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

[veritas]

Originally Posted by flyry

then you're not looking hard enough.

Severance and Pachinko were arguably the best shows of last year. and for All Mankind Season 3 was just as good. and black bird was great too. slow horses is cool too.

right now Silo is airing and it's good. Drops of God just finished. I enjoyed that one. Currently watching Platonic. it's okay, more of a background show but i like the actors. Swagger is kind of corny , but i liked it being a basketball junkie and Season 2 airs in a few weeks.

killers of the flower moon by scorcese and napoleon by ridley scott release later this year

apple tv has 180 titles to watch while Netflix has around 6000 and Disney has around 1200. So ya I can look though 180 titles in list format in about 3 mins pretty easily. I could not do that on basically any other streaming service.

Even if every single thing on apple tv was a Wednesday / squid game level hit they would still not have as many hits as other streaming services because they have so few shows.

If they broke down listings by genre then they would have a bunch of categories that are like zero to 10 shows each.

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by veritas

apple tv has 180 titles to watch while Netflix has around 6000 and Disney has around 1200.

IMHO, a good portion of TV on Netflix is just filler fluff. Can not tell you how many titles we have started and dumped because it was made on the cheap using handheld cameras. Titles like Wednesday are the exception.

If you are into the natural world and science then ATV+ has some of the best shows around. The World at Night in Color is unlike anything we have ever watched.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by bhampton

Why things are removed from Streaming services...

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/comp...ss/ar-AA1bQ71d

"As media companies have been desperate to make streaming profitable, the businesses have been turning more and more to new advertising strategies, from cheaper, ad-supported offerings to putting content on FAST channels.

"My main takeaway is that nothing is guaranteed to remain on streaming forever. You are paying for a convenient way to watch content, but it is not a replacement for buying a movie or TV show on home video," Cartelli said."

Streaming is here today gone tomorrow.
Blu Rays are Forever.

I don't get why anyone would assume content would be permanent on subscription streaming sites. I think for mos5tr it is easy to see a shelf (redbox kiosk) can only hold so many physical copies so if you want new stuff you have to remove some older stuff unless you keep on increasing space which hhas a cost. But I don't get why it is so hard for people to realize that there is a cost with having films on a server just like a shelf or kiosk and so you can either choose to greatly increase costs or keep costs in check and remove content to make room for new one.

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

I don't get why anyone would assume content would be permanent on subscription streaming sites. I think for mos5tr it is easy to see a shelf (redbox kiosk) can only hold so many physical copies so if you want new stuff you have to remove some older stuff unless you keep on increasing space which hhas a cost. But I don't get why it is so hard for people to realize that there is a cost with having films on a server just like a shelf or kiosk and so you can either choose to greatly increase costs or keep costs in check and remove content to make room for new one.

From the link above:

Removing content from streaming platforms is a way for streamers to avoid residual payments and licensing fees.

[cheez avenger]

Removing content from streaming platforms is a way for streamers to avoid residual payments and licensing fees.

It's one of the reasons why the writer's strike is going on.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

From the link above:

Not sure of your point (since all you did was quote a tidbit from the article.

Are you assuming when I said

But I don't get why it is so hard for people to realize that there is a cost with having films on a server just like a shelf or kiosk and so you can either choose to greatly increase costs or keep costs in check and remove content to make room for new one.

that I meant HDD costs or something like that? yes they will eventually need to by more HDDs, but the bays will eventually also fill up and then they will need to buy more arrays and if you add more machines then you need to add more cooling and yes content is not free so they will need to pay for that as well. All those costs fit in the "cost with having films on a server"

or do you mean since they said "residual payments and licensing fees." that they are saying those must be the only two things that affect cost and storage arrays and everything else is free?

[Wendell R. Breland]

The streaming app and hardware CF as noted by a poster at AVS:

[Show spoiler]
The developers are just lazy. They don't care. Almost every service has at least one or more issues on at least one platform.

