The Warner Chat 5/7: Official Discussion Thread (2 Viewers)

[David Levine]

But I'm not saying anything that they don't already know. I've been part of discussions with people from all the majors. We are either currently or in the process of licensing product from many of them. I'm not saying anything that hasn't been part of every discussion. I've heard people say "if it doesn't sell 300,000 units, it isn't worth our time".

Like I said, this discussion really hasn't been about KNOTS LANDING, it's been about how the DVD business has changed over the last few years and how all the major studios have shifted their business practices. What worked 2 years ago may not work today.

And hey, I even offered up a practical solution to get shows like KNOTS (or LARRY SANDERS) into the fans hands without putting the studios at risk.

 

[brett tolino]

This from the guy who says he'd be glad to apologize when he's wrong... but he can't see where he's wrong.

Like the person says, 'WOW! You look GREAT! Did you lose 700 pounds?"

 

[TravisR]

Brett, if you want to continue this discussion please send me a private message (which I will ignore) but for the sake of the thread and the people not interested in this ridiculous debate, just let this go.

 

[Gary OS]

David, again I want to thank you for this information about the major studios and what their thoughts are. I've asked a question a couple of times and I think it keeps getting lost in the useless clutter of bickering (I second Travis's last suggestion wholeheartedly). Are the major studios asking too much for many of their vintage material, thereby making it unfeasible for a company like your's to actually rent it out? Or are they literally unwilling to let go of some of their material regardless of pricing?

Gary "just wondering how ridiculous some of the majors are with their classic material" O.

 

[David Levine]

I didn't realize until now that you only post about KNOTS LANDING on the HTF forum, so out of respect for your love of the show, I won't mention it again during this conversation. Plus I think we're deep enough into this conversation that we don't need to use specific shows as examples - or we can bring other ones into play - like Travis did with LARRY SANDERS.

 

[brett tolino]

David,

We get it. We know you're in the business and you know how things run and why it would be so foolish for some studios to release or continue releasing things.

Last post (I SWEAR because I don't want help from people holding knives) -- it's difficult enough for studios to release anything on dvd nowadays without you giving them reasons why they shouldn't.

It's productive and helpful only when you can make a suggestion why or how it may be beneficial for them to release it.

 

[David Levine]

It can be a lot of things.

Warner for example just won't license anything no matter the price. I'm not sure exactly why, but it's currently their policy.

Some shows have rights issues - either music or that the studio doesn't have full ownership so they couldn't put them out if they wanted.

Sometimes it's money. And that's not just the asking price. Even if they recieve what they deem to be a fair advance and a decent percent of each sale, there is a big factor that gets in the way. They still need to manage the account. They need to find and deliver masters and other deliverables. they need to have people working with the company that they license to (people available to communicate, to approve artwork and special features, etc.). So sometimes it isn't worth the studios time and money to do these deals.

Some may worry about the image of having someone else put out their property. It could be control issues.

there really are a lot of factors that go into it. IMO, it benefits everyone. The consumer gets their DVDs, the independent makes some money and can increase their reputation, and while the studio may not make a ton, they make more than they would by keeping it in the vault, and it's good PR for them to get more product into the marketplace.

 

[David Levine]

 

[Gary OS]

Thanks David. I appreciate you taking the time to outline the procedures. There certainly is a lot that goes into these things. More than most of us consider.

If you don't mind, I'm gonna make a few suggestions for BCI to consider (having no idea if its feasible or not - just taking a shot as a fan). I don't think WB owns any of these three titles: "FATHER KNOWS BEST" - "ROUTE 66" - "MY THREE SONS". I don't know if BCI would be interested in any of those 3, but they are all classics and certainly carry some measure of interest.

Gary "BCI has done a great job with many titles thus far, and I look forward to many more in the future" O.

 

[David Levine]

To this point we haven't gone after any older shows, but it's something that we'd consider. Honestly, shows like that are a little scary, because if they are available, they'll take a big monetary commitment, but they are really hard to predict. For example, I LOVE LUCY has done fantastic numbers on DVD. DICK VAN DYKE hasn't done well. LEAVE IT TO BEAVER falls inbetween.

