4 ms·

How Hollywood plans to keep prices up as movies go online

27 points by AndrewWarner 17y ago

joubert 17y ago
I have Netflix. For movies that are available on BluRay, I love getting the disc, but for the rest I use Netflix' PS3 streaming service. I probably watch on average one movie a day.
- loganfrederick 17y ago
  You have the time to watch a full length movie every day?
vaksel 17y ago
The movie industry should just get together, and create a content streaming box like Netflix. Then on movie release date, you'd get a popup, that so and so movie came out, gives you a 3 minute preview, then prompts you to watch it for $39.99 Movie industry doesn't have to pay a dime to theaters, people don't have to pay the money for overpriced popcorn, and everyone wins. + there is the incentive for people to buy the movie to be able to talk about it at the water cooler on Monday. Could make it a cultural thing, make it the thing to do, to watch the movie on release weekend. And for piracy, there is no reason to do it, since you are offering much higher quality offering, and are making it easy for people to watch your movie.
- ams6110 17y ago
  Everyone wins except the theatre owners, of course. And the folks they employ. Not that legacy infrastructure has a right to exist forever, but some people do lose. I'd guess a tiered pricing would be used... high prices at the moment of release, dropping daily/weekly until they hit the standard minimum which I'd guess would be a few dollars. This way they get the high profits from people who can't wait, and they also get money later from people who would never pay the higher prices. I would pay more for a streamed movie than a redbox rental because I don't have to: a) pick it up; b) deal with the occasional damaged/dirty disc; c) take it back.
- CrazedGeek 17y ago
  $40? That's... way, way, WAY out of the range most people would pay to watch a movie as individuals. You would have to assume at least five people watching a movie in front of the same TV before you get any relative benefit whatsoever from the purchase.
  - vaksel 17y ago
    find how about $19.99? And on top of the movie you get all that extra stuff they add to DVDs?
    - mattmaroon 17y ago
      Where do you live? I didn't know there was a place where a DVD rental costs $20. Market rates now are about $1 for Redbox or a video store, up to $5 from your cable company on demand.
      - ojbyrne 17y ago
        People do pay more to see a movie in some cases though. Either they pay $20 to see it in a theater (including overpriced popcorn and soda), or they purchase the dvd.
        steveklabnik 17y ago
        People don't think of it as "I paid $20 to see it in the theatre," though. I know that everyone I talk to says, "Let's go to $5 movie night," even though with popcorn and drink it's more like $12.
        mattmaroon 17y ago
        Also we're not talking about theaters here, which are a value added service. We're talking about watching at home.
        ojbyrne 17y ago
- bbq 17y ago
  This would make the pirating experience that much better too. Instead of some cam rip the pirates will just rip the video stream from their box. Now you have high quality + time to download vs high quality + $20. If anything I think this would actually increase piracy. As it is now, people will avoid pirating a new movie due to its poor quality; they would rather pay to see it than download a grainy cam rip. If the pirated copies are higher quality some of that incentive is gone (the movie theater experience itself is worth it to some).
- bugs 17y ago
  If I'm paying 40 bucks I'm going to the theater with 2 other people and buying popcorn and drinks. My limit for a one time rental kind of deal is 2-3 bucks (internet download/sat tv), even with other people around to watch.
praptak 17y ago
For me the biggest part of the price of watching a movie is my time. There isn't much room for additional physical dollars that I'm willing to put into the experience. I cannot even remember the last time a movie was worthy of (my time + ticket/rental price.)
- DannoHung 17y ago
  Gosh, you must be a rather depressing person to be around. I'm imagining a friend telling you about a funny anecdote and then you interrupt them by giving a stern look and pointing to your wristwatch.
  - deleted 17y ago
    [deleted]
  - thwarted 17y ago
    I guess you're also imagining him having paid his friend $8-$12 before his friend started telling the anecdote?
Periodic 17y ago
The whole rental business reminds me of some conversations I've had with friends trying to explain how the first-sale doctrine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine) increases the value of the books, movies, and games that they buy, and for that reason the digital versions which cannot be transferred should be sold cheaper, where they argue that since the experience is roughly the same the cost should be. Basically, since you have the right to resell a book, DVD or CD that you buy to the used store, a friend, or a yard sale, that copy is worth more. That value is included in the retail price. Would you be willing to pay as much for a car if you could never resell it not matter how good the condition was? As an example, take that movie you only end up watching once, the DVD and the digital download cost $20. If you get the digital download you would watch it once and that would be it, it would sit on your hard drive until you deleted it and then just be a database record on some server somewhere. If you bought a physical copy, you could sell that copy, say for 50%, to a friend who was thinking about buying it, or to at a flea market or the like. The net result is that the digital copy costs $20 and the physical copy costs $10. Which is the better deal? Sounds to me like the digital copy should only cost $10. Of course, most people don't resell their movies, games or books and end up with selves storing a bunch of items they don't need and don't plan to use again. But that's another rant.
njharman 17y ago
They've missed the boat, by several years. All (new)movies are online at a price of zero (not counting risk of being convicted for copyright infringement). Legally, more movies are online at a cost of greencine or netflix account. There's also Hulu and the like.