For example,

• Prime Video has HDR issues on all platforms.
• Prime Video for a while (and possibly still) doesn't offer Dolby Vision on Roku
• Prime Video only very recently offered frame rate matching on the Roku
• Netflix for weeks had 4K content labeled as 4k HDR except on Apple TV. This was just recently fixed
• Netflix continues to miss-label Sony content with Dolby Vision on all platforms
• Netflix only very recently offered frame rate matching on the Roku
• Netflix does not offer frame rate matching on some, if not all, Fire TV devices like the most recent Fire TV Cube.
• The original HBO Max app has no frame rate matching on Roku or Fire TV
• Disney+ offers automatic frame rate matching only to the Apple TV.
• Disney+ doesn't know how to play any content except 1080p or 4K HDR. It will not play HDR content in 1080p. In addition, Disney+ apparently doesn't know how to play 4K content unless it's in HDR. I assume this will have to be fixed before Hulu content is made available to Disney+ as quite a bit Hulu content is in 4k SDR. This content is already available on Disney+ outside of the US but it's downgraded to 1080p.
• Hulu doesn't have HDR on Google TV or Android TV.
• Hulu doesn't offer 5.1 audio to Google TV. And, even on the devices that it does offer 5.1 audio, it's hit or miss between episodes within a season. One episode will have it. The next won't.
• Hulu offers frame rate matching only to Apple TV
• Hulu lacks DV on Apple TV. It only offers HDR to Apple TV.
• Peacock has frame rate matching only on the Roku.
• Peacock lacks HDR of any kind on Google TV.
• Apple TV+ doesn't offer frame rate matching on any platform except the Apple TV

As you can see, these issues that I can think of off of my head, are hardly unique to the Apple TV.

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

Not sure of your point (since all you did was quote a tidbit from the article.

Are you assuming when I said



that I meant HDD costs or something like that? yes they will eventually need to by more HDDs, but the bays will eventually also fill up and then they will need to buy more arrays and if you add more machines then you need to add more cooling and yes content is not free so they will need to pay for that as well. All those costs fit in the "cost with having films on a server"

or do you mean since they said "residual payments and licensing fees." that they are saying those must be the only two things that affect cost and storage arrays and everything else is free?

Disney Incurs $1.5 Billion Content Write-Off Charge Following Recent Content Purge

Following Disney's unceremonious content purge across Hulu and Disney+ last month, the House of Mouse has officially confirmed in an SEC filing that it is taking a $1.5 billion impairment charge that it will be able to use as a tax write-off.

https://collider.com/disney-1-point-...content-purge/

There is nothing mentioned about server real estate being saved. That does not appear in any of the articles on the subject of Disney's content pull. Tax write off and saving residuals and license fees. Those are 2 main points.

But now you will defend to the death your point because having a discussion with you is like trying to nail JELL-O to the wall.

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

There is nothing mentioned about server real estate being saved.

Doubt seriously the pulled content is deleted from their servers, only access has changed. Most of us has no idea how contracts are written, they (any provider) could deem it to once again provide access. Most should remember Disney is famous for removing titles only to make them available at later dates.

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

Doubt seriously the pulled content is deleted from their servers, only access has changed. Most of us has no idea how contracts are written, they (any provider) could deem it to once again provide access. Most should remember Disney is famous for removing titles only to make them available at later dates.

Restricting access to content doesn't provide the desired write off.

Impairment Charges: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

https://www.investopedia.com/investi...rment-charges/

[veritas]

One thing that really needs to happan is if a title is written off a companies taxes then the movie or show should immediately enter the public domain. As it is currently a show being written off basically enters purgatory unavailable to be bought or sold by anybody (they can be recovered in theory but it’s not realistic).

[bhampton]

There was a thought that streaming would destroy physical media but it's looking more like streaming will simply destroy the film industry completely.

It's good news for people who like "reality" shows as they don't need screen writers.

Maybe it will all work out in time. I hope to cancel most or all of the streaming services soon. Disney and ATV are the most compelling for me but I would rather buy the content. I still buy Disney movies so I would likely cancel them first.

