Why have Disney & Warner Bros given up on releasing their vintage shorts to Blu-ray?

[Jar Jar Stinks]

As far as I know, Disney has not released any titles with just their vintage shorts. Warner Bros. has only released 5 titles: 3 volumes of Looney Tunes, Chuck Jones' The Mouse Chronicles, and a volume of Tom & Jerry.

Earlier this year WB released "Tom & Jerry – The Gene Deitch Collection" to DVD only. With regard to this release, Jerry Beck said "Considering the sorry state of the DVD business – at least among the major studios – this may be the last classic theatrical cartoon collection from Warner Bros. to feature restored cartoons and include a bonus documentary."

Apart from Disney feature films, there's precious little vintage animation on Blu-ray and it doesn't seem like we'll be getting much more.

[steve_dave]

For Warner, the expense of remastering them in HD outweighed the sales. It simply cost far too much to produce the Blu-rays which were just not selling as expected.

Paramount had this happen with Star Trek: The Next Generation, far too many fans demanded they be remastered for Blu-ray. Paramount put forth the effort but far too few fans actually bought the release to justify any further remastering projects for Deep Space Nine and Voyager.

And Fox realized that with over 25 seasons, The Simpsons would be a financial black hole. Yeah, we have folks here who say they would buy them but the world is huge. When people aren't buying something, the company has to say we need to stop.

[CharlieBarkin]

Disney simply needs to get some of their shows out on disc period. Blu-ray or DVD...they've left a few good ones half finished. I'm looking at you, Darkwing Duck, or Rescue Rangers....

[willbfree]

Disney doesn't even release their current hit cartoons on BluRay. Phineas & Ferb was probably their hugest cartoon series of the past ten years with fans both young and old, but they didn't release it on BluRay (or DVD for that matter, not in season sets).

[AgentOrange]

Originally Posted by steve_dave

For Warner, the expense of remastering them in HD outweighed the sales. It simply cost far too much to produce the Blu-rays which were just not selling as expected.

Paramount had this happen with Star Trek: The Next Generation, far too many fans demanded they be remastered for Blu-ray. Paramount put forth the effort but far too few fans actually bought the release to justify any further remastering projects for Deep Space Nine and Voyager.

And Fox realized that with over 25 seasons, The Simpsons would be a financial black hole. Yeah, we have folks here who say they would buy them but the world is huge. When people aren't buying something, the company has to say we need to stop.

Completely different sales expectations though. TNG probably sold 100x the Looney Tunes collections. Of course it was a far more expensive endeavor, so it needed those sales. DS9 and Voyager had far worse ratings, far lower sales projections, and also wouldn't be cheap to bring to blu-ray. I doubt they lost their shirt on TNG, but those other Trek series might be a different story.

It didn't seem the Looney Tunes collections had that much effort put into them - relatively speaking. It's a shame they don't seem to have much interest in making some volumes as Archive releases or something along those lines.

[EVERYONE LIES]

Don't forget Sony and The 3 Stooges.

[Jar Jar Stinks]

Disney has stopped caring about it's legacy. It's all about Pixar, Marvel, and Star Wars now.

What I don't understand is why they don't just make sets available direct-to-consumer. They'd make 100% more profit.

Seriously, the demand would be crazy for these titles as a deluxe set:

• Silly Symphonies
• Mickey Mouse in Black and White
• Mickey Mouse in Living Color
• The Chronological Donald
• The Complete Goofy
• The Complete Pluto

[Jar Jar Stinks]

Originally Posted by EVERYONE LIES

Don't forget Sony and The 3 Stooges.

I'm still hoping they come through with at least the Curly years.

[MifuneFan]

Because they don't sell well enough

/thread

[Starchild]

It doesn't make sense not to remaster these shorts in HD. Especially in the case of Warners who still shows their shorts on the air. Whether it be Cartoon Network or elsewhere these shorts could be shown in HD. Of course, then mastering and selling these on Blu ray would be a cake walk.

Disney shorts in my opinion are national treasures which beg being remastered and exhibited both on television as well as on Blu ray. It's a pity they haven't been treated this way. Walt would have recognized this.

And I cannot wait to see what MGM does with the Pink Panther shorts. Maybe we will get a glimpse of how good they can look when Kino Lorber releases the other Depatie-Freling shorts next spring.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by Starchild

It doesn't make sense not to remaster these shorts in HD. Especially in the case of Warners who still shows their shorts on the air. Whether it be Cartoon Network or elsewhere these shorts could be shown in HD. Of course, then mastering and selling these on Blu ray would be a cake walk.

Disney shorts in my opinion are national treasures which beg being remastered and exhibited both on television as well as on Blu ray. It's a pity they haven't been treated this way. Walt would have recognized this.

And I cannot wait to see what MGM does with the Pink Panther shorts. Maybe we will get a glimpse of how good they can look when Kino Lorber releases the other Depatie-Freling shorts next spring.

If you ran a business and it cost $200,000 too make something, and you were pretty much guaranteed to only make back 10% of that, would you still make it?

[Scarface32]

Originally Posted by CharlieBarkin

Disney simply needs to get some of their shows out on disc period. Blu-ray or DVD...they've left a few good ones half finished. I'm looking at you, Darkwing Duck, or Rescue Rangers....

I'd love to have those on Blu-ray, as well as Tail Spin and the old Chip 'n Dale cartoons.

[Jar Jar Stinks]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

If you ran a business and it cost $200,000 too make something, and you were pretty much guaranteed to only make back 10% of that, would you still make it?

