Physical & Digital EST: The Future of Home Video Discussion Thread

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by Vilya

While I get the point that you are making, Vudu is not gone. It has a new owner, yes, but it is very much still with us and thus it does not belong on a "here yesterday, gone today" list. Changes of ownership and closures are not the same thing.

The intended point was: Walmart owned then sold Vudu. Will edit for clarity.

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

The intended point was: Walmart owned then sold Vudu. Will edit for clarity.

It shouldn't be on the list. All the other line items have already or will disappear. Vudu is still Vudu - just owned by a different company.

[Wendell R. Breland]

For new readers that may get the wrong impression about me and streaming, I have accounts with the following:

• Disney
• Disney Club
• Disney Movie Rewards
• Disney+
• Fandango
• Flixster (defunct)
• JustWatch
• Netflix
• Nvidia Shield
• Paramount
• Roku
• Universal
• Vudu

Mainly used for streaming:
Sony FMP-X10 ● $470 (sold for $120)
Sony BDP-S6700 ● $88.00
Sony UBP-X800/BM ● $268.00
Sony UBP-X1000ES ● $498.00

Streaming only:
Nvidia Shield Pro 2019 ● $199.99 + FLIRC Receiver $23 + Inteset IReTV USB IR Receiver $24
Roku Ultra 2019 ● $83
(2) Chromecast Audio ● $35.00 each

For a total of $1,603 for hardware

[Lee A Stewart]

Wendell, you haven't removed Vudu from your list so you might as well add the following:

20th Century Fox - Purchased by Disney, now 20th Century

Time Warner - Purchased by AT&T, now Warner Media

Crunchyroll, formerly owned by AT&T - being sold to Sony's Funimation Global Group

Tubi - now owned by Fox Corporation

Pluto TV - now owned by ViacomCBS

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by bhampton

Redeemed a two week HBO Max code and zero chance I will extend it.

Where did you come by the code? I should have Max app on Nvidia and Roku. I may sign up just to see what it is like.

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

Where did you come by the code? I should have Max app on Nvidia and Roku. I may sign up just to see what it is like.

HBO Max 14-day free trial with qualifying purchase.

https://www.bestbuy.com/site/clp-mov...t1589908102346

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

Love the RF remote.

Then you may want to look into one of these devices. Never tried myself but others say they do work.

Many years ago I used a IR to RF widget attached to my Marantz RC-2000 MKII remote. It was replaced with a URC MX-850 + MRF-250 base station and in turn it was replaced with a MX-980 remote and MRF-260 base station. The MX-980 replaces all the remotes below for the home theater devices (not all shown).

[Show spoiler]

[Lee A Stewart]

I still have my MARANTZ RC2000MKII remote. No longer use it. Got tired of changing batteries (4) every week. Now it just sits in a drawer.

[bhampton]

CyberPunk 2077 game recalled.


https://apple.news/A3kS8J4KBQZCKZvgxnoENXg

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

I still have my MARANTZ RC2000MKII remote. No longer use it. Got tired of changing batteries (4) every week. Now it just sits in a drawer.

Mine is in a box somewhere. I had 8 Sony rechargeable batteries that I rotated as needed. The MX-980 uses a large rechargeable battery and has a charging cradle that it sits in while not in use. From the programming simulator (my custom graphics):

[Show spoiler]

[mdo7]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

As far as what new subscribers assume. It's a bit naïve to think that every single movie and TV show ever produced by the Studio will be there. The only way to cut the churn rate is to continue to offer new content each month which all of them do.

Well that's the problem. Not all (new HBO Max, Disney+, Netflix, and Peacock subscribers) of them read the same type of entertainment and technology news like you and I do. I'll admit I did missed the report about the NBCUniversal and WB deal that led to Harry Potter and Chris Nolan's Batman trilogy appearing on Peacock TV when the report came out (or maybe I did, but I didn't pay that much attention to it at the time the articles came out).

As I said, this type of deal when it comes content appearing on another streaming sites will frustrate subscribers of these streaming sites. As I said, there's probably HBO Max subscribers upset over the Nolan's Batman and Harry Potter appearing on Peacock TV. I can imagine how many other people with Disney+ would be upset over Disney content leaving Disney+ and appearing on Netflix and let's assume there's a demographic of Disney+ subscribers that don't have Netflix subscribers or know anyone with Netflix account sharing are the one that will suffer the most from the Disney content appearing on Netflix when it's no longer on Disney+.

