Inside Redbox is the #1 "Unofficial" Redbox Online Community for Redbox Codes, News and more. Inside Redbox is not affiliated with Redbox Automated Retail, LLC.

In his comments during his company’s Q3 earnings call, Warner CEO Jeff Bewkes said Warner will be launching premium VOD titles in HD by the summer of 2011. Bewkes also echoed recent comments from Warner Home Video president Ron Sanders, saying that current 28-day delay windows with Redbox and Netflix may be lengthened in the near future.

Under the terms of the upcoming premium VOD service, users will pay around $30 per title to view films on or shortly after their theatrical releases. The exact length of the window between the theatrical and VOD release of titles is still being discussed, according to Bewkes.

Discussing the new release delay windows Warner currently has in place with Redbox and Netflix, Bewkes said that his company wasn’t “religious” about the 28-day windows, and that those time frames are under constant “scrutiny.”

Do you think Hollywood is overestimating the number of consumers who are willing to shell out to get early VOD access to major movies? Will you participate in this service when it launches? Hit the comments and let us know.

(via Variety)

25 Responses to “Warner CEO: Premium VOD Movies on Their Way”

  1. Member [Join Now]
    mkiker2089

    This proves that Warner is out of touch with consumers. If I don’t pay 8 dollars to see it in the theatre I won’t pay 30 to see it on my TV.

    They are looking at movies like eggs. You have to buy them early so they’ll taste the best. Unfortunately it doesn’t work that way.

  2. Visitor [Join Now]
    1st timer [visitor]

    Say goodbye to shaky, hand-held camera torrents and hello to HD/5.1DD torrents!

  3. Member [Join Now]
    s142424

    The only way I would do this is if there were several of us who would all chip in a couple of bucks. This is going to fail.

    • Administrator
      Michael [administrator]

      You say it will fail, but you have really hit the exact reason why it could succeed.

      I have a home theater, and it would be infinitely better to get a bunch of my friends together to watch the movie in my home and split the costs then it would be to go to a movie theater, where I have pay to ridiculous prices for snacks, have the inconvenience of possibly crowded theaters and bad seats, loud people, etc…

      Not to mention the convenience of people with larger families (I have 4 kids) – it is just a lot easier to watch something at home then to try and get everyone to the movie theater. And, with a family size of 6, it is also cheaper.

      The theaters are the ones who are going to hate this idea, but for me, it may actually get me to catch that new movie I am interested in when it comes out instead of waiting for it to come to DVD.

      • Visitor [Join Now]
        firstlawofnature [visitor]

        You can have the friends over and do this already with VOD for $5 but do you? If it looks, smells and feels like VOD with a $30 tag it wil be a tiny market.

        • Administrator
          Michael [administrator]

          Right now, the $5 VOD is the same time as a DVD release, and sometimes later. I mean, I can do it for $1 with a DVD from Redbox, too.

          The interest here comes from seeing it when it is first released to the theaters and the buzz is high. Redbox users are likely not the market for this service, since for the most part they (we) are looking for low price and value, not being first to see something.

          You are right, though, the market it not big right now, and I don’t know if it will get a lot bigger anytime soon, if ever. But, it does fill an interesting niche, allowing some to stay home and check out the latest movies with less hassle.

          Again, though, movie theaters are going to hate this, so I don’t know if we are going to see popular, highly anticipated movies like “Harry Potter” coming to VOD on release day ever. They are looking to create another window here, and more power to them if they can succeed in increasing their revenues without really any additional costs.

          • Member [Join Now]
            mkiker2089

            I just don’t see it really happening though. Sure in a one off situation it may seem like a good idea, but how often will it happen in reality. Perhaps a group of girls to see the next New Moon or something but for most releases it will just seem like a rip off.

            For the record Amazon has been testing this for a while and they’ve pretty much abandoned it. They even had a few BEFORE the theatres if I recall. Even then it was 30 bucks. To ask the same of something that is within a few weeks of hitting the redbox for a dollar is just not going to fly.

