New pricing structure

[PrinceAllen]

I think all OLD movies getting re-released on BLU should be low, like they do now with DVD an old title is 12.99 on release day.

ACTUALLY, they are kinda doing that like 13 going on 30 is 19.99 on amazon for pre-order and I'm sure it will be 17.99 soon.... but I think they should go $14.99 or lower because the DVD equivelant is under $10 and Blu should have AT MOST a $5 premium....

[assydingo]

Originally Posted by cvm

You liked HOT ROD?!?!?!

I never heard that from somone before...

Back to topic... I think it would be nice if the prices would be adjusted, but it could be hard to find criteria to base the prices off of.

I love Hot Rod. It's much better the second time.

And I completely agree. It depends on the amount of worthwhile features also. For example Anchorman had some great stuff on the DVD version.

[Crim122]

I agree on pricing, I dont care what the genre is.

Pricing and marketing is what needs to change for blu to take off imo.


Oh and you can find Hot Rod and 40 Yr Old Virgin on amazon for 15 each

[shadow72]

Originally Posted by PrinceAllen

I think all OLD movies getting re-released on BLU should be low, like they do now with DVD an old title is 12.99 on release day.

ACTUALLY, they are kinda doing that like 13 going on 30 is 19.99 on amazon for pre-order and I'm sure it will be 17.99 soon.... but I think they should go $14.99 or lower because the DVD equivelant is under $10 and Blu should have AT MOST a $5 premium....

+1

[t0nythebeat]

cheap talks on a blu-ray forum ... out of place.

[assydingo]

Originally Posted by Crim122

I agree on pricing, I dont care what the genre is.

Pricing and marketing is what needs to change for blu to take off imo.


Oh and you can find Hot Rod and 40 Yr Old Virgin on amazon for 15 each

That's good to know =]. I've already seen Hot Rod three times... and I've heard the difference isn't significant. I'll wait till later.

[Antirock]

Originally Posted by Marquoz

You are looking at the pricing structure from a very narrow point of view. There are people that think that 40 Year Old Virgin is worth the $30 while Wanted is barely worth $5 in a Walmart bin. They are targeting the people that love comedies and not action movies when they have 40 Year Old Virgin, Pineapple Express, etc. at full value.

People will buy the movies they love regardless of the price, and those are the ones that they target new release prices at. If you don't feel it's worth that much, wait for a sale.

All I am saying is that if studios want to get consumers in the habit of buying blu, or better yet, double dipping, then they need to subsidize the price of "non-eye candy" movies.

When I was buying DVDs I would go to the store on Tuesdays and buy 5 or 6 of them because they were $15 a piece for new releases. I just got in that habit and bought things that, looking back, I should not have bought. The same can be done with blu. If the pricing structure makes it easy for me to pick up multiple titles on a whim, then blu's foot hold in the industry will grow faster. As it stands right now I have to think long and hard about my purchases and I never buy things on impulse because the price is so high. This is especially true for catalog titles. The only titles I have double dipped are Batman Begins and Cars. I probably would have double dipped more had the price been universally less expensive.

As for the price premium on catalog titles on blu vs dvd. I feel like the premium I am paying is re-buying the movie!!! The price on catalog titles should be the same as the DVD version. If studios want to encourage blu ray adopters to double dip on non effects driven, catalog movies, the best way to do this is to make the price equal (unless there is new content).

[Barnum]

I agree I don't see the general public buying that many movies at $30. Keep it cheap and people will come.

Originally Posted by PrinceAllen

I think all OLD movies getting re-released on BLU should be low, like they do now with DVD an old title is 12.99 on release day.

ACTUALLY, they are kinda doing that like 13 going on 30 is 19.99 on amazon for pre-order and I'm sure it will be 17.99 soon.... but I think they should go $14.99 or lower because the DVD equivelant is under $10 and Blu should have AT MOST a $5 premium....

[Disky76]

Because when I open up a $30 Blu-Ray...my expectations are HIGH. I expect perfection. I expect a REFERENCE quality disc.

When I find a Blu-Ray on sale for $14.99, like when I picked up The Road Warrior and saw an average transfer, it wasn't that big of a deal. Still great, hi-def and all, but had I paid $30...I would have returned it!!!

MY SUGGESTION -

If the disc debuts at $29.99+, then we should be GAURANTEED a pristine, reference quality disc, no matter what the title. Blu-ray has the potential for that, as I, Robot proves. I don't want to spend $30 on a movie that is not going to use Blu-Ray to its fullest potential. But there are some titles that really just look like dressed up DVD's. I don't mind paying the price if I know I will be blown away.