27 points by AndrewWarner 17y ago

I have Netflix. For movies that are available on BluRay, I love getting the disc, but for the rest I use Netflix' PS3 streaming service. I probably watch on average one movie a day.

loganfrederick 17y ago
You have the time to watch a full length movie every day?

vaksel 17y ago

The movie industry should just get together, and create a content streaming box like Netflix. Then on movie release date, you'd get a popup, that so and so movie came out, gives you a 3 minute preview, then prompts you to watch it for $39.99 Movie industry doesn't have to pay a dime to theaters, people don't have to pay the money for overpriced popcorn, and everyone wins. + there is the incentive for people to buy the movie to be able to talk about it at the water cooler on Monday. Could make it a cultural thing, make it the thing to do, to watch the movie on release weekend. And for piracy, there is no reason to do it, since you are offering much higher quality offering, and are making it easy for people to watch your movie.

ams6110 17y ago
Everyone wins except the theatre owners, of course. And the folks they employ. Not that legacy infrastructure has a right to exist forever, but some people do lose. I'd guess a tiered pricing would be used... high prices at the moment of release, dropping daily/weekly until they hit the standard minimum which I'd guess would be a few dollars. This way they get the high profits from people who can't wait, and they also get money later from people who would never pay the higher prices. I would pay more for a streamed movie than a redbox rental because I don't have to: a) pick it up; b) deal with the occasional damaged/dirty disc; c) take it back.
CrazedGeek 17y ago
$40? That's... way, way, WAY out of the range most people would pay to watch a movie as individuals. You would have to assume at least five people watching a movie in front of the same TV before you get any relative benefit whatsoever from the purchase.
- vaksel 17y ago
  find how about $19.99? And on top of the movie you get all that extra stuff they add to DVDs?
  - mattmaroon 17y ago
    Where do you live? I didn't know there was a place where a DVD rental costs $20. Market rates now are about $1 for Redbox or a video store, up to $5 from your cable company on demand.
    - ojbyrne 17y ago
      People do pay more to see a movie in some cases though. Either they pay $20 to see it in a theater (including overpriced popcorn and soda), or they purchase the dvd.
      - steveklabnik 17y ago
        People don't think of it as "I paid $20 to see it in the theatre," though. I know that everyone I talk to says, "Let's go to $5 movie night," even though with popcorn and drink it's more like $12.
        mattmaroon 17y ago
        Also we're not talking about theaters here, which are a value added service. We're talking about watching at home.
        ojbyrne 17y ago
bbq 17y ago
This would make the pirating experience that much better too. Instead of some cam rip the pirates will just rip the video stream from their box. Now you have high quality + time to download vs high quality + $20. If anything I think this would actually increase piracy. As it is now, people will avoid pirating a new movie due to its poor quality; they would rather pay to see it than download a grainy cam rip. If the pirated copies are higher quality some of that incentive is gone (the movie theater experience itself is worth it to some).
bugs 17y ago
If I'm paying 40 bucks I'm going to the theater with 2 other people and buying popcorn and drinks. My limit for a one time rental kind of deal is 2-3 bucks (internet download/sat tv), even with other people around to watch.

praptak 17y ago

For me the biggest part of the price of watching a movie is my time. There isn't much room for additional physical dollars that I'm willing to put into the experience. I cannot even remember the last time a movie was worthy of (my time + ticket/rental price.)

DannoHung 17y ago
Gosh, you must be a rather depressing person to be around. I'm imagining a friend telling you about a funny anecdote and then you interrupt them by giving a stern look and pointing to your wristwatch.
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
- thwarted 17y ago
  I guess you're also imagining him having paid his friend $8-$12 before his friend started telling the anecdote?

Periodic 17y ago

The whole rental business reminds me of some conversations I've had with friends trying to explain how the first-sale doctrine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine) increases the value of the books, movies, and games that they buy, and for that reason the digital versions which cannot be transferred should be sold cheaper, where they argue that since the experience is roughly the same the cost should be. Basically, since you have the right to resell a book, DVD or CD that you buy to the used store, a friend, or a yard sale, that copy is worth more. That value is included in the retail price. Would you be willing to pay as much for a car if you could never resell it not matter how good the condition was? As an example, take that movie you only end up watching once, the DVD and the digital download cost $20. If you get the digital download you would watch it once and that would be it, it would sit on your hard drive until you deleted it and then just be a database record on some server somewhere. If you bought a physical copy, you could sell that copy, say for 50%, to a friend who was thinking about buying it, or to at a flea market or the like. The net result is that the digital copy costs $20 and the physical copy costs $10. Which is the better deal? Sounds to me like the digital copy should only cost $10. Of course, most people don't resell their movies, games or books and end up with selves storing a bunch of items they don't need and don't plan to use again. But that's another rant.

njharman 17y ago

They've missed the boat, by several years. All (new)movies are online at a price of zero (not counting risk of being convicted for copyright infringement). Legally, more movies are online at a cost of greencine or netflix account. There's also Hulu and the like.