We will keep prime for the advantages in fast free shipping but Amazon refuses to send anything to me on release day now so I have stopped pre ordering there. Even Jaws 2 was set to be late as soon as it was announced for pre order.

It could all be a joke if it was funny.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by bhampton

There was a thought that streaming would destroy physical media but it's looking more like streaming will simply destroy the film industry completely.

It's good news for people who like "reality" shows as they don't need screen writers.

Maybe it will all work out in time. I hope to cancel most or all of the streaming services soon. Disney and ATV are the most compelling for me but I would rather buy the content. I still buy Disney movies so I would likely cancel them first.

We will keep prime for the advantages in fast free shipping but Amazon refuses to send anything to me on release day now so I have stopped pre ordering there. Even Jaws 2 was set to be late as soon as it was announced for pre order.

It could all be a joke if it was funny.

I think these things tend to sort themselves out over time, although I do think there will only be four streaming services left standing in the USA (our situation is different with broadcast/cable/sat).
I think it will be far fewer originals (like the present moment) and the big four dictating where are the creatives go. That goes for movies as well. For the record, I think the big four (let’s say, 5 years from now) will be Warner Media, Amazon, Disney/Star (Hulu in your cases) and Apple. I see Paramount+ folding eventually with their assets living on across the four majors I mentioned. Maybe even a merger.
Despite common sense telling me Netflix will still be around, my gut tells me they will be merged with one of the big four. I don’t see them surviving as a stand alone.

Movie wise, who knows but what I do know is that this weekend, theatrical was up 72% on last years weekend. It was also up 22% over 2019. Film will be fine.

Cable tv was meant to be dead 5 years ago and now it’s meant to be dead in 5 years from now. (It won’t) There are always folk who claim film is dead Brian. It’s been happening since WW2. I wouldn’t worry.

disc wise, I don’t regret a thing. I was so incredibly hyped for DVD and was reading about this new format for a long time before it hit the market. Disc collecting is a glorious thing, it’s given me 23 fantastic years including Blu and UHD. It’s still going and hopefully, we will reach 30 years of disc releases. Regardless, what a fantastic time.

I think people drink the kool aid and that has contributed to discs decline. Jumping on the digital bandwagon with a format that is not even close to making up for disc declines, it’s the ‘MP3 download’ of the film world. Collecting digital dust on digital devices.
People also gave up ownership for a monthly menu of films that are just not sustainable.

I argued this point for a good few years but some folk knew better. ‘Digital films are the future’ , etc..
Ummm, no, no they aren’t. The formats YOY gains are skinny single digits.

Film hitting streaming services after a few months (PVOD first) will be the common sense end game. Hopefully, that will still include discs also down the line.

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

I think people drink the kool aid and that has contributed to discs decline.

Agree with most of your points. The decline in Blu-ray sales is pretty easy to understand, box office power. Just not enough new tent poles to sustain big sales month after month. Look at your own top 25, very few titles from recent years.

Disc in general, saturation, collectors already have most of the titles they want. Another major factor, ownership, DVD created a unique experience in home entertainment which was buying content to own. LaserDisc and video cassette was available for sale for many years before DVD but not many ever purchased their content. With 120 mm video disc people starting buying and sales figures rose. Over time they bought all the titles they wanted, the disc market saturated and sales started and continues to decline. Add in ownership in general has declined.

If EST had really big numbers that would be a indicator people were moving away from disc ownership but that is not the case. Considering the number of EST capable devices vs disc devices EST sales are pretty pathetic.

[Wendell R. Breland]

Interested in winning a copy of the new Spears & Munsil 4K UHD HDR Benchmark Test Disc? If so then see my post here.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

Doubt seriously the pulled content is deleted from their servers, only access has changed. Most of us has no idea how contracts are written, they (any provider) could deem it to once again provide access. Most should remember Disney is famous for removing titles only to make them available at later dates.

Will Disney destroy any pulled content? no. Will it remain on streaming servers? No.

There is a huge cost difference between data on hot (easily available at any time) and cold ( need to do some work to get it back) storage.

