Another example of movie studios screwing their potential customers, while whining about piracy - Page 3 - GoFuckYourself.com

Dirty F · 01-30-2012, 04:06 AM

100 dumb ass sales reps who defended credit card fraud.

Jel · 01-30-2012, 04:26 AM

I thought piracy had ZERO impact on sales according to a fair few people on here? So it doesn't matter what they do, they won't lose ANY income, as those who get pirated copies were never going to buy it anyway, or even rent it. Apparently.

Jel · 01-30-2012, 04:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ The Kid

Yes they will make higher short-term profits with their model. But this isn't about scolding movie studios for trying to reap the most profits possible for their products. They are a business of course they should strive for that.

The fact is they still do things the old way, when clearly the market and consumer behavior has changed. It's about doing things in a different way, that could quell some piracy and perhaps make studios even more money in the long-term.

When was the last time you rushed out to purchase a newly released DVD? Or do you wait until it's available for rental?

Personally I buy every time. I've never rented a DVD in my life.

Jel · 01-30-2012, 04:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by epitome

The people who think Hollywood shouldn't do what they want also thinks porn studios shouldn't, right?

People would rather have a $9.95 month price point. We should do that and offer affiliates $10 PPS out of the kindness of our hearts.

Cheap porn for the masses (even if they bitch about the higher price but still pay it).

Beat me to it

DWB · 01-30-2012, 06:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by u-Bob

Who buys DVDs anyway?

I do. All the time.

Barry-xlovecam · 01-30-2012, 07:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by u-Bob

Who buys DVDs anyway?

The pirates to make copies for their piracy sites then the MPPA cries they stole our copyrighted product, we need a new law ... apply, rinse, repeat ...

LuckyMax · 01-30-2012, 08:45 AM

DJ...

When a company spend an average of 80M$-120M$ budget on a movie, I think they kind of own that movie and therefore, they can do whatever they want with it in order to make the most out of their investment.

Setting predefine windows of realease per media and revenues channels is what any business would define as a good commercial pratices in product life cycle management. Can I remind you that those guys are in the business of maximizing an ROI on an earlier investment, not so much pm pleasing the the customer, even less pleasing the portion of people who are low paying customer. They want to give added value to the one paying top money at first place (Theater customer and DVD buyers), the digital viewers at the long tale and the lowest share of profit by far. By pushing those later down the road, you are in fact giving higher value to the other ones to which you can more easily justify the premium you are asking for. By making 4X more money with the one who buy the DVD than the one who downloads, I think they are in their right of saying "dude, you want to download, fine, but wait for your turn..."

The situation here is that you are a smart tech savy webmaster that generalize his tech skills and personal opinion on the rest of the 99% of average customer out there. You are entitle to your opinion that is based on your own personal experience, but this does not legitimize you to say that these rightful right owners (the studios) are "screwing up" their customer.

By the way, if you are so sure of the concept, why don't you go away, take a loan, shoot for over half a million of content, skipping the the highly profitable DVD phase, put the content both online AND on DVD at the same time, while charging a very high price for download, hope that some affiliate will dare send traffic at your ridiculously low PPS (because you cannot offer more because your ) and try to invest in anti-piracy to prevent those poor offended customer who are downloading pirated version of your content and offering it for free on torrent with the argument that you are screwing them for selling a digital version higher than the DVD at the first place and calling you a dinosaur who missed the digital revolution to justify their logic.

Seriously, go ahead, I'll take notes of the experience...

Bottom line, easy to talk when it's not your money...

D Ghost · 01-30-2012, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LuckyMax

DJ...

When a company spend an average of 80M$-120M$ budget on a movie, I think they kind of own that movie and therefore, they can do whatever they want with it in order to make the most out of their investment.

