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

[Cranston37]

I didn't say anything about each individual studio having their own service.

Example - look at Apple Music. What I'm proposing would be Apple Movies. For the cost of one blu-ray purchase you could have access to everything in the iTunes store that's more than say 3 years old. No titles rotating in and out like Netflix - you get everything. Music has already done it, and Netflix already does it with discs.

Apple Music has something like 15mil paying customers. If Apple Movies had 15mil customers paying $14.99 a month that's $225mil per month in revenue. Do you think the studios are making anywhere near that on catalog titles right now? And that's just for one company. Spotify, Google, etc would have their millions of customers as well. And all of that isn't even adding in the money made from selling the newest releases, which is where 90% of their revenue comes from today.

[master gandhi]

Originally Posted by Cranston37

I didn't say anything about each individual studio having their own service.

Example - look at Apple Music. What I'm proposing would be Apple Movies. For the cost of one blu-ray purchase you could have access to everything in the iTunes store that's more than say 3 years old. No titles rotating in and out like Netflix - you get everything. Music has already done it, and Netflix already does it with discs.

Apple Music has something like 15mil paying customers. If Apple Movies had 15mil customers paying $14.99 a month that's $225mil per month in revenue. Do you think the studios are making anywhere near that on catalog titles right now? And that's just for one company. Spotify, Google, etc would have their millions of customers as well. And all of that isn't even adding in the money made from selling the newest releases, which is where 90% of their revenue comes from today.

Is that how Apple Music works? It's only stuff that's over five years old? I doubt most people would care about stuff that's more than a year or two old. People like new stuff. When I used to work at Blockbuster Video, people would come in asking what's new. They weren't asking what old movies do I recommend. They want new stuff.

[Cranston37]

Originally Posted by master gandhi

Is that how Apple Music works? It's only stuff that's over five years old? I doubt most people would care about stuff that's more than a year or two old. People like new stuff. When I used to work at Blockbuster Video, people would come in asking what's new. They weren't asking what old movies do I recommend. They want new stuff.

No, that isn't how Apple Music works (and to be accurate I said it would be for movies over 3 years old, not 5). If my theoretical Apple Movies can be made to work financially by including the newest releases then even better. As a matter of fact, maybe it COULD work that way - I was just trying to protect the studios maximum profit opportunities with movies like Star Wars, Marvel, etc...

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by master gandhi

Is that how Apple Music works? It's only stuff that's over five years old? I doubt most people would care about stuff that's more than a year or two old. People like new stuff. When I used to work at Blockbuster Video, people would come in asking what's new. They weren't asking what old movies do I recommend. They want new stuff.

No, Apple have all the latest music as well.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Cranston37

No, that isn't how Apple Music works. If my theoretical Apple Movies can be made to work financially by including the newest releases then even better. As a matter of fact, maybe it COULD work that way - the studios make their money first on theatrical then put it right to one of these services a year later.

What you are suggesting is exactly what I have been talking about for several years. Only I used the Spotify model. SD? Pay less. HD top tier (4K). Or going one further, free service with adverts!

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by master gandhi

Sounds expensive, that's for sure. If they include all their features, that could be appealing, but still sounds expensive and less fun than collecting individual titles.

Agree. It sounds grim to me.

[Cranston37]

...and to bring this back full circle to my original point - if this IS the way the movie industry is heading, it renders most of this thread moot. Im not making a physical vs digital argument here, I'm literally saying that things might change so much in the next few years that issues like you losing rights to a title you purchased (pro physical) or a format no longer being supported (pro digital) might soon be completely irrelevant.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Cranston37

...and to bring this back full circle to my original point - if this IS the way the movie industry is heading, it renders many of the physical vs digital arguments in this thread moot. Things might change so much that issues like you losing rights to a title you purchased (pro physical) or a format no longer being supported (pro digital) might soon be irrelevant.

Good job I have over 700 movies to fall back on then!

[master gandhi]

Originally Posted by Cranston37

...and to bring this back full circle to my original point - if this IS the way the movie industry is heading, it renders many of the physical vs digital arguments in this thread moot. Things might change so much that issues like you losing rights to a title you purchased (pro physical) or a format no longer being supported (pro digital) might soon be irrelevant.

It sounds like an Apple Movies idea wouldn't replace physical media or digital copies. It would just be an alternative. You still wouldn't have the latest movies, according to your proposed model, so there would still need to be a way to get the newest movies. Hence, we're still talking about physical media and digital copies.

[Cranston37]

Originally Posted by master gandhi

It sounds like an Apple Movies idea wouldn't replace physical media or digital copies. It would just be an alternative. You still wouldn't have the latest movies, according to your proposed model, so there would still need to be a way to get the newest movies. Hence, we're still talking about physical media and digital copies.

