and without warning. God knows, they couldn't just let you burn them onto a BD-R, that would be "piracy" and cut their profits! Blu-ray sales are reported to be quite brisk in Germany, France and Japan which answers a big question about the future, just don't bank on America!

 

[ROclockCK]

Plus, the downloads look like crap, at least the ones I've seen and you store them on a hard drive which could falter abruptly and without warning. God knows, they couldn't just let you burn them onto a BD-R, that would be "piracy" and cut their profits! Blu-ray sales are reported to be quite brisk in Germany, France and Japan which answers a big question about the future, just don't bank on America!

Not necessarily Ed. It just depends on the capacity of the individual catalogue fan's central nervous system for patience.

In the past 2 or 3 years, I've seen scant evidence that any classic Hollywood title with a viable HD master has not been showing up or will not show up in Region A...eventually. Perhaps released as a limited edition, but nevertheless still available and invariably a pro job. And there is another benefit to be had from a little patience...I mean, how many fans and collectors who panic-bought...say...Double Indemnity and Touch of Evil from Region B, are now kicking themselves since Universal's release of superior 4k sourced Region A Blu-ray editions? Suppose it's any coincidence that both titles are "limited editions"?*

And there are a raft of other recent examples where the Region A home label or one of its licensees has arrived a bit late[r] to the party, but with an all-round better quality, fuller-featured Blu-ray. Twilight Time's Alfredo Garcia comes to mind. Ditto for The Blue Max. Ditto for Fox's Studio Classics split between their own shop and TT. Even what WB has been consigning to the WAC (albeit pokily), has been very respectable world class quality.

I'm certainly not prepared to write-off the output of Region A, not by a long shot, just the viability of our domestic mass market.

* Hopefully, the harbinger of a new premium collector line from Universal.

 

[Malcolm R]

It seems foolish to release a mainstream title such as Fright Night in a limited edition. It may be a suitable method for a cult film or small independent film, but TT could easily sell thousands more copies of Fright Night if they desired. Instead, all they've done is make a few speculators a lot of money. As I recall, that title was sold out well before release day.

 

[ROclockCK]

Actually, 35 days...one full week after release date.

But I digress; this thread isn't about TT's business model or their decision to run with Sony's 4k-sourced Fright Night in lieu of the studio's lack of interest in releasing it themselves...except perhaps by providing a preview of things that have since come to pass for other titles formerly perceived as "mainstream".

There is still the matter of that "mainstream" 4 million selling DVD which number crunched down to less than 6000 on Blu-ray. That is not hypothetical nor atypical anymore.

Labels like Scorpion are just doing what they have to do to make sense of this market contraction.