The problem is, I have paid $29 for movies that I have been blown away with, and $29 for others that I was really dissapointed with.

There needs to be a pricing structure based on how the film was transferred, how many extras, AQ and VQ, etc. and some movies that DON'T use Blu-Ray to its fullest potential should be offered at a lower price (ex: 50 First Dates.) With titles that use Blu-Rays potential to a lesser degree selling at a lower price, the studios then might be able excuse themselves for the poor transfers they have been sometimes giving us. A movie that transfers well to Blu-Ray could be offered at a premium, but it had better well deliver on the promise.

To sum up, base pricing on the quality of the transfer. If we are paying $30, it'd better be like looking through a window. If we pay $14.99, we can excuse some grain, softness, or an older master.

[supersix4]

Originally Posted by ixlegitballinxl

+1

it seems that is the trend right now, just not at release date.. most comedy movies drop in price within 2-3 weeks of being released... fry's had 40 year old virgin for 8.99 a few weeks ago lol

they pretty much do that since you can find those movies as this guy above said for 8.99 awhile ago... you have to be willing to look if you are going to nit pick prices.

[assydingo]

Originally Posted by Disky76

Because when I open up a $30 Blu-Ray...my expectations are HIGH. I expect perfection. I expect a REFERENCE quality disc.

When I find a Blu-Ray on sale for $14.99, like when I picked up The Road Warrior and saw an average transfer, it wasn't that big of a deal. Still great, hi-def and all, but had I paid $30...I would have returned it!!!

MY SUGGESTION -

If the disc debuts at $29.99+, then we should be GAURANTEED a pristine, reference quality disc, no matter what the title. Blu-ray has the potential for that, as I, Robot proves. I don't want to spend $30 on a movie that is not going to use Blu-Ray to its fullest potential. But there are some titles that really just look like dressed up DVD's. I don't mind paying the price if I know I will be blown away.

The problem is, I have paid $29 for movies that I have been blown away with, and $29 for others that I was really dissapointed with.

There needs to be a pricing structure based on how the film was transferred, how many extras, AQ and VQ, etc. and some movies that DON'T use Blu-Ray to its fullest potential should be offered at a lower price (ex: 50 First Dates.) With titles that use Blu-Rays potential to a lesser degree selling at a lower price, the studios then might be able excuse themselves for the poor transfers they have been sometimes giving us. A movie that transfers well to Blu-Ray could be offered at a premium, but it had better well deliver on the promise.

To sum up, base pricing on the quality of the transfer. If we are paying $30, it'd better be like looking through a window. If we pay $14.99, we can excuse some grain, softness, or an older master.

I, Robot was an eye candy movie. Aren't those shot with significantly better equipment? It's not a good example of a weak source being made to look flawless.

[neos_peace]

Originally Posted by cvm

You liked HOT ROD?!?!?!

I never heard that from somone before...

Back to topic... I think it would be nice if the prices would be adjusted, but it could be hard to find criteria to base the prices off of.

Here's a thought. Base the starting price based off what kind of money it brought it from in the theater.

EX: TDK was a KILLER box office. Price could be starting $30 on blu
while a lesser killer movie....?(can't think of a title so I'll just make one up) Kung fu Panda<----have no idea what it brought in so don't kill me for the title I choose to pick. Price could be $20.

They could just simply do this. The more money it brought in at the movie theater the higher the price for the blu. The lower the money it brought in at the theater the lower the price on blu.

What about that?

[Disky76]

Originally Posted by assydingo

I, Robot was an eye candy movie. Aren't those shot with significantly better equipment? It's not a good example of a weak source being made to look flawless.

I would say a weak source made to look flawless was 2001: A Space Oddessey. There, you have a movie made years and years before the "eye candy" movies of today, and yet the Blu-Ray was superb!!

But that really is the basis of my whole argument. If they can do it with a movie from the 60's, then they can do it with a movie made in 1991 (Terminator 2 - horrible transfer).

I think it goes down to the care and workmanship in transferring the film and making the Blu Ray Disc. In some instances, you can tell that the most care was taken, like in The Day After Tomorrow, and in others, it seems like a release was just rushed out - like in Firewall.