A streaming service needs several grades of the content (good for people with sl9ow speeds, better for people with better speeds....) and each one of them on many machines (can't travel halfway across the world over too many hops). You don't need all that if the film is not streaming.

[Wendell R. Breland]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

Will Disney destroy any pulled content? no. Will it remain on streaming servers? No.

There is a huge cost difference between data on hot (easily available at any time) and cold ( need to do some work to get it back) storage.

A streaming service needs several grades of the content (good for people with sl9ow speeds, better for people with better speeds....) and each one of them on many machines (can't travel halfway across the world over too many hops). You don't need all that if the film is not streaming.

I don’t think any outsider knows what Disney will do with pulled content.

Some here will relate to the word “grade” as color grading in post. Streamers segment content files with different amounts of compression applied to the various segments. Referred to as “adaptive streaming”. If streaming was perfect there would be no need of adaptive streaming.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

There is nothing mentioned about server real estate being saved.

why would it?

https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives...s-20230526.htm

As previously announced, The Walt Disney Company (together with the subsidiaries through which its various businesses are actually conducted, the “Company”) is in the process of reviewing content, primarily on its direct-to-consumer (“DTC”) services, for alignment with a strategic change in approach to content curation and as a result is removing certain content from its platforms. On May 26, 2023, the Company removed certain produced content from its DTC services. As a result, the Company will record a $1.5 billion impairment charge in its fiscal third quarter financial statements to adjust the carrying value of these content assets to fair value.
The Company is continuing its review and currently anticipates additional produced content will be removed from its DTC and other platforms, largely during the remainder of its third fiscal quarter. As a result, the Company currently estimates it may incur further impairment charges of up to approximately $0.4 billion related to produced content. The Company does not expect any material cash expenditures in connection with the impairment charges related to produced content. In addition, the Company may terminate certain license agreements for the right to use content on its platforms, which would result in the removal of licensed content from its platforms and lead to impairment and/or contract termination charges as well as cash payments. The Company currently expects that any such charges and payments related to licensed content would be meaningfully less than the impairment charges related to produced content.

the filing is that they will spend 1.5B+ to lose content. There is nothing in it on what they will save because of the 1.5B+ spent, or where those savings will come from. Because they don't need to do a SEC filing for that part of the equation.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Wendell R. Breland

Agree with most of your points. The decline in Blu-ray sales is pretty easy to understand, box office power. Just not enough new tent poles to sustain big sales month after month. Look at your own top 25, very few titles from recent years.

Disc in general, saturation, collectors already have most of the titles they want. Another major factor, ownership, DVD created a unique experience in home entertainment which was buying content to own. LaserDisc and video cassette was available for sale for many years before DVD but not many ever purchased their content. With 120 mm video disc people starting buying and sales figures rose. Over time they bought all the titles they wanted, the disc market saturated and sales started and continues to decline. Add in ownership in general has declined.

If EST had really big numbers that would be a indicator people were moving away from disc ownership but that is not the case. Considering the number of EST capable devices vs disc devices EST sales are pretty pathetic.

Agreed. Although blockbusters are definitely picking up some pace in the last couple of months. But yeah, that needs to be relentless for disc to be stable like you say.
We have four major blockbusters at cinemas at the moment, I think it’s the most we have had since COVID.

I said years back, I will go down with the ship, and that’s what I will do. I’m hoping it reaches 2030 (think it will) even if it’s just special editions with all the bells and whistles. Streaming doesn’t hold the same excitement for me, so I will just sit it out and wait for films over the long term (that I don’t see theatrically) rather than feeling the need to pay PVOD prices. Quality and ownership are the drivers for me.
When that’s gone, I become just another typical punter. It will save me money,I guess that’s a minuscule positive.

The HT will still be reserved for my disc collection which I strongly believe will become far more vast over the next two years.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

Restricting access to content doesn't provide the desired write off.

Impairment Charges: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

https://www.investopedia.com/investi...rment-charges/

I like this part

Companies that have to write off billions of dollars due to the impairment have not made good investment decisions.