I agree with that, but I also left open the possibility of my Apple Movies including the newest releases. It all depends on how the economics of it would work. Don't get too caught up in me originally saying it was for older movies only - that was just me brainstorming. Maybe a movie like Deadpool would be included, but it wouldn't hit home video for more than a year after theatrical to try and make more money on that end of it.

[Fiffy]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Yes, but Netflix etc.. Are simply not solutions for movie lovers. They are more tv related. Also, the same problems (buying or renting) apply for the U.K even when renting. We still need a decent storefront that offers HQ HD and 5.1 surround at least. We have loads but none are Ultraviolet.

Why does it matter for rentals whether a service is UV or not?

Generally, rental and EST markets behave very differently. When you buy movies, you become invested in the ecosystem. This is one reason why the early starter (iTunes) still has a dominating market position. Renters, on the other hand, have no loyalty and can switch any time.

[master gandhi]

Originally Posted by Cranston37

I agree with that, but I also left open the possibility of my Apple Movies including the newest releases. It all depends on how the economics of it would work. Don't get too caught up in me originally saying it was for older movies only - that was just me brainstorming. Maybe a movie like Deadpool would be included, but it wouldn't hit home video for more than a year after theatrical to try and make more money on that end of it.

If it takes a year or more to be available at home, it's no longer a new release IMO. That would be like waiting until now to see Mad Max Fury Road or Avengers Age of Ultron. No thanks. That's so 2015. Heh

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Fiffy

Why does it matter for rentals whether a service is UV or not?

Generally, rental and EST markets behave very differently. When you buy movies, you become invested in the ecosystem. This is one reason why the early starter (iTunes) still has a dominating market position. Renters, on the other hand, have no loyalty and can switch any time.

I was presuming that UV would still want to control the market rather than let iTunes, Google dominate rental markets. Don't know how they would do that though!

[ArmyOfDarknessAW]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

I was presuming that UV would still want to control the market rather than let iTunes, Google dominate rental markets. Don't know how they would do that though!

UV wouldn't control anything. Services like Cinemanow and VUDU use UV, but they are in competition with each other along with everyone else. All the UV providers don't get lumped into one. UV is just something on the back end of these services allowing your movies to transfer.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by ArmyOfDarknessAW

UV wouldn't control anything. Services like Cinemanow and VUDU use UV, but they are in competition with each other along with everyone else. All the UV providers don't get lumped into one. UV is just something on the back end of these services allowing your movies to transfer.

Fair enough

It's really confusing. I was even reading that when buying a Fox disc you can redeem with ITunes, Google play etc.. Neither are UV.

Also, Google play doesn't have apps for playback on a tv except Chromecast. It really is a mess. A friend was telling me that he uses UV rarely and some of the titles can be cast and others not!

[Krizzle1]

Yup definitely find UV confusing with all these companies/services like Flixster, VUDU, CinemaNow, Fandango and the rest of them. Dont get me started on the thing with credits.

Thats why im glad I have my collection with iTunes, pretty simple and straight-forward

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Krizzle1

Yup definitely find UV confusing with all these companies/services like Flixster, VUDU, CinemaNow, Fandango and the rest of them. Dont get me started on the thing with credits.

Thats why im glad I have my collection with iTunes, pretty simple and straight-forward

Bluray even more so!

[PCFan]

Originally Posted by Krizzle1

Yup definitely find UV confusing with all these companies/services like Flixster, VUDU, CinemaNow, Fandango and the rest of them. Dont get me started on the thing with credits.

Thats why im glad I have my collection with iTunes, pretty simple and straight-forward

What am I going to do if I have almost 450 movies in my UV account but only 80 movies in my iTunes account but I prefer iTunes? I'm just so invested into UV because more codes are available in UV than iTunes and UV is what I used when I started out digitally. I also prefer to have my digital movies in one library, my Vudu library.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by PCFan

What am I going to do if I have almost 450 movies in my UV account but only 80 movies in my iTunes account but I prefer iTunes? I'm just so invested into UV because more codes are available in UV than iTunes and UV is what I used when I started out digitally. I also prefer to have my digital movies in one library, my Vudu library.

Buy the ITunes version? If you prefer iTunes surely? Or is it about the cheap codes because that won't last forever.

[Mr Kite]

Originally Posted by PCFan

What am I going to do if I have almost 450 movies in my UV account but only 80 movies in my iTunes account but I prefer iTunes? I'm just so invested into UV because more codes are available in UV than iTunes and UV is what I used when I started out digitally. I also prefer to have my digital movies in one library, my Vudu library.

Buy the bloody Blu Ray.