Redbox and Movie Studios Going Head-To-Head Over Rental Rights - HotHardware
Redbox and Movie Studios Going Head-To-Head Over Rental Rights

Redbox and Movie Studios Going Head-To-Head Over Rental Rights

If it isn't Netflix making the news, it's Redbox. The go-to red DVD rental kiosk company is hitting it really big of late, and maybe too big. Essentially, this is the Netflix alternative when you just don't have time to wait a day or two for your newest movie to arrive, and the ease and low price associated with renting versus buying obviously has some suits at movie studios up in arms.

Recently, Netflix agreed to wait 28 days after a Warner Bros. DVDs shelf release before renting it out. This basically forces consumers to buy the DVD if they want it right away; otherwise, they'll have to wait a month to see it via Netflix. We can understand this logic if you're Warner Bros., but this definitely doesn't help the company's public perception.

Now, things are being taken a step further with Redbox. Currently, Fox and Universal are reportedly refusing to sell DVDs to Redbox, which is a somewhat childish way of "forcing" users to either buy their DVDs or rent them through less convenient means. Redbox, in order to circumvent the issue, has purportedly been sending out employees to purchase DVDs and then use them in rental kiosks. Like we said, childish. At any rate, Wal-mart and Target are both now putting a 5-DVD-per-customer cap on bulk purchases, with Wally World setting the limit for 28 days after release and Target setting its limit to one week. We have to believe that this will be tough or impossible to enforce, but it really leads to a much larger question.



Is the at-home entertainment industry finally at the breaking point? We knew things were going to be different once Blockbuster starting slowing and Netflix started growing, and with digital distribution outlets like Hulu and Vudu gaining ground, we think putting pressure on one-day rental kiosk companies seems a little short-sighted. Maybe these movie executives should embrace what's new--we wonder if they've ever considered creating a rival company to Redbox and cutting out the middleman? Nah, that'd be too easy.
0
+ -

Childish indeed! From the movie studios' perspective, Red Box is cannibalizing their DVD sales. Also people haven't taken to Blu-Ray as much as they hoped. The fact is that consumers just aren't as interested in buying DVDs anymore. I know several people that have massive DVD collections and the prospect of replacing them with the more expensive Blu-Rays doesn't appeal to them as much. They shouldn't restrict Red-Box and Netflix rentals, because the alternative will be people just illegally downloading and watching those movies instead.

And the limit on bulk purchases is laughable. I could always split up 20 DVDs in 4 transactions, and pay in cash.

The trend is towards digital media over the internet. Why walk to the store to buy the movie, when you can stream it to your computer directly? It would be in the best interests of the MPAA to embrace this trend instead of trying to fight it.

0
+ -

The digital realm will always be fought over.  Ideally we would resort to streaming, but that is countered by the talks of bandwidth caps.  Do you know how insane that would be to have a bandwidth cap and download HD movies?  I like the mail service method, although I don't use it.  I may however start heading to Redbox, since they just placed one across the street from my current dorm.

Also, most people that buy a dvd only watch it once anyway.  So renting will always be for the majority.

0
+ -

This is called shooting yourself in the foot. I would compare this to the McMillan books debacle currently playing at Amazon. Mcmillian became a sign on iPad supporter, there the ones we saw the exec on the news conference the night before the actual Apple conference talking about how cool the iPad would be.

With what I see now as the reaction to a wide negative reaction by the market there flipping out. Therefore there making Amazon raise there (Mcmillans directly) E-Book prices by as much as 50%. This is insane because an E-Book costs the publisher close to or less than nothing, because it is already paid for by initial release.

The provider reaction much like this actually handicap's the platform for them, much like music execs vs mp3 did for CD's. This as is current now at least to the greater part slows down said industry in adoption as well as in new market model introduction and therefore future profit. When they realize this and adapt to the business model becomes current and everyone is at least somewhat happy and profitable.

I personally see this as stupidity in refusal to change. Wake up people and adapt and continue. It is going to happen regardless of what you wish. As for Mcmillan I think they should be actively protested, and people should refuse to bye anything from them. They are trying to cover there own butt which there afraid of loosing, although last week they were all fine with it.

Right now their seeing the market reaction to the iPad and loosing it, much like this mess with the movie companies. They now realize an iPhone user is going to get there books for next to nothing. So they cannibalize the iPad and in turn Amazon (roughly the largest e-book distributor) with there demands. In reaction and fear that no one is going to buy an iPad and therefore make them rich.

The bad part is in the end they end up retarding the growth of said industry (when they realize that especially in E-books that they as a company are no longer needed), and in the end hurt them selves. I think they should lower the prices to hasten then adoption ratio initially, and then slowly raise the price line and change the distribution model to whats best for them.

For now both providers are going to raise the prices of the market therefore slowing the growth of said market as well as it's adoption rate. In the end they accomplish nothing but as I said shooting them selves in the foot. Movies especially still need production companies to make the media, whereas both music, and E-book's in all reality don't, and can be done by the artist or author entirely by them selves, and in the end the make considerably more money.

Stephen king did it (although while remaining with his publisher), as did The musical group Bare naked Ladies, who in the end realized there profit to cost ratio as well as the money in their pockets went up considerably without the publishing body.

0
+ -

The movie pukes are not known for doing the right thing,... why should they start now?

Creating a rival company to RedBox is in fact a good idea and that's why they'll scoff at it.

BluRay prices are almost the same as DVD prices now, so I'm buying them when I can. But I'll never be able to afford to replace all of my DVD's with new tech. So I'm stuck with DVD's mostly, and I do not mind at all!

0
+ -

Yay greedy media companies. I can see that they are using these methods to front their quote unqoute anti-piracy movement. But this is putting a big impact on the legit people who rent movies through Redbox or Netflix. People use these services to keep up with media they want to watch while reducing the time and cost to go buy it or go to your video rental place. Hopefully they will cut back on these fierce rules to do right by their customers.

I myself prefer to have physical media cause I may want to access that media at different dates and you can't always hope that the rental service or streaming will be there.

Login or Register to Comment
Post a Comment
Username:   Password: