Warner Bros' Market Research (1 Viewer)

[Chris Bardon]

Reading something on the Wonka board at the WB site, and someone mentioned that WB market research indicated that 80% of consumers preferred P&S. If this is the case, then wouldn't it seem like they made the right decision from a business standpoint?
What I'd like to call into question though, is those 80%. First of all, ans anyone who remembers the Quebec referrendum, and they can tell you that the wording of a question is VERY important. Was the survey written with a P&S bias? Also, did those who were surveyed actually know what widescreen was? If you'd asked me about 12 years ago, I would have said I wanted to see the picture fill my screen too. I wonder what the results would have been if they'd included an explanation of widescreen with the survey (if they indeed did not).
There has been a lot of hostility towards the studio on this board, and I think that some of it is going too far. WB, like all the studios out there, is in the game to make money, and if P&S does that, then so be it. I don't have to like it, but unless we can change people's minds about OAR, the studios will continue to do what's profitable.

 

[Jason Seaver]

someone mentioned that WB market research indicated that 80% of consumers preferred P&S. If this is the case, then wouldn't it seem like they made the right decision from a business standpoint?

Not necessarily. This is anecdotal evidence, understand, but among Seaver family members with a preference, about 50% prefer 4:3 and 50% prefer OAR. However, the thing is, the 50% that prefer fullscreen may complain for a few minutes when faced with an OAR movie, whereas the 50% who prefer OAR absolutely insist upon it. It's a deal-breaker with us, whereas it's a nuisance for them.
Which is, generally, the attitude I've seen. Certainly, there are folks who insist on 4:3, and we've all got stories of some ignorant schmuck making a scene at the video store. They're the minority, though, as most folks who prefer 4:3 understand and accept widescreen, if sometimes grudgingly, when that's the only option.
What that allegeded research would indicate is not that 4:3-only is the "correct decision", but that having a 4:3 version available would be a selling point.

 

[Seymour Uranowitz]

The rage directed at WB isn't so much because they're releasing P&S (as objectionable as that is). It's that that they aren't releasing OAR. That's completely unacceptable, offensive, and abhorrent.
If people want to view a defective product, and the studios can make money on it, that's their problem. Sure the studios will do what's profitable. But for them to deny us access to the unabridged product is not only bad business, it also makes a mockery of any purported commitment to quality.
Seymour

 

[Patrick Larkin]

I agree with the above post and have been arguing the same thing. Fullscreen makes money for WB but they should also do OAR. Simple as that.
Just like people that make games for Windows should release a Mac version as well. The argument there is that the Mac market share is too small. Bummer.

 

[Antonio_M]

Look at Columbia as of right now, they are releasing a title called See no evil, hear no evil...and it includes fullscreen and widescreen on the same disc! THIS is what I am talking about! Making both parties happy by releasing the film with both image formats, even though I don't get along with pan and scan joesixpacks.

------------------
Petition to make Halloween II an SE from Universal

 

[John Miles]

Reading something on the Wonka board at the WB site, and someone mentioned that WB market research indicated that 80% of consumers preferred P&S.

Could very well be true. However, if they didn't ask their survey participants how many DVDs they actually buy, then they're fooling themselves if they think their "market research" actually yielded any valid numbers.
If 10% of the video-buying public buys 90% of the DVDs -- which I'd almost be willing to bet is the case -- then the preferences of the remaining 90% of the public are not especially relevant. The only meaningful question you could ask the remaining 90% of people would be, "Would a widescreen presentation prevent you from purchasing a DVD"?
Someone, probably a third-party polling organization unconnected with the home video business, has fed Warner Home Video some irrelevant and misleading numbers, and we're all likely to suffer as a result.

 

[Scott Weinberg]

The main thing here is that we aficionados fully understand that lots of people want Pan N Scan. I don't remember reading many HTFers who asked for the PnS to be omitted entirely...
What's truly despicable is that WB is refusing to include what the movie SHOULD look like!! Pan N Scan ONLY is just unacceptable, an insult to the filmmakers and an affront to true movie lovers.
------------------
Scott
Check out my Movie Reviews at Epinions. Help support my debilitating DVD addiction!
AOL IM: TheAngryJew29

 

[Seymour Uranowitz]

The only meaningful question you could ask the remaining 90% of people would be, "Would a widescreen presentation prevent you from purchasing a DVD"?

A better question is "Would a widescreen-only presentation prevent you from purchasing a DVD"? And for the current mass video market, the answer is probably yes.
But I still haven't heard a reasonable explanation that justifies a P&S-only presentation. Apparently they just don't value the opinion or cash of OAR buyers. Appalling.
Seymour

 

[Jacob_St]

I'd like to know how this so called professional Warner Bros research was done. Obviously this studio is not paying any attention to 20% or more of their customers. That's assuming their research is accurate. Not a very good business descision if you ask me.

 

[george kaplan]

One of the VPs called Miss Cleo's psychic hotline and was told to go the p&s route.
The problem with the 80% or 50% or whatever number is that it's an unweighted sample. To the degree that we are voting with our dollars, those of us who buy more dvds cast more votes. This ain't one man, one vote. If 8 of 10 people buy p&s and each buy 1 dvd, and 2 of 10 buy OAR and buy 10 dvds each, that's really 20 votes for OAR to 8 for p&s. But unlike the people in Warner's marketing dept. I'm a Statistics professor, who understands the right way to do this stuff, and those morons clearly aren't. BTW, I don't mean to imply you need a Ph.D. to understand this, just more brains than the idiots making these decisions at Warner.
------------------
13-time NBA world champion Lakers: 1949, 1950, 1952, 1953, 1954, 1972, 1980, 1982, 1985, 1987, 1988, 2000, 2001

 

[Seymour Uranowitz]

They don't need statistics to tell them their core market (i.e., the early adopters who got the format off the ground) wants OAR. They read this board and all the others. Abandoning this market segment by excluding our single most desired feature is just plain idiocy, and insulting to boot.
Hey WB, you wouldn't even be in the DVD business without us. How about meeting our needs as well as J6P's?
Seymour

 

[Patrick Larkin]

Devil's advocate:
We are just talking Wonka and Cats and Dogs here. Yes, they will probably release most of their so-called family titles in fullscreen. I think their market research shows that the pro-OAR crowd is also a serious film buff crowd. I think I'm safe in saying that you won't be seeing fullscreen releases of 2001, Goodfellas, or Magnolia anytime soon...
And I wouldn't write off their marketing staff as utter morons just yet. I'm sure they have a very good staff because that's what that business is all about - marketing.
that all being said, I'd like to see a widescreen version of every fullscreen release or the decision makes little sense.

 

[Jeffrey Gray]

I, too, would also like to see dual-releases (one widescreen and one full-frame) of WB family titles. One of my favorite WB family/animated titles, Cats Don't Dance, was produced at hard-matted 1.85:1 and is in danger of being pan-and-scan only when and if it is ever given a DVD release. Thus, I want dual releases, or only widescreen releases, for WB family titles.