Comments on: BREAKING NEWS: Warner Bros doing it different, still hurting Redbox

By: uByte

uByte — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 21:24:35 +0000

Its all about money! The same thing happened to the music industry almost 10 years ago with apple, Kazaa, and napster. They get scared over loosing money and react. Things change, and they should change there business model when it does and not punish the early adopters which set the trend for the rest of the world. Crap like this makes me not want to even want to watch movies anymore (now I have reacted see how it works).

By: DVD Sales Continue to Drop, Rentals on the Rise | Inside Redbox

DVD Sales Continue to Drop, Rentals on the Rise | Inside Redbox — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 18:10:00 +0000

[...] as we all know, it’s not just declining sales that have the movie studios playing nasty with Redbox. Consumers are demonstrating their preference for cheaper, more convenient rentals more [...]

By: NickJensen

NickJensen — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 20:42:31 +0000

Could it be that Redbox is being targeted because the number of rentals of each individual kiosk DVD disk is much higher than the number of rentals for each NetFlix or Blockbuster DVD disk. So the total disks sold to the rental market is droping for a given number of viewings. Of course, this neglects the fact that thousands of people wouldn’t choose to rent so many disks if the price was higher or the conveinence was lower.

So even though a studio charges the same price to RedBox for the DVD, because each DVD is seen by so many more people, the Studios may believe that revenue generated for the number of viewings has been seriously reduced by the Redbox business model.

By: get2steppin

get2steppin — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 21:54:59 +0000

Will this be 2.00 for the first nite and then $1.00 for additional nites? I drive too far to get a movie for a dollar . Just to get 1 movie not worth it. Now would be the time for redbox to put the not so popular movies in the box. Give the movies that don’t get to the show a chance. they would be glad to sell thier movies for rental. The show movies are not all that good anyway. Let the big shots suffer awhile. They will think twice when they are’nt getting anything.

By: monkey

monkey — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 11:18:11 +0000

Who do you think is behind all this? Blockbuster!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Blockbuster is owned by Hollywood studios. Redbox steals all its customers and its money. Some people just can’t wait 28 days for a new release. Most likely redbox will lose some customers back to blockbuster. As for me, I am a one-dollar-a-movie man. I will wait.

By: Darrell

Darrell — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 07:37:03 +0000

Good points, Mark. I can see the business sense in delaying rental supply 30 days after release to increase sales. Don’t agree with the ethics, but I understand their position. I don’t understand why the three major studios are just targeting redbox and not blockbuster or netflix. That seems unfair, greedy and not entirely legal (or ethical).

It won’t affect my rental pattern, I will choose to wait rather than pay blockbuster’s higher fees, but why not delay products to the other two major rental outlets as well? It just doesn’t make sense and will result in loss of revenue in the long run.

And as a naturally born capitalist I find this type of manipulation to be repulsive. I believe in the free market system, that the customer is always right, and that lowering costs by increasing sales volume. This is a violation of our free market system, tinkering with the markets. This manipulation of the market is a blatant antitrust violation when you have 3 major studios controlling over 50% of the market involved in it. We should all write out Washington representatives urging the Department of Justice to act on this.

By: Pam

Pam — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 01:46:45 +0000

That is a shame that you can’t come up off of an extra buck or two. Condsidering that movies now cost $10 perticket, it is still a great deal!!! You are only ruining your own entertaining.

By: Pam

Pam — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 01:43:33 +0000

rb — you are so correct! What an alternative for Redbox!! You sure you don’t work for them? They should hire you!!

By: FalconFour

FalconFour — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 00:52:31 +0000

Well, whatever it is, I know that I don’t care when a DVD actually comes out. I only ever know a movie is out on DVD when the poster on the Redbox kiosk says so, and when I see it on the screen. The time between theater and DVD varies so wildly, I often forget about a movie until it comes out on DVD and I think “Oh, hey, I wanted to see that but I never had the [money/time] to see it in theaters”. Of course, if there’s too long a delay between it being in theaters, and being on DVD, I just download the thing (and the studio makes nothing).

At no point along the way do I even consider buying the DVD. I never will. I have no need to keep a copy of a movie in my tiny, packed apartment. So with that said, it’s plain flat idiotic that studios (I seriously keep writing out “stupid” in place of “studio” and have to backspace) have their DVD model centered around DVD sales instead of rentals. I’m all but certain that the majority of people believe the same thing: Rental is the only policy worth considering.

By: just me

just me — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 22:09:51 +0000

I’m with you, Omar! I rent from both RedBox and NetFlix. If I like the movie I buy it. Not allowing their movies to be rented in those venues for 4 weeks after general release is only going to direct my movie $$ to moves i AM able to see when they come out. Not a smart move.