Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

For a Thrifty Audience, Buying DVDs Is So 2004 (Dinosaur Media DeathWatchâ„¢)
The New York Times ^ | November 22, 2008 | Brooks Barnes

Posted on 11/23/2008 5:40:07 AM PST by abb

MATTHEW BOWERS, of Chicago, has been paying to have HBO piped into his home every month for nearly two decades. He tunes in for the occasional episode of “Entourage” and every couple of months orders a movie on demand. Recently, the whole family watched “Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street.”

But when his company laid him off in September, he started to think about the value he was getting out of the premium cable channel. “It’s ridiculous to pay for this service I rarely use when I can get the same stuff online and save a lot of money,” he said. The result? HBO is losing a customer.

Does an economy in tatters slow down or speed up the shift to watching TV shows and movies on the Web and mobile devices? The entertainment industry doesn’t like the answer that is rapidly becoming clear: A global economic crisis almost certainly means a sharp acceleration in the move to new ways of consuming content, setting the stage for a new clash between consumers and studios.

Historically, the movie factories haven’t been terribly afraid of tough economic times. In fact, they have almost welcomed them. During the Great Depression, people continued to turn to the movies for escape. VHS rentals boomed during the recession of the early 1980s, while DVDs got a boost from the downturn earlier this decade.

snip

But the current gloom has the Hollywood establishment rattled. DVDs are now where the industry makes its money, and Nielsen VideoScan reported a 9 percent drop in DVD sales in the third quarter over the quarter a year earlier — before the economy ran into a buzz saw. In television, crucial car advertising is drying up.

snip

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Extended News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: cndw; dbm; hollywood; movies; television
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-48 next last
Sunday morning good news.
1 posted on 11/23/2008 5:40:07 AM PST by abb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 04-Bravo; aimhigh; andyandval; Arizona Carolyn; backhoe; Bahbah; bert; bilhosty; Caipirabob; ...

ping


2 posted on 11/23/2008 5:40:42 AM PST by abb ("What ISN'T in the news is often more important than what IS." Ed Biersmith, 1942 -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: abb

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/23/business/media/23sag.html?ref=business
Actors’ Union Talks Break Down

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-sag23-2008nov23,0,1126570.story
Screen Actors Guild contract impasse could lead to strike
After failing to negotiate with studios on payment for shows distributed on the Web, the union has decided to seek a strike authorization vote from its members.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-covertechside23-2008nov23,0,2616978.story
Progress in TV technology continues — at a price
The latest advances are expensive, but patient buyers wait for prices to come down.

http://cancelthebee.blogspot.com/
Predicting McClatchy’s future


3 posted on 11/23/2008 5:42:39 AM PST by abb ("What ISN'T in the news is often more important than what IS." Ed Biersmith, 1942 -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: abb

Why is is this such a good thing? Should movies be made and then be free to everyone?


4 posted on 11/23/2008 5:44:49 AM PST by raybbr (You think it's bad now - wait till the anchor babies start to vote!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: abb

I would rather buy the DVD than buy it online. The DVD usually has additional content that I haven’t yet seen online.

I’ve purchased movies from the iTunes store and from my AppleTV.


5 posted on 11/23/2008 5:45:34 AM PST by jimtorr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: raybbr

Anything that causes Hollywood distress and lessens their influence on the USA’s culture is a good thing.

In my opinion.


6 posted on 11/23/2008 5:49:56 AM PST by abb ("What ISN'T in the news is often more important than what IS." Ed Biersmith, 1942 -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: jimtorr

Indeed. Why schlep to the store, staring sideways at titles, and wait in line to pay, when I can order online, usually cheaper, and watch instantly on my apple tv? Additionally, online content doesn’t scratch or get lost or “borrowed” only never to be found again.

DVD’s are soon to become today’s beta’s and 8 tracks.


7 posted on 11/23/2008 5:57:05 AM PST by prov1813man (While the one you despise and ridicule works to protect you, those you embrace work to destroy you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: raybbr; abb

I agree with abb. I rarely watch TV anymore. I can watch many of the same programs online - LEGALLY - with fewer commercial interruptions, etc. I have VERY basic cable. I’m only paying a small amount for it because of a bundle package deal. I’m still going to get rid of the cable. I just don’t watch it enough to make it worthwhile. I’ll take my chances with a HD box and rabbit ears. As long as I have the web, I can get most of what I want for free.

If the cable company gave me more choices (i.e. I could pick the ten channels I wanted piped into my house), then I would happily keep the service. Otherwise, screw them. They sell an inferior product at a ridiculous price.


8 posted on 11/23/2008 5:57:53 AM PST by vladimir998 (Ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ. St. Jerome)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: jimtorr

And “NetFlix” is the best of both worlds (at least currently).


9 posted on 11/23/2008 6:05:00 AM PST by Wonder Warthog ( The Hog of Steel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: prov1813man
DVD’s are soon to become today’s beta’s and 8 tracks.

You have certainly articulate some great reasons for using on-line content instead of DVDs. Beta and 8 tracks went out of style mostly for technological reasons, and by that I mean a competing technology won out. I am not so sure, however, that the argument between DVD and on-line is going to be a technology driven decision by the consumer. Yes, they clearly are different technologies, but the real issue will be the business model. The market will chose the business model that has the most appeal to consumers, advertisers and movie makers. Technology will of course play a part, albeit a secondary part, in this choice.