Yes. Because if you're Disney or Warner Bros it's imperative to keep exposing your characters to the next generations. If the public loses interest in these characters, their licensing potential dissipates. But Disney wouldn't lose money... they know how to market their products so they command top dollar.

Then again, why sell a sure thing when you can lose 400 million on John Carter and The Lone Ranger?

[steve_dave]

Originally Posted by Jar Jar Stinks

Yes. Because if you're Disney or Warner Bros it's imperative to keep exposing your characters to the next generations. If the public loses interest in these characters, their licensing potential dissipates. But Disney wouldn't lose money... they know how to market their products so they command top dollar.

Then again, why sell a sure thing when you can lose 400 million on John Carter and The Lone Ranger?

But you are talking about physical home video sales.

The characters already have exposure on Disney Channel and Cartoon Network and with those come advertiser dollars which are far larger than home video sales.

Mickey Mouse Clubhouse airs on Disney Junior, Disney Channel, and sometimes Disney XD. That's three outlets to expose kids to Mickey, Donald, Goofy, Minnie, Pete, and various other Disney characters.

Now on the Warner side, Warner has had a few revival programs as well. The latest is Wabbit which features Bugs Bunny, Yosemite Sam, Elmer Fudd, and more Looney Tunes characters. And Cartoon Network loves to reair programming a lot so it's not like they don't put out Wabbit constantly.

Warner isn't going to lose any marketability for any Looney Tunes character due to "no shorts on Blu-ray." And to say that Disney markets to command top dollar is ridiculous. Both Disney and Warner overexpose their properties on the same level.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by Jar Jar Stinks

Yes. Because if you're Disney or Warner Bros it's imperative to keep exposing your characters to the next generations. If the public loses interest in these characters, their licensing potential dissipates. But Disney wouldn't lose money... they know how to market their products so they command top dollar.

Then again, why sell a sure thing when you can lose 400 million on John Carter and The Lone Ranger?

You think these vintage shorts are marketed primarily towards kids? Warner advertised them for adult collectors, and that is the prime demographic for them. Kids won't be unfamiliar with Bugs Bunny or Mickey Mouse anyime soon, and surely a BD release of some vintsge shorts isn't what they would need to reinvigorate them if that were to happen.

You could cherry pick two bad investments, but the same can be done with all of their other successful ventures which far outweigh those. While it's unfortunate collectors can't get these films/shorts on BD, I can totally understand why it hasn't happened.

[rexcrk]

Originally Posted by steve_dave

And Fox realized that with over 25 seasons, The Simpsons would be a financial black hole. Yeah, we have folks here who say they would buy them but the world is huge. When people aren't buying something, the company has to say we need to stop.

I'm still not over this. I find it very hard to believe that the Simpsons sets weren't profitable enough. I'm still convinced that it's a ploy to push digital streaming BS.
The only consolation is that at least the best years are on DVD. Still would've liked to have the whole series though. If only they didn't take so freaking long releasing them.

[Jar Jar Stinks]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

You think these vintage shorts are marketed primarily towards kids? Warner advertised them for adult collectors, and that is the prime demographic for them.

Of course adults are the market. Kids are smart... they have no compelling need to own physical media. But the parents and the grandparents buy this stuff for nostalgia purposes and it gets talked about and the children get exposed to it. Then the grandparents say, "Hey, let's go to Disneyworld." Then they go to Florida and spend $5,000 on tickets, Mickey Mouse sweatshirts, and mouse ears.

[blurayfriend]

Originally Posted by CharlieBarkin

Disney simply needs to get some of their shows out on disc period. Blu-ray or DVD...they've left a few good ones half finished. I'm looking at you, Darkwing Duck, or Rescue Rangers....

Ducktales NEEDS to be finished, and there were only 12 episodes left of Chip n Dale or something. Come on! The worst by far though, is the non-release of the 1994 Spider-man series, which Disney owns the rights too, would sell like gangbusters, and just sits on it because it would "conflict" with sales of their Ultimate Spider-man show. What a crock!

[Nocturnaloner]

Originally Posted by Starchild

It doesn't make sense not to remaster these shorts in HD.
.....
Disney shorts in my opinion are national treasures which beg being remastered and exhibited both on television as well as on Blu ray.

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

If you ran a business and it cost $200,000 too make something, and you were pretty much guaranteed to only make back 10% of that, would you still make it?

First and foremost, a company as rich and profitable as Disney absolutely has the ability to preserve all of its foundational works at 2K resolution or higher. That's the key thing. They need to do at least that much simply to preserve their own history. (If they won't do it, then the collectors will eventually step in and take up the slack, just as has been done with the original Star Wars.)

Granted that the masters exist, at that point it's just a matter of how they want to use the resource. They could simply view it as an extras archive, and dole it out as supplemental material to their modern work. If they released them as digital streams or downloads, that would be better than nothing, and pure profit for Disney. Burn-on-demand blu-rays would be great, but I'm not holding my breath.

[StLouisRibs]

Originally Posted by rexcrk

I'm still not over this. I find it very hard to believe that the Simpsons sets weren't profitable enough. I'm still convinced that it's a ploy to push digital streaming BS.
The only consolation is that at least the best years are on DVD. Still would've liked to have the whole series though. If only they didn't take so freaking long releasing them.

It's not that sales weren't high enough, it's that year-over-year they were decreasing to the point they predicted the sales wouldn't be high enough soon enough.