|
Fox pulls new DVDs from Redbox kiosks
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 8 August, 2009
20th Century Fox has decided to follow Universal Studios by forcing distributors to stop selling new DVDs to Redbox, which operates low-cost DVD rental kiosks. Fox does not have any distribution deal with Redbox, instead DVD distributors such as Ingram and VPD, who do have deals with Fox and other studios, provide the rental service with DVDs. Fox believes the low costs undervalue the product ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
8. August 2009 @ 09:58 |
Link to this message
|
|
I guess that's the end of redbox...
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
|
devingman
Newbie
|
8. August 2009 @ 12:45 |
Link to this message
|
|
Movie Studios making bad decisions in the same way music studios do... F*ck Fox, they should pay me $1 a day for some of the shit they pass off as movies these days
|
|
varnull
Suspended permanently
|
8. August 2009 @ 12:49 |
Link to this message
|
Why don't they just go into wallyworld and buy the damn disks and shove them in their kiosks? Should be easy enough to stick them in a printer and print "rental version" on them.. or is that too simple and not supporting the greed cartel culture?
ppw ... your friendly 21st century fox XD
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 8. August 2009 @ 12:49
|
|
bomber991
Member
|
8. August 2009 @ 13:02 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by varnull:
Why don't they just go into wallyworld and buy the damn disks and shove them in their kiosks? Should be easy enough to stick them in a printer and print "rental version" on them.. or is that too simple and not supporting the greed cartel culture?
ppw ... your friendly 21st century fox XD
I could be wrong, but I think it's illegal to do that. There's some kind of licensing agreement when you buy a dvd at the store that you won't rent it out to others.
I guess it's the same as having a movie theater and buying dvd's from walmart as the source of the movies you sell tickets to. Yeah, movies in theaters are never on dvd's at the same time except for at the dollar theaters.
|
|
jony218
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
9. August 2009 @ 00:32 |
Link to this message
|
|
it looks like the people who use to "pay" to rent at the kiosk will probably be downloading for free. They will get there movies one way or the other. Greed is costing the movie companys a few customers.
|
Junior Member
|
9. August 2009 @ 01:55 |
Link to this message
|
|
If Redbox goes down then I go with them. I would much rather pay $1.00 to rent a movie that is potentially crap than go to a Blockbuster or Hollywood Video and pay $5.00. I'll just boycott the whole industry if this happens. Hollywood is trying to stifle competition which I wont support.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
9. August 2009 @ 16:33 |
Link to this message
|
|
I think they are viaing for more money from the deal...
|
|
condorito
Newbie
|
9. August 2009 @ 17:15 |
Link to this message
|
|
That's price fixing.
|
AfterDawn Addict
4 product reviews
|
9. August 2009 @ 17:24 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by condorito:
That's price fixing.
Not really big studios make deals with nation wide rental chains, they are going to ahve to cough up more cash for the privilege of getting new fox,ect titles.
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
10. August 2009 @ 05:28 |
Link to this message
|
|
I wouldn't miss redbox...they stock themselves with terrible movies like the ones that fox wants to remove. Last time I was at the grocery store I looked through their selection and found only one movie I wanted to see at all (had already gotten it from netflix anyway). The time before that, there was not one movie that I would have rented for free! On top of that, I can watch netflix movies online (no going to store, no returns, no waiting, and a much larger selection).
|
|
maryjayne
Junior Member
|
10. August 2009 @ 15:04 |
Link to this message
|
I used to use Redbox practially weekly. The new releases for the last 6+ months have been very poor. The few worth renting I was able to get from Netflix the day it was released.
Fox pulling the plug on Redbox is not going to hurt the fact that newly released movies are not really worth the money to rent let alone buy.
I havent set foot in a brick and mortar rental store in over a year. With everything going Blu-ray and having no interest in upgrading to blu-ray, going out to rent is not worth the time. Very hard to find anything worth renting at a real rental store anymore.
I'll stick with Netflix for my rental needs.
|
|
TSRSteve
Newbie
|
10. August 2009 @ 15:09 |
Link to this message
|
Those redbox machines have dvd's in them? I thought they contained meth or marlboro cigarettes. All the ones I've ever seen are about 5 pieces of white trash deep at walmart at any given moment.
All joking aside, how is this any different than online services such as netflix or blockbuster? Blockbuster costs me about $17 a month and I easily get 17 movies a month from them.
*edit*
You know they'd love to go back to the old vhs days when new movies were around $80-$100 each. I remember being a kid and seeing those price lists for new movies. Those days are over hollywood.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 10. August 2009 @ 15:49
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
11. August 2009 @ 05:58 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by TSRSteve:
All joking aside, how is this any different than online services such as netflix or blockbuster? Blockbuster costs me about $17 a month and I easily get 17 movies a month from them.
Lots of differences:
1.) Online has far more titles, easier selection, and "watch now" feature (at least netflix does, not sure about blockbuster).
2.) Online has full director's cuts and extended releases (Redbox usualy only has one version, typicaly the rated version. Blockbuster is owned by christian extremists, so I would suspect their movies are at least as censored (if not more) than RedBox's movies.
3.) Online services don't require two trips to the store per movie. (one to pickup, another to drop off). I can get movies just by walking to the mail box, or even faster by watching online.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
TSRSteve
Newbie
|
11. August 2009 @ 11:35 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Originally posted by TSRSteve:
All joking aside, how is this any different than online services such as netflix or blockbuster? Blockbuster costs me about $17 a month and I easily get 17 movies a month from them.
Lots of differences:
1.) Online has far more titles, easier selection, and "watch now" feature (at least netflix does, not sure about blockbuster).
2.) Online has full director's cuts and extended releases (Redbox usualy only has one version, typicaly the rated version. Blockbuster is owned by christian extremists, so I would suspect their movies are at least as censored (if not more) than RedBox's movies.
3.) Online services don't require two trips to the store per movie. (one to pickup, another to drop off). I can get movies just by walking to the mail box, or even faster by watching online.
I understand the benefits to the consumer for online services. That's not my point.
I'm talking in regards to hollywood and the "undervalue the product" statement. What does it matter to them (fox and the other studios) especially since the movies are bought and paid for. In essence it's the same thing, if I rent 17 movies online each month and pay $17 a month subscription or I make 17 trips to the redbox. They're just pissed somebody had a great idea and now they want their cut of the money.
I don't use redbox, but a lot of people do and I can see why. But like you said why make two trips when you don't need to?
|