So the question with those shows becomes "Do we have an I LOVE LUCY or a DICK VAN DYKE on our hands?" And we have to hope we guess right.

 

[Gary OS]

Gotcha. Thanks again! I am really surprised that DICK VAN DYKE didn't do well. That was such a wonderfully put together set. And I'm guessing the reason we got all 5 seasons was simply because Brownstein and company committed to it ahead of time. I'd love to know for sure if LEAVE IT TO BEAVER really did that bad. Universal has been silent on that one.

Gary "I LOVE LUCY, one would think, would have been a no-brainer" O.

 

[David Levine]

I'm surprised too. That makes me 0-2 on DICK VAN DYKE and LARRY SANDERS.

I think the reason we saw all 5 seasons is because even though it didn't do BIG numbers, it probably did enough to make Image satisfied with the results.

Which just leads back to why it makes so much sense to let independent studios release the products that can't make your minimums. A Shout! Factory, Image or BCI would've continued to put out all the shows we're talking about that have been killed by the studios (provided they were willing to license them at a cost that made things work for everyone).

 

[Gary OS]

Well, now I'm ready to cry, knowing that the smaller studios would have continued with releases instead of abandoning them. Ok, I might not be ready to cry, but it is discouraging.

All I can say is go get 'em, David. I hope BCI can pick up some of these classics because they deserve initial and continued releases. Hey, go get LEAVE IT TO BEAVER! Universal has obviously abandoned it at this point.

Gary "thanks once more for taking the time to answer my questions" O.

P.S. Lest my comments about going to get LITB be misinterpreted, let me clarify. I'm basically saying that tongue in cheek, knowing that a property like that would almost assuredly be too pricey for most any independent company. I do honestly wish BCI had the rights to it, but I know that's not realistic.

 

[Jim Beaver]

I was pretty sad but really not that surprised that Warner Bros once again said they had no plans for Brimstone. I ask every year and always get the same response. Sometimes I feel that Brimstone will never be released. Right now this is my most wanted show on DVD, I hope I will finally be able to add it to my collection some day.

It would have been nice too if they had said they were working on sets for Eyes, Opposite Sex, Run of the House, Fish Police and Bucky O'Hare as well.

It's awesome that they are finally considering Perfect Strangers. Sad about Static Shock as well. It definitely deserves the season set treatment.

 

[tjguitar85]

I'd love to see a show like NightMan come out (the first season shot in San Diego that is, the 2nd season w/ all the cast changes shot in Canada was awful), but nobody's interested, probably not even the indy's. I highly doubt a recent show like that would require much remastering, maybe some of the jazz music they used has music costs that are too expensive.

It's a malibu comics (now marvel) property, so I'm guessing that it will just be stuck in Disney vaults until somebody purchases marvel who actually wants to promote its properties.

 

[Elena S]

The only reason Dick Van Dyke didn't sell well was because the price is outrageously high. $79.95 per season set? For a black and white show that's 40 years old? I mean, I love the show, but that's a pretty steep price to expect most people to pay for it. Unless the price comes down I won't be purchasing it.

As for Knots, did it occur to anyone that lots of fans probably don't even know this show was released on DVD? I'm not talking about the rabid fans who frequent DVD sites or fan-based sites. I'm talking about people like many of my friends who would never know the series is out unless I told them about it. There has been almost 0 publicity about this show getting a release. How can people buy the product if they don't know it exists? This is a problem I really wish companies like Warner would take into consideration. If you're going to release a show -- especially an older one -- at least do a publicity campaign for it. Otherwise it will just sit on shelves, unnoticed.

 

[TravisR]

Image spent alot of money on remastering the episodes, creating bonus materials and making an overall nice set though. The price is high but you do get a quality product for that money.

EDIT: I just checked at Deep Discount DVD and Amazon and they now list the Dick Van Dyke seasons at an MSRP of $40 (so DDD has it for $26 and Amazon has it for $35) which is a steal!

 

[RickER]

I tell you something else that i like about Warner, the distribution of BBC DVDs. Love my Dr Who, and i know it isnt a big seller here in the States, but i am happy to get it.