10 posted on 11/23/2008 6:09:45 AM PST by mlocher (USA is a sovereign nation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog

Netflix is the way to go. I watch the very best selection of 100,000 movies, unplugged my cable tv service, and couldn’t be happier. I will still buy a few dvds, but not like the old days!


11 posted on 11/23/2008 6:10:17 AM PST by mountaineer1997
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: raybbr

I dont think anyone suggested movie be made ‘free for the masses’ (Like linux geeks and ‘open source’ communists)

He is just noticing and commenting on a trend, whey does eveyone here have to jump to conclusions so fast...

I have cut down my cable service to bare minimum get ALL my extra content online and still save $50 a month.

Besides, Showtime and Cinemax will keep repeating “48 hours” and “The Golden Child” forever, and i have seen them 800 times each.


12 posted on 11/23/2008 6:13:48 AM PST by Mr. K (Some days even my lucky rocketship underpants don't help)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: mlocher

My prediction is an advertiser-supported model. On-demand viewing of any movie or tv show ever made available ubiquitously. As bandwidth becomes cheaper and digital compression more advanced, data becomes ever more available.

The price for viewing? Watching a commercial.


13 posted on 11/23/2008 6:18:03 AM PST by abb ("What ISN'T in the news is often more important than what IS." Ed Biersmith, 1942 -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: abb

I tend to agree with you. Billing and collection is a very expensive business proposition. It is much easier and cheaper to collect money from a few advertisers than it is to collect money from 30M consumers.


14 posted on 11/23/2008 6:21:04 AM PST by mlocher (USA is a sovereign nation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998
I agree with abb. I rarely watch TV anymore. I can watch many of the same programs online - LEGALLY - with fewer commercial interruptions, etc. I have VERY basic cable. I’m only paying a small amount for it because of a bundle package deal. I’m still going to get rid of the cable. I just don’t watch it enough to make it worthwhile. I’ll take my chances with a HD box and rabbit ears. As long as I have the web, I can get most of what I want for free.

I only watch a couple of shows a week. All taped and fast forward through the ads.

The problem for me is children. I won't have them sitting in front of a PC watching shows. They watch movies on DVD. Or, some kid's shows.

If the cable company gave me more choices (i.e. I could pick the ten channels I wanted piped into my house), then I would happily keep the service. Otherwise, screw them. They sell an inferior product at a ridiculous price.

Cable companies have had a monopoly for so long they don't care what you want to watch. They are still operating under "where else you gonna go" model. That will soon end. I would agree to a "per channel" charge if it was available. That way I could keep my wife from watching QVC and HSN.

15 posted on 11/23/2008 6:26:33 AM PST by raybbr (You think it's bad now - wait till the anchor babies start to vote!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: abb
If the idiots making movies would refuse to pay the exorbitant prices movie actors and actresses demand they could price their movies at a level the average person could afford to pay. Let's see, what does t cost today to get into a movie, about 10 bucks average? That is 40 bucks for mom, dad and two kids, and heaven forbid you have more than two. Now if you are dumb enough to actually buy popcorn and drinks once you get in you are looking at quite a hit on your wallet, and 40 bucks isn't exactly chicken feed when you compare it with renting a movie or watching it on computer.

During the last depression movies were the back bone of the entertainment media, TV and computers hadn't hit the scene and they kept the prices reasonable, no high tech gadgetry, no super over paid stars, just good movies with real plots. No more of that, even if they do wise up and lower costs they will not be able to keep up the way they did in the past. Another thing, as long as they persists in handing out oscars based on industry prejudice, and the queers seem to be top of the list right now, they will continue to slide regardless of other factors.

16 posted on 11/23/2008 6:29:10 AM PST by calex59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: abb
The price for viewing? Watching a commercial.

Wow, that model sounds familiar, where I have I seen something like that before? Oh, yeah, back in the day before idiots started paying for TV and still have to watch ads.

Does that irk anyone else besides me? When they first started talking about pay TV the idea was you would never have to watch another commercial. Then when they finally get the ok, commercials were out for a time and then Wham! right back with the commercials. Only certain channels run without them, and some channels now show commercials on screen while the show is running, what a irritant that is.

I agree with your theory, I also think cable and Satellite TV will go the way of the Dodo. People won't be able to afford it, hence back to network TV or to computers, computers will win.

17 posted on 11/23/2008 6:37:19 AM PST by calex59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: abb

“Anything that causes Hollywood distress and lessens their influence on the USA’s culture is a good thing”

You could also buy excellent movies, even if they are old, and maybe “Hollywood” would see that there is a demand for good movies. If not we will still have many hours of viewing pleasure. The producers of all these “graphic intensive” movies could definitely learn a thing or two from Alfred Hitchcock.


18 posted on 11/23/2008 6:38:05 AM PST by Peter Horry (Mount Up Everybody and Ride to the Sound of the Guns .. Pat Buchanan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: raybbr

“I would agree to a “per channel” charge if it was available. That way I could keep my wife from watching QVC and HSN.”

BONUS!


19 posted on 11/23/2008 6:38:56 AM PST by vladimir998 (Ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ. St. Jerome)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: calex59

It looks to me like computers and TV will blend into one entity. It’s almost there now.


20 posted on 11/23/2008 6:41:23 AM PST by abb ("What ISN'T in the news is often more important than what IS." Ed Biersmith, 1942 -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-48 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson