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

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

I feel a heck of a lot safer with my disc collection than having a bunch of digital films. I’m confident I made the correct decision to go down with the ship. If disc does die, I become a renter again.

I don't know if I will become a renter but I agree with you. the two are not comparable.

When VHS ended people were still (and might still be able to) buy films they did not buy before studio support finished and they can definitely still watch the films they bought. The same is not true for cinema now or target ticket or....

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

for me the min to be happy would be what I have now but more generally my def of HT starts with all seats being "front facing", if the room has seats that face each other... it is not an HT. On the audio side I can accept 5.1 DTS capable (for two reasons : 1) if someone built an HT 20 years ago does it stop being an HT because back then 5.1 was all that existed and he did not feal like re-building the room since then?

Well, it stops being a home theater if he rearranges his seats incorrectly. That alone gets him kicked out of the clubhouse.

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

The studios don't because they don't sell directly to consumers. You buy digital movies from 3rd parties who keep 15% of the selling price and send the rest to the production studio. They maintain the servers not the studios.

The question was who pays for the cost of the CDN for EST content. You imply that is the retailer but provide no proof, I say it is the studio. Who else besides the studios pay for digital code CDN access?

There is absolutely no reason a EST retailer or studio or any internet video provider has to own a server farm in order to provide content via the internet. Many contract with Amazon CloudFront (AWS), Limelight, Microsoft Azure and others for CDN services.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

Streaming has a future. Streaming is the future. It can bring in tens of billions of dollars. It provides hundreds of millions of demographic stats on who they are doing business with. They will make it work. They are 100% committed to making it profitable.

Purchases have a limited future with very limited profits.

I am not sure of your point the question was EST and not SVOD. Are you saying SVOD has a future but EST is DOA?

as for "they are 100% committed to making it profitable" (assuming you mean SVOD) I have my portfolio manager that takes care of my money I come here to discus film. The only way that is in the least bit interesting to me is not if Disney's streaming will one day be profitable but how will they get there. Will the price they charge go up to cover the huge deficit a bit at a time every so often hoping people won't notice how much higher it is? will it be like Netflix that sent a letter to one of my friends that he would need to pay more if he wants to be able to continue watching at home and at their cottage? or will they cut costs by removing the content people want to see.

The studios have nothing to do with maintaining server farms. That's why they don't do business directly with consumers for EST. They do business with third parties like Amazon, Google Play, Apple iTunes, etc. They have the server farms because EST is not a large part of their business. It's nothing more than a line item on their balance sheets.

funny how now you saw the word EST and not talking about something completely irrelevant like you did above too bad this time you did not notice that I never said studios have to pay for it but it is the EST retailer that does. Cinema now, Target ticket... shut down because they were not selling enough to keep the servers working.

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

I am not sure of your point the question was EST and not SVOD. Are you saying SVOD has a future but EST is DOA?

It has a brighter future than physical media. The numbers bear this out.

as for "they are 100% committed to making it profitable" (assuming you mean SVOD) I have my portfolio manager that takes care of my money I come here to discus film. The only way that is in the least bit interesting to me is not if Disney's streaming will one day be profitable but how will they get there. Will the price they charge go up to cover the huge deficit a bit at a time every so often hoping people won't notice how much higher it is? will it be like Netflix that sent a letter to one of my friends that he would need to pay more if he wants to be able to continue watching at home and at their cottage? or will they cut costs by removing the content people want to see.

If the increased price is $3 or $4 or $5, people only look at that increase. And what they see is it's tiny compared to their electric bills. Or what it costs to go out to dinner, or see a movie. They don't care. Worst case scenerio - they drop a service. Have 2 instead of 3 or 3 instead of 4.

funny how now you saw the word EST and not talking about something completely irrelevant like you did above too bad this time you did not notice that I never said studios have to pay for it but it is the EST retailer that does. Cinema now, Target ticket... shut down because they were not selling enough to keep the servers working.

And yet Amazon, Google and Apple continue to offer EST. So they must be making money from it right?

How would you explain Disney pulling out of Australia and New Zealand? If selling discs is profitable why are they stopping?

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Vilya

You really do not need to tell someone that owns over 500 4K discs to enjoy in their Atmos home theater that not everything is aimed at the typical Walmart shopper. I, and others, have never fit that description. Some of us were heavily invested in the laserdisc era, too, and most Walmart shoppers had no part in that technology, either, just to name another example, among many, where our movie and home theater hobby had nothing to do with Walmart .

did not mean it as an insult at anyone and honestly did not aim it at you ( you were not the one that talked original of scale bringing down the prices )


I can understand wishing things were cheaper (we all work hard for our money so I can understand that) but ion this site we often get on almost everything that there is no room for a premium niche

How can you be sure about Kaleidescape's current financial status beyond just wishing them well? They are tight fisted with such information and their "storied" history of 22 years has numerous examples of their being in financial peril throughout it. They have a long history of being on the brink of ruin and I have yet to ever read a story about them doing well as a business.

the simple answer is that I do not know for certain and maybe it is that I am wishing them the best (but usually I tend to be pessimistic in those scenarios). But

1) we have always known in the past when they were having financial trouble

2) it was not just business, but their legal issues added a lot of financial strain ( studios sued them for circumventing encryption)

3) like I said people don't need to buy new K systems every year. You buy it and use it. With the disk based system that means if you can't convince new people to buy there is no income coming in. Now they also sell content at a premium, as far as I know the guy that bought a digital K a few years ago will still need to buy or rent K films if he wants to still be using it and they will need to pay a premium (i.e. I can buy Spider-Man: Across The Spider-Verse on UHD BD for 30$ on AMAZON OR 35$ for the K digital)

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

The question was who pays for the cost of the CDN for EST content. You imply that is the retailer but provide no proof, I say it is the studio. Who else besides the studios pay for digital code CDN access?

