The Era of "You Want Extras Ya Gotta Pay For 'Em" Is In Full Swing (1 Viewer)

[Simon Howson]

Exactly!

To me it is just obvious that consumers expect each new format to offer better value for money. I have bought hundreds of DVDs for under $10, but can't remember buying ANY VHS tapes for that price (I never bought public domain videos, and very, very rarely buy public domain DVDs).

 

[Joe Karlosi]

Oh, come on -- even if laserdiscs had been competitively priced as low as DVD (or even lower priced) LD was NEVER going to become the standard in any way, shape or form - because the quality wasn't as good as DVD, and the LD discs were too large and required being flipped over in the middle of most movies! The DVD, like the music CD, was much more convenient and appealing to consumers.

Blu-ray, by comparison, IS better video quality (than DVD). And it's just as convenient to use, even the cases are smaller (if you want to consider space savings).

Bottom Line-- High Definition is here to stay, and it is the future. Standard Definition is old, and is not. So it's time to move onward. Quite basic, really.

 

[TravisR]

But with Blu-ray, you're still not going to pay between $40 (for a movie-only disc) to $100 (for a special edition) like you would have for laserdiscs so the analogy doesn't work.

 

[Simon Howson]

You've missed the point. DVD was a better product than VHS and LaserDiscs, and was ALWAYS cheaper than LD, and very quickly became cheaper than VHS.

So DVD is both BETTER and CHEAPER, which some in this thread have argued is somehow impossible, and that we should expect to pay more for a better technology. This is just wrong, and in fact, the opposte is true. Consumers expect to get more for their money as new technologies are introduced.

 

[TravisR]

I'm sure you're correct but (once again) expecting a better product for less money makes no sense to me. I wouldn't buy a $150,000 house and expect the amenities of a $1,500,000 house just because houses have been around for a long time. If you want something better, it's probably going to cost more.

 

[Simon Howson]

I'm not, as I have stated repeatedly in this thread and others, I think DVDs and Blu-rays should be priced THE SAME.

But of course, over time that effectively means they will be cheaper due to inflation.

 

[rich_d]

Joe, that's not the point being discussed. Simon (correctly) gave an example of media delivering more and at a lower price. Laserdiscs didn't do that. Certainly we don't need to rehash DVD advantages over LDs.

When I buy storage media (hard disc, flash drive etc), cell phones or computer software I expect more for less. If a sales person told me I should pay more because the computer chip is faster than a prior model I'd look at him like he had three heads. I expect that the chip manufacturer is always improving the speed and the chip yield and passing that savings on to the hardware manufacturer and then to the consumer. If not, they are all in the wrong business.

I have Blu-Ray. Some here believe that SD is to HD as a Toyota Corolla is to a Lexus. I see it more as a Toyota Corolla is to a Camry. Is it nicer? Yep. Would I wait for my Corolla to crap out before upgrading? Depends on the deals being offered.

 

[rich_d]

Inflation makes things cheaper?

I think you meant to say it will become cheaper as HD gets to critical mass.

 

[Simon Howson]

No, I meant what I wrote.

If you spent $25 on a DVD 10 years ago, and $25 on a Blu-ray today, the Blu-ray is effectively cheaper, because $25 today is worth less than $25, 10 years ago.

This Australian inflation calculator RBA: Inflation Calculator says that $25 10 years ago is worth about $33 today (it actually only goes up to 2007).

So this could explain small differences in prices. But the huge differences that the corporations are arbitrarily creating IMO can't be justified.

I completely agree with you that Blu-rays will eventually be cheaper, and it is in the interests of the studios to make this happen as soon as possible. Creating this arbitrary price difference between new Blu-ray and DVD releases will just delay that inevitability.

 

[Stan]

Economies of scale make a lot of sense between Blu-ray and DVD.

I have no idea what the stats are comparing the two formats, but DVD is obviously outselling Blu-ray at this time. Let's say for example it's 10 to 1.

There may be a few production costs that are the same for both formats, but for most things DVD will be cheaper.

It's a lot cheaper, per piece, to print a batch of 100,000 DVD labels as compared to 10,000 Blu-ray. Same thing shipping 100,000 units to Costco or wherever as compared to 10,000.

If and when Blu-ray ever reaches the same popularity level of DVD, the two formats will probably level out with similar pricing. Of course by the time that happens, an entirely new format will be available and we can start the argument all over again.

 

[Corey3rd]

When I got into buying DVDs back in 1999, the biggest advantage they had price-wise was the internet sites with outrageous discounts. I remember getting the special edition of fightclub for $10 from Reel.com. There were sites that let you get the 35% off pre-sale order discount along with using one of their cyber coupons. Of course those were the glorious days when it didn't matter how much money they were losing cause the stock kept soaring on the cyber stores of tomorrow.

speaking of things i want in Blu-ray, TCM's showing a letterboxed "Don't Make Waves" with Tony Curtis. I want to experience Sharon Tate working the trampoline in 1080p.

although I'd like to complain about the tiny fonts they're using to list the bonus features on Blu-rays. Not all of us have invested on billboard sized TVs.

 

[rich_d]

Thanks for bringing that up. Yup, with coupons or the (seemingly many) price mistakes on-line, tons of titles were sold on-line. And that was important to the DVD format as people like myself, now considered buying films and having personal libraries of films.

Any format needs a bit of luck even if it is the best thing since sliced bread. That's the 200 pound gorilla on the back of Blu-Ray sales even if we thought the product was a significant step-change from what came before it.

The other issue is the changing marketplace. I don't think that 18 year old dudes really think about libraries per se even if they are big film fans. More about storing things on their external hard drives or their laptops. Not a great sign (if I'm right) for the future of physical media.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Nothing ever has - or probably ever will - top the 3 for $1 sale at... 800.com? Buy.com? Can't remember, but it offered 3 DVDs for one buck SHIPPING INCLUDED! Ah, those were the days!

 

[RickER]

What i said was, if DVD and Blu-ray should be the same price, then a Corolla and a Lexus should also be the same price. A car is a car, right?
And you said that we should be getting more for our money. So how about a brand new Lexus for $17,000. I'm in!

 

[John Alderson]

Ah yes, that was 800.com. I got Star Trek: First Contact, Sleepless In Seattle and As Good As It Gets for $1 shipped. Astonishing. I believe I ordered in december of '98, and they showed up a few weeks later. It almost felt bad about it, like I had scammed them. I also very rarely paid more than $15 for a new release -- shipped! Frequently it was around $12. Those were the days.

What a surprise that 800.com went out of business.