  4. Visitor [Join Now]
    Jamie [visitor]

    Hilarious. $30 to watch a movie? The people that run these movie companies must be certifiably insane. They’re going ot kill their business much like the record executives did back when mp3s and Napster came along. if they think people will pay $30 to watch a movie I got some nice swamp land to sell them.

    • Member [Join Now]
      seagreen

      that’s exactly what i was going to say. INSANE! you can watch movies that are in the theater now on amazon and it isn’t thirty dollars…and i still won’t pay that much. i do agree with others, the only way i would ever consider it would be if several friends chipped in. but that would be a once in a great while kind of thing. watching movies is an activity that could even be considered a hobby. who will shell out that kind of money on a regular basis?

  5. Visitor [Join Now]
    tee [visitor]

    It’s not for the masses, however if several people want to get together and in the comfort of their living room and view a first run movie on their high end equipment it’s no more expensive than going to the show. You can eat, smoke, recline, etc. and you don’t have to blow $5 – $10 on gas to get to the show. Why would this be a problem for anybody, so you don’t personally want it maybe a very small percentage will want it, and that could translate to millions for the studio’s. If there is a way for those corporations to be more profitable in this economy, good for them for thinking outside the box.

    • Visitor [Join Now]
      Jamie [visitor]

      Exactly it’s not for the masses so how can you make money on it? It’s an extremely niche audience

      • Visitor [Join Now]
        tee [visitor]

        Assume there are 30 million plus cable/satellite subscribers, if 1/10th of 1% use this that’s another $900k per movie. If the studio put’s out 10 a year that’s 10 mil a year, not bad. Of course this is a shot in the dark, but you see how a very small % makes a difference.

        • Visitor [Join Now]
          tee [visitor]

          In no way am I saying this will work, but I think every business has to maximize their income in this economy, and I think it’s worth a try.

        • Visitor [Join Now]
          firstlawofnature [visitor]

          Some of that will come out of theatrical so the net gain will be even less so sure try it but it won’t move the needle at all.

          • Member [Join Now]
            mkiker2089

            What doesn’t come out of theatrical will come out of BR sales and rental. You’d have to REALLY love a movie to see it in the theatre, pay 30 bucks to see it streamed, and pay another 30 to buy the BR.

            It’s a no win situation.

  6. Visitor [Join Now]
    Rob Hood [visitor]

    I wouldn’t pay $30 a month for unlimited contents! These guys are idiots!

  7. Member [Join Now]
    Alan Smithee [8traxrule]

    I’m surprised anyone still goes to theaters with prices reaching the $10 level. I love movies, but that’s simply too much to see a movie one time (especially with the small screens and overall lousy atmosphere of most theaters these days!)

  8. Member [Join Now]
    s142424

    I see this going into the same category as pay-per-view. People will pay $30 for a big boxing match or wrestling show but not for some movie.

  9. Member [Join Now]
    alans613

    What a bunch of morons! $30 for a movie? Give me a friggin’ break!

  10. Visitor [Join Now]
    Mike [visitor]

    If I really wanted to see a movie again I’d see it in the theater. Yeah that might work if ya had 6 or 7 people, but I’d rather wait and rent it for a buck. Insane and greedy.

  11. Visitor [Join Now]
    Frank Huber [visitor]

    I didn’t pay $4 for recent movies at Blockbuster. I don’t pay DirecTV $6 for PPV movies. I certainly wouldn’t pay $8, let alone $30! Last year’s movies are good enough for me and my family.

    Only an idiot (or a child) simply has to watch a movie as soon as it comes out.

  12. Member [Join Now]
    Joe LittleBear [joe-littlebear]

    28 days AND more ??? Forgetaboutit !!! I’ll get mine from another source…If I have to wait that long….I can wait a couple of months and get them off HBO and the movie channels… Warner is thinking that absence makes the heart grow fomndr…and I’m thinking “Out of sight….out of mind..,” After doing without for so long….I reach a point where I don’t care anymore…

  13. Member [Join Now]
    jgarozzo

    I see a very small market. I love movies but I don’t like the theater. They still use celluloid film for crying out load. Even the digital pics I’ve seen aren’t that good when compared to my home theater. I have no problem waiting for redbox, netflix, or lastly VOD.