Are you paying for that digital code or is it included with your disc purchase? And these are not ESTs.

There is absolutely no reason a EST retailer or studio or any internet video provider has to own a server farm in order to provide content via the internet. Many contract with Amazon CloudFront (AWS), Limelight, Microsoft Azure and others for CDN services.

Correct. The studio gives up a % of the sale to the IP provider. The provider collects the money, takes their cut then passes on the rest to the content creator. Like what movie theaters do.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Vilya

Well, it stops being a home theater if he rearranges his seats incorrectly. That alone gets him kicked out of the clubhouse.

If someone has office chairs on wheels that they spin around to make it easier to get out the door that is in the back, I would not exclude them. but if it is too couches facing each other so people can talk to each other more easily, is that what you are looking for in a theatre. Long before there were movie theaters people realized if you go to the theatre the seats need to be so people can enjoy the presentation.

[crutzulee]

Not exactly sure where the discussion about chairs facing each other came in...

Of all the differing opinions in this thread, I think the one thing everybody here agrees on, and has in their media rooms, are seats that face the display....

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

It has a brighter future than physical media. The numbers bear this out.

tell that to cinema now target ticket....and all the other ESTs that have shut down. While DVDs , CDs and records are still around.

If the increased price is $3 or $4 or $5, people only look at that increase. And what they see is it's tiny compared to their electric bills. Or what it costs to go out to dinner, or see a movie. They don't care.

I am sure there are some dumb people that think that way about subscri[tion what is your pouint?

Worst case scenerio - they drop a service. Have 2 instead of 3 or 3 instead of 4.

but isn't that bad for the subscription streaming companies bottom line? If a bunch of people drop streaminRus , StreamingRus revenue goes down but they still have to pay for the content that is available they still need to pay for streaming infrastructure.

but isn't t6hat a problem

And yet Amazon, Google and Apple continue to offer EST. So they must be making money from it right?

no let me ask you two counter questions

1) is Disney making a profit from Disney+? sometimes companies "invest in something that is not profitable now because they are wishing it will be worth it in the end.

2) I did not say they are not profitable now. some might be some might not. What I pointed out is that the costs of hosting the service will necesserily keep on growing, what is profitable today might not be sooner or later if that particular EST retailer sales are not growing fast enough.

How would you explain Disney pulling out of Australia and New Zealand? If selling discs is profitable why are they stopping?

key words are Australia and New Zealand. Around 20 years ago Someone started advertising in Australia modified region free PS2s. Sony sued them saying making the player region free went against copy protection law there. The judge basically ruled that it did not, in essence (to go with discussion at hand) if Joe in Australia is watching the latest Disney US DVD instead of Disney Australia DVD Joe is still watching a legal Disney DVD and Disney made money off of that DVD.

With that ruling some DVD player manufacturers started selling region free players (using that verdict to support their claim that region locking players was useless) as a cool feature to differentiate from their competitors and eventualy almost (using almost in case someone manages to find one that is region locked) all were region free.


That also meant that people could import from the US (traditionally first to get releases) before the Australian release comes out (and early on sometimes before the film hit theatres)and that lead to retailers preferring imports from what ever region over "Australian copy of films"


do you honestly think someone in Australia won't be able to (soon) see the latest Disney film on physical media if he wants to? all that big yawh of news mean is that when the guy buys the DVD/BD UHD BD it wont say Disney Australia (or what ever that branch is called ) but Disney US or Disney Europe or ....


Now as for NZ, the population is around 5K to Australia's 26K in the same way that for most companies Canada is treated like the 51st state orf the US NZ is treated like it is part for Australia and that verdict in Australia has meant NZ has followed the same path.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

did not mean it as an insult at anyone and honestly did not aim it at you ( you were not the one that talked original of scale bringing down the prices )

I have never found your posts to be insulting.

As for Kaleidescape, I have never read a positive article about their financial situation, only negative ones. Their unwillingness to be more forthcoming about their business situation only increases my suspicion. Companies usually love to share good news after all.

I don't mind spending $35 for a movie; I have more than established that fact, but when I do I like to actually own the medium that contains it and not be dependent upon an overpriced proprietary conventional hard drive based closed eco-system. I like being able to play my purchased content with whatever brand of device that I choose.

I have heard that K uses more robust conventional hard drives than what most consumers use, but I still do not trust conventional hard drives long term. Conventional hard drives fail far more readily than has any disc player that I have ever owned.