This is probably the reason why blu-ray could see a increase in sales in the next few years. Because of streaming rights complication and confusion like we're seeing.

[Wendell R. Breland]

Some of you OTT pay TV subs may find this interesting, Netflix has setup a linear channel (France ?) so viewers do not have to pick content, it is just like any other linear TV.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by bhampton

CyberPunk 2077 game recalled.


https://apple.news/A3kS8J4KBQZCKZvgxnoENXg

Disgraceful. What a botch.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by flyry

I don't see apple/iTunes Google or Amazon storefronts going anywhere.

Irrelevent.

firstly, many have said it for other large stores in the past and they have gone the way of the dodo. Big today can easily be none existing tomorrow.

Second, Bestbuy is still around but cinemanow shut down, Target is still around but target ticket is shut down, Walmart is still around but they found a sucker to offload Vudu on so a comment a few months ago like "I don't see Walmart storefronts going anywhere" to imply Vudu will benefit from that now looks ridiculous....

[alchav21]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

Irrelevent.

firstly, many have said it for other large stores in the past and they have gone the way of the dodo. Big today can easily be none existing tomorrow.

Second, Bestbuy is still around but cinemanow shut down, Target is still around but target ticket is shut down, Walmart is still around but they found a sucker to offload Vudu on so a comment a few months ago like "I don't see Walmart storefronts going anywhere" to imply Vudu will benefit from that now looks ridiculous....

Follow the Money and access The Content, that is The Future!!!

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

That’s my point, just last year some were saying Vudu was a safe bet as Walmart aren’t going anywhere. Then they sold their service because they realised there isn’t much of a future in digital ownership.

for me subscription rentals are relatively safe and if not who cares?

Does anyone care if they can't rent films at blockbuster any more? no, theyu just fund an other way to rent and the rentals they paid for they saw and newer rentels their $ goes somewhere else.

Same with subscription rentals, if sub1 closes down (and probably before that) people will stop paying for sub1 and join sub 2 that has the content they want and their money will go to sub2. And life goes on with maybe the occasional touch of nostalgia "remeber when internet meant dialing into a BBS and using it to access the internet with gaufer and archie, Veronica and Jughead? when we used to have to blockbusters to rent films....."

As for EST for me the model is and can only be broken. Unless it becomes completly different (and not sure it could work).

The issue is the itunes effect. Apple came out with a new concept, yes it was virtual media but instead of an album with a bunch of songs you don't care for you could buy the one song you do care for and even though it was over priced it was still cheaper then paying for a bunch of songs you don't care for. You could carry a lot of songs with you on your ipod and shuffle through them while you jog while a CD would be more limited in content and it can't shuffle. Apple a company that nearly closed down created a monopoly where they could dictate the terms with the content holders and made tons of money.

Many assume the same lightning can be true for video which is why there have been so many. But that is wrong IMHO and why there have been so many that shut down and people lost access to the content they paid for.

1) music is a tiny amount of data, films are huge (just look at the k discussion where the one guy that uses it admitted he DL the film just before he watches it, people don't want to spend the $$$$$ to house their films locally, on the other hand an ipod (depending on model and size) could go from hundreds to tens of thousands. This means that it is several magnitudes more expensive for a movie service then it was for music.

2) Music benefited from iTunes. it had transportability (people could jog with their ipod and hundreds of songs running on shuffle) and splitting up content (people were willing to pay a bit more per song to buy the song they want). I don't see the same to be true for films. People don't look to buy their favorite chapter of a film and then randomly shuffle the chapters they bought while jogging.

3) Apple had a de facto content/hardware monopoly while this is not bound to happen with movies. Technically you could buy a CD and DL that one song you want to the ipod and if you already have the CD why not, but if all you want is that one song why pay more for the CD for songs that you don't want and won't listen to so you are "forced" to buy the songs from Apple

4) the times are different. Back when iTunes launched subscription streaming did not exist. Today it does. Most people don't see the benefit of building up a collection when they can (and are already paying) for a subscription. Both need a constant and ever increasing amount of capital to operate. Subscription should be OK with that for some providers (i.e. if you don't pay the monthly fee you lose access to the service, so you keep paying to be able to watch films/ listen to music) But it is an issue for video/music sales and they need to constantly increase or they will capitulate from their own weight (i.e. if Joe Bought something a year ago and he decides to re-DL to watch this month the service provider has the cost of operating the machines and internet connection but he has 0$ revenue to cover those costs and those monthly costs are there if he re-dl or not)

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by alchav21

Follow the Money and access The Content, that is The Future!!!