Setting predefine windows of realease per media and revenues channels is what any business would define as a good commercial pratices in product life cycle management. Can I remind you that those guys are in the business of maximizing an ROI on an earlier investment, not so much pm pleasing the the customer, even less pleasing the portion of people who are low paying customer. They want to give added value to the one paying top money at first place (Theater customer and DVD buyers), the digital viewers at the long tale and the lowest share of profit by far. By pushing those later down the road, you are in fact giving higher value to the other ones to which you can more easily justify the premium you are asking for. By making 4X more money with the one who buy the DVD than the one who downloads, I think they are in their right of saying "dude, you want to download, fine, but wait for your turn..."

The situation here is that you are a smart tech savy webmaster that generalize his tech skills and personal opinion on the rest of the 99% of average customer out there. You are entitle to your opinion that is based on your own personal experience, but this does not legitimize you to say that these rightful right owners (the studios) are "screwing up" their customer.

By the way, if you are so sure of the concept, why don't you go away, take a loan, shoot for over half a million of content, skipping the the highly profitable DVD phase, put the content both online AND on DVD at the same time, while charging a very high price for download, hope that some affiliate will dare send traffic at your ridiculously low PPS (because you cannot offer more because your ) and try to invest in anti-piracy to prevent those poor offended customer who are downloading pirated version of your content and offering it for free on torrent with the argument that you are screwing them for selling a digital version higher than the DVD at the first place and calling you a dinosaur who missed the digital revolution to justify their logic.

Seriously, go ahead, I'll take notes of the experience...

Bottom line, easy to talk when it's not your money...

Neither I or anyone else here said, "It's not their product and they cannot do what they want with it." This is not the point whatsoever. Of course a company can do whatever they want with their product. I am simply throwing an idea out there, that maybe, just maybe they would have something better. There are ways to increase profit beyond DVD sales with premium price points for new-release content.

They are "Screwing" their potential customers and customers. They are basically telling a whole market segment "fuck you" - people who don't buy DVDs and never will, they get their content via digital means, are more tech savvy and might have even more to spend on content.

There is no real value in owning a DVD for 56-days before people can rent/own it digitally.
Every single person (No, not people who pirate, people who purchase own/rent tons of digital content) I've talked to about this subject believes it's extremely petty that they would make customers wait to be able to rent/own digitally for 56-days.

And yes, everyone has said, "Oh well, I think they know what they are talking about, they are a multi-million dollar studio, and they research these strategies." Ok, I get that point, but sometimes the companies with the big budget aren't always doing things the right way. If this is how people always thought or small startups thought (just playing follow the leader), we wouldn't have successful new companies innovating and doing things differently.

porno jew · 01-30-2012, 02:53 PM

LuckyMax broke it down perfectly for you. read what he wrote again it went right over your head.

D Ghost · 01-30-2012, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by porno jew

LuckyMax broke it down perfectly for you. read what he wrote again it went right over your head.

I did read his entire post, hence my response.

If the movie studios want to continue being seen as archaic non-customer focused brands, with almost no brand loyalty, yes that is their right. And I think their model will continue to decay over time (just as it has already begun to do) against newer, more innovative methods and constantly changing savvy consumer behavior.

PR_Glen · 01-30-2012, 04:39 PM

people are accustomed to waiting for movies to come out, this isn't something new and its definitely not screwing over the customer base. If it helps their profitability it helps them continue to spend the big money to make better movies (in theory, doesn't always work out that way). Can you imagine the future of movies if they have to start making cut backs? I like a good low budget film as much as the next guy but if they all had to do that we'd have to resort to bollywood...yikes.

I see trailers for the new hobbit movie already, when is that coming out? next december?? ouch! Not to mention it is a two parter and they will wait another year to release the next one. I don't really feel screwed, i just have to wait for it. It comes with the territory with movie making and watching.

Rochard · 01-30-2012, 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ The Kid

Yes they will make higher short-term profits with their model. But this isn't about scolding movie studios for trying to reap the most profits possible for their products. They are a business of course they should strive for that.

The fact is they still do things the old way, when clearly the market and consumer behavior has changed. It's about doing things in a different way, that could quell some piracy and perhaps make studios even more money in the long-term.