That's what I am saying. If they are going to charge $30, we should get the best transfer available. Lesser calibur versions could also be made available at lower price points. And movies in genres that don't really take advantage of all that Blu Ray has to offer (like Juno for example) could also be transferred in a less expensive fashion and released at a lower price point as well - still High Def, still better than DVD, but not jumping out of the screen like I, Robot or Transformers.

Just food for thought!

[MCT]

Originally Posted by jasontkelley1746

As long as you look around and are patient, you can pretty much get any movie for between $10 and $20 on average.

a wise little green Jedi monster extolled the virtues of patience in the early 80's, and I still heed his advice to this day. The Hot Deals forum is a godsend.

[Crim122]

I wish more people would bought off the internet then I think prices in store would fall...but people have to get there movie and take it home THAT VERY DAY

[Marquoz]

Originally Posted by Antirock

All I am saying is that if studios want to get consumers in the habit of buying blu, or better yet, double dipping, then they need to subsidize the price of "non-eye candy" movies.

When I was buying DVDs I would go to the store on Tuesdays and buy 5 or 6 of them because they were $15 a piece for new releases. I just got in that habit and bought things that, looking back, I should not have bought. The same can be done with blu. If the pricing structure makes it easy for me to pick up multiple titles on a whim, then blu's foot hold in the industry will grow faster. As it stands right now I have to think long and hard about my purchases and I never buy things on impulse because the price is so high. This is especially true for catalog titles. The only titles I have double dipped are Batman Begins and Cars. I probably would have double dipped more had the price been universally less expensive.

As for the price premium on catalog titles on blu vs dvd. I feel like the premium I am paying is re-buying the movie!!! The price on catalog titles should be the same as the DVD version. If studios want to encourage blu ray adopters to double dip on non effects driven, catalog movies, the best way to do this is to make the price equal (unless there is new content).

Double dipping and pricing specific genres are two different things. I agree that catalog titles shouldn't debut at the full MSRP as a brand spanking new release unless it is a VASTLY better transfer. The original Fifth Element wasn't worth the full new release price, while the re-master was. Catalog titles shouldn't come out for more then 19.99. I know some studios dropped standard catalog prices in the past, and hopefully they will do it again, getting it to a stable price where they make money, and consumers don't feel shafted having to "buy the movie yet again".

[assydingo]

Originally Posted by Disky76

I would say a weak source made to look flawless was 2001: A Space Oddessey. There, you have a movie made years and years before the "eye candy" movies of today, and yet the Blu-Ray was superb!!

But that really is the basis of my whole argument. If they can do it with a movie from the 60's, then they can do it with a movie made in 1991 (Terminator 2 - horrible transfer).

I think it goes down to the care and workmanship in transferring the film and making the Blu Ray Disc. In some instances, you can tell that the most care was taken, like in The Day After Tomorrow, and in others, it seems like a release was just rushed out - like in Firewall.

That's what I am saying. If they are going to charge $30, we should get the best transfer available. Lesser calibur versions could also be made available at lower price points. And movies in genres that don't really take advantage of all that Blu Ray has to offer (like Juno for example) could also be transferred in a less expensive fashion and released at a lower price point as well - still High Def, still better than DVD, but not jumping out of the screen like I, Robot or Transformers.

Just food for thought!

Honestly I don't know much technical stuff. I'm pretty sure some old movies, like 2001: A Space Oddysey are grain free. Yet somehow it's ridiculous to wish all older movies could be grain free.

People just say source a lot and basically that a good transfer is a movie that looked how did it in theaters. I've never seen these really old movies in theaters so I don't have anything to respond back <.<.

[Kaiju]

Originally Posted by cvm

You liked HOT ROD?!?!?!

I never heard that from somone before...

Back to topic... I think it would be nice if the prices would be adjusted, but it could be hard to find criteria to base the prices off of.

Dude come on that movie was silly as hell, in a good way.

[kabukijoe]

I can see $25 for a new release on blu ray, but $30 is a little much, and I actually saw some overpriced places (FYE) selling a new blu for $40 which is disgusting. I think $20-$25 is reasonable for a new blu ray release and $10-$15 for movies that have already been out on dvd.

But my advice for cheapest prices is to just shop on amazon... I found some great deals on there.

[QOTSA1]

I buy movies on Bluray that I feel will benefit from the technology (The Dark Knight, Hellboy 2 etc...). I don't think my enjoyment of a movie like the 40 Year Old Virgin or Hot rod would benefit from superior picture quality, so I would just buy them for $5 on regular dvd.