Considering what K charges for their hardware, I would dread having to replace a single piece of it. I can buy disc spinners by the dozen for what their devices cost.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

If someone has office chairs on wheels that they spin around to make it easier to get out the door that is in the back, I would not exclude them. but if it is too couches facing each other so people can talk to each other more easily, is that what you are looking for in a theatre. Long before there were movie theaters people realized if you go to the theatre the seats need to be so people can enjoy the presentation.

People are supposed to refrain from talking when watching a movie- at least in my home. The discussion is supposed to come AFTER seeing the film, or even during a pause, but NEVER while the movie is playing.

I was just trying to point out that people can have some pretty arbitrary, and sometimes outright peculiar, requirements for what constitutes a home theater as if they, and they alone, are the arbiter of such things.

I generally do not like outdoor presentations of movies; there are too many environmental factors (distractions) that can not be controlled.

[Vilya]

As for EST, I occasionally "buy" some titles that way, but I never see these as real purchases as I have squat control over what I "bought." To me, they are just rentals of unknown duration that I can share with others and also access from almost anywhere.

I would not be surprised if EST providers, like Vudu and others, start charging some kind of digital library maintenance fee to defray the cost of their operations unless you meet some kind of spending threshold per year or other period of time.

Stranger things have happened. Netflix swore that they would never get in bed with ads repeatedly since 2016 only to roll in the sack with them now.

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by Vilya

I would not be surprised if EST providers, like Vudu and others, start charging some kind of digital library maintenance fee to defray the cost of their operations unless you meet some kind of spending threshold per year or other period of time.

That very same thing could happen to movies accessed via codes provided and redeemed with disc.

Before anyone says that is not spelled out specifically in the TOS/ELUA just remember you agreed to the TOS/EULA could be changed in whole or in part at any time and without notice. IMHO, you have to read each providers TOS AND the providing studio's TOS. And the clincher, you agreed not to take any legal action against the provider and/or the studio.

BTW, I have first hand experience with content loss with no recourse. Fortunately, I had not invested that much into content, did lose several hundred on the hardware, Sony FMP-X10. It was a download to own, download to rent system. Some computer gurus tried to copy the HDD but never succeeded.

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by Vilya

As for EST, I occasionally "buy" some titles that way, but I never see these as real purchases as I have squat control over what I "bought." To me, they are just rentals of unknown duration that I can share with others and also access from almost anywhere.

In recent months a few of my EST titles became available on BD and they were purchased for real. I will replace any and all my EST if they become available on BD or UHD BD.

[veritas]

So I could buy pulp fiction in 4k for 4.99. gift cards with 15% to 20% are not uncommon so they would get around 4 dollars from it. Then they get 15% of that meaning they need to run a server farm and give me access for 60 cents (split across 5 services if its movies anywhere) for like 100 years.

It probably costs 5 to 10 cents at least every time somebody watches a movie in 4k in power and wear and tear etc so I just cant see how thats sustainable unless the studios are the ones footing most of the bill.

[crutzulee]

Originally Posted by Vilya

As for EST, I occasionally "buy" some titles that way, but I never see these as real purchases as I have squat control over what I "bought." To me, they are just rentals of unknown duration that I can share with others and also access from almost anywhere.

I would not be surprised if EST providers, like Vudu and others, start charging some kind of digital library maintenance fee to defray the cost of their operations unless you meet some kind of spending threshold per year or other period of time.

Stranger things have happened. Netflix swore that they would never get in bed with ads repeatedly since 2016 only to roll in the sack with them now.

Sometimes, when I go to rent a stream, I get sucked in to "buying" it for a few dollars more.. After buying so many titles on multiple formats, I consider everything I buy as just a rental. Next month, I'll have my umpteenth physical release of THE EXCORCIST... which will only be spun a couple of times until I buy it on the next format.. just like the bluray from the last set , and the DVD before it and the LD before that...

Incidently, about 5 minutes after my last post, I got into a fight with a can of salmon.. 2 hours in emerg and 3 stitches later, I'm back typing one handed with you lot..

[PenguinInfinity]

Originally Posted by Vilya

As for EST, I occasionally "buy" some titles that way, but I never see these as real purchases as I have squat control over what I "bought." To me, they are just rentals of unknown duration that I can share with others and also access from almost anywhere.

I would not be surprised if EST providers, like Vudu and others, start charging some kind of digital library maintenance fee to defray the cost of their operations unless you meet some kind of spending threshold per year or other period of time.

Stranger things have happened. Netflix swore that they would never get in bed with ads repeatedly since 2016 only to roll in the sack with them now.

EST providers could also insert ads into the titles you've "bought".

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by crutzulee

Incidently, about 5 minutes after my last post, I got into a fight with a can of salmon.. 2 hours in emerg and 3 stitches later, I'm back typing one handed with you lot..

Ouch! I'm sorry that you got injured and over a can of salmon.

You were lucky that your ER visit only took 2 hours. I don't think I have ever escaped an ER in under 4 hours.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by PenguinInfinity

EST providers could also insert ads into the titles you've "bought".

I am more concerned about how they sometimes "sanitize" movies to satisfy their ever changing views on political correctness.