Your too young to remember the "old way". There was once a time when you had to wait years for a movie to be released for the home market, and with TV shows sometimes even decades.

If they put movies the day after or a year after, it's not going to stop people from putting it online and other people from ripping it. You have two different demographics mixed up - the people that are going to buy it don't know how to rip movies online, or don't bother with it.

D Ghost · 01-30-2012, 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

Your too young to remember the "old way". There was once a time when you had to wait years for a movie to be released for the home market, and with TV shows sometimes even decades.

If they put movies the day after or a year after, it's not going to stop people from putting it online and other people from ripping it. You have two different demographics mixed up - the people that are going to buy it don't know how to rip movies online, or don't bother with it.

Yes, and from theater to DVD release used to be 6-months instead of the average 4-months, I'm sure that was "before my time" too. Just because something happened before someone was born or "too young" doesn't mean they are ignorant to it.

This isnt about from the theater-to-DVD, it's the 56-day from DVD-to-digital own/rent, so they can funnel people to Walmart, Target and Best Buy and buy a hard copy disc.

Holding on to the old way is a sure-fire way to garner negative sentiment. Also, just because something "used to be done this way or that way" isn't necessarily the best way to do it nowadays. Consumer behavior does change over time, with technology. Fighting against what is essentially a sea change in how people prefer to consume their entertainment, just doesn't seem like a bright idea in the long haul. Sure, maybe they make a few extra bucks off funneling people to buy the outdated DVD haha.

AS I mentioned before, they have every right, and they will find out soon rather than later when they start actually listening to their customers.

D Ghost · 01-30-2012, 05:37 PM

The movie industry has a long history of trying to resist new technology and consumer behavior, because they do not understand it.

Robbie · 01-30-2012, 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ The Kid

Holding on to the old way is a sure-fire way to garner negative sentiment. Also, just because something "used to be done this way or that way" isn't necessarily the best way to do it nowadays.

And the most recent way they "used to do it"... was to rush the movies to DVD rental within a few weeks.

Now they are going to try something "different". Time moves quickly on the internet...it's like "dog years" Just as I wrote this...7 years went by in internet time.

Maybe you are stuck in the "past" of the last few years way of doing things. And this is the "new" way.

Come on man...you better catch up with the times!

D Ghost · 01-30-2012, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

Just as I wrote this...7 years went by in internet time.

Haha

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

And the most recent way they "used to do it"... was to rush the movies to DVD rental within a few weeks.

Now they are going to try something "different".

I think their "different" way of doing things is always actually the same end game: resisting innovation, new technology and forward moving with consumer behavior.

Quote:

Warner Bros. is hoping that all of this waiting is simply too much, and consumers will have to rush out and buy the films. I find this strategy to be a short sighted plan to make a few more bucks, but one that will in the end harm its business prospects.

http://thenextweb.com/insider/2012/0...-from-netflix/

Quote:

Netflix has confirmed the rumor that if you wanna rent movies from [Warner Bros], you'll have to wait 56 days, twice as long as the previous window.

Quote:

It also heavily implies that the studio was threatening to withdraw access to its library unless the rental service complied.

Comments:

Quote:

"Cancelled my Time Warner Cable and turned in the box yesterday, before this announcement. After this, the search is on for a new ISP and move from AOL (free version). With over 300 titles in my DVD and Saved queues at Netflix, do they really think this is going to bother me? I've got plenty to keep me occupied for 56 days. If I like something I've watched through Netflix, it's off to Amazon when the price has dropped, the bargain bins or a resale shop. Haven't bought a full price new release in years and WB just made sure I will never buy one of theirs. Ever."

Quote:

"Its not just DVD sales, Time Warner happens to also run its own cable company which has been bleeding cable TV customers in the last couple of years. The idea is to offer those same movies On Demand for $3 or $4 and somehow convince consumers that paying $60 a month (or more) just to have the option to pay MORE money to rent a movie is better than Netflix or Redbox or such.