I do follow the money that is what is so sad. For example I look at Disney plus and I follow the 2B$+ losses down the drain and I mourn it since it could bhave been used more productively like into making movies and it having a return on investment instead of a write-down loss.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

for me subscription rentals are relatively safe and if not who cares?

Does anyone care if they can't rent films at blockbuster any more? no, theyu just fund an other way to rent and the rentals they paid for they saw and newer rentels their $ goes somewhere else.

Same with subscription rentals, if sub1 closes down (and probably before that) people will stop paying for sub1 and join sub 2 that has the content they want and their money will go to sub2. And life goes on with maybe the occasional touch of nostalgia "remeber when internet meant dialing into a BBS and using it to access the internet with gaufer and archie, Veronica and Jughead? when we used to have to blockbusters to rent films....."

As for EST for me the model is and can only be broken. Unless it becomes completly different (and not sure it could work).

The issue is the itunes effect. Apple came out with a new concept, yes it was virtual media but instead of an album with a bunch of songs you don't care for you could buy the one song you do care for and even though it was over priced it was still cheaper then paying for a bunch of songs you don't care for. You could carry a lot of songs with you on your ipod and shuffle through them while you jog while a CD would be more limited in content and it can't shuffle. Apple a company that nearly closed down created a monopoly where they could dictate the terms with the content holders and made tons of money.

Many assume the same lightning can be true for video which is why there have been so many. But that is wrong IMHO and why there have been so many that shut down and people lost access to the content they paid for.

1) music is a tiny amount of data, films are huge (just look at the k discussion where the one guy that uses it admitted he DL the film just before he watches it, people don't want to spend the $$$$$ to house their films locally, on the other hand an ipod (depending on model and size) could go from hundreds to tens of thousands. This means that it is several magnitudes more expensive for a movie service then it was for music.

2) Music benefited from iTunes. it had transportability (people could jog with their ipod and hundreds of songs running on shuffle) and splitting up content (people were willing to pay a bit more per song to buy the song they want). I don't see the same to be true for films. People don't look to buy their favorite chapter of a film and then randomly shuffle the chapters they bought while jogging.

3) Apple had a de facto content/hardware monopoly while this is not bound to happen with movies. Technically you could buy a CD and DL that one song you want to the ipod and if you already have the CD why not, but if all you want is that one song why pay more for the CD for songs that you don't want and won't listen to so you are "forced" to buy the songs from Apple

4) the times are different. Back when iTunes launched subscription streaming did not exist. Today it does. Most people don't see the benefit of building up a collection when they can (and are already paying) for a subscription. Both need a constant and ever increasing amount of capital to operate. Subscription should be OK with that for some providers (i.e. if you don't pay the monthly fee you lose access to the service, so you keep paying to be able to watch films/ listen to music) But it is an issue for video/music sales and they need to constantly increase or they will capitulate from their own weight (i.e. if Joe Bought something a year ago and he decides to re-DL to watch this month the service provider has the cost of operating the machines and internet connection but he has 0$ revenue to cover those costs and those monthly costs are there if he re-dl or not)

Rentals are fine like you say. However, I’m very much a ownership guy and I like to buy blind.

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Rentals are fine like you say. However, I’m very much a ownership guy and I like to buy blind.

We have watched many hundreds of titles because we could rent them (LaserDisc, video cassette, DVD and Blu-ray). Blind buys have not worked out well for us. My library of titles is not that big but it is titles that are worthy of repeat viewing. We have several dozen DVD titles that I would procure on Blu-ray if they were available.

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

I do follow the money that is what is so sad. For example I look at Disney plus and I follow the 2B$+ losses down the drain and I mourn it since it could bhave been used more productively like into making movies and it having a return on investment instead of a write-down loss.

It's called investing in the future. SVOD is a long game. A marathon, not a sprint.