The problem is that the media conglomerates do not want to let go or renovate their 30 year cash cow known as cable television. They'd rather hurt new innovation and try to make money the same old way. The sad part is they could be make a TON of dough if they got on the bus rather than trying to stop it.

Pirating is NOT the answer, but the point of those comments is that the studios themselves are the cause. Now they want to support domain blocking for something they are directly responsible for? There are ways to make money in the digital space and the media conglomerates are letting everyone else drink from that tit while going hungry!"

http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/10/w...netflix-delay/

There is an overwhelming negative sentiment towards this move that shouldn't be ignored. Ignoring customers and potential customer desires is the antithesis of good marketing and business.

01-30-2012, 04:39 PM	#111
PR_Glen Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Canada Posts: 9,058	people are accustomed to waiting for movies to come out, this isn't something new and its definitely not screwing over the customer base. If it helps their profitability it helps them continue to spend the big money to make better movies (in theory, doesn't always work out that way). Can you imagine the future of movies if they have to start making cut backs? I like a good low budget film as much as the next guy but if they all had to do that we'd have to resort to bollywood...yikes. I see trailers for the new hobbit movie already, when is that coming out? next december?? ouch! Not to mention it is a two parter and they will wait another year to release the next one. I don't really feel screwed, i just have to wait for it. It comes with the territory with movie making and watching. __________________ webmaster at pimproll dot com

01-30-2012, 04:06 AM	#101
Dirty F Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2001 Posts: 59,204	100 dumb ass sales reps who defended credit card fraud.

01-30-2012, 04:26 AM	#102
Jel Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 6,904	I thought piracy had ZERO impact on sales according to a fair few people on here? So it doesn't matter what they do, they won't lose ANY income, as those who get pirated copies were never going to buy it anyway, or even rent it. Apparently.

01-30-2012, 08:45 AM	#107
LuckyMax Registered User Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 55	DJ... When a company spend an average of 80M$-120M$ budget on a movie, I think they kind of own that movie and therefore, they can do whatever they want with it in order to make the most out of their investment. Setting predefine windows of realease per media and revenues channels is what any business would define as a good commercial pratices in product life cycle management. Can I remind you that those guys are in the business of maximizing an ROI on an earlier investment, not so much pm pleasing the the customer, even less pleasing the portion of people who are low paying customer. They want to give added value to the one paying top money at first place (Theater customer and DVD buyers), the digital viewers at the long tale and the lowest share of profit by far. By pushing those later down the road, you are in fact giving higher value to the other ones to which you can more easily justify the premium you are asking for. By making 4X more money with the one who buy the DVD than the one who downloads, I think they are in their right of saying "dude, you want to download, fine, but wait for your turn..." The situation here is that you are a smart tech savy webmaster that generalize his tech skills and personal opinion on the rest of the 99% of average customer out there. You are entitle to your opinion that is based on your own personal experience, but this does not legitimize you to say that these rightful right owners (the studios) are "screwing up" their customer. By the way, if you are so sure of the concept, why don't you go away, take a loan, shoot for over half a million of content, skipping the the highly profitable DVD phase, put the content both online AND on DVD at the same time, while charging a very high price for download, hope that some affiliate will dare send traffic at your ridiculously low PPS (because you cannot offer more because your ) and try to invest in anti-piracy to prevent those poor offended customer who are downloading pirated version of your content and offering it for free on torrent with the argument that you are screwing them for selling a digital version higher than the DVD at the first place and calling you a dinosaur who missed the digital revolution to justify their logic. Seriously, go ahead, I'll take notes of the experience... Bottom line, easy to talk when it's not your money...

01-30-2012, 02:53 PM	#109
porno jew Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 10,166	LuckyMax broke it down perfectly for you. read what he wrote again it went right over your head.

01-30-2012, 05:37 PM	#114
D Ghost null Industry Role: Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 9,820	The movie industry has a long history of trying to resist new technology and consumer behavior, because they do not understand it.