Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

1.  

   buying out a rival

   

   data64, Nov 11th, 2004 @ 8:20am

   
   

   They are just interested in the customer base, and not the stores for the most part.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

2.  

   Hol and BB

   

   incognito, Nov 11th, 2004 @ 8:30am

   
   

   So I wonder what the chances are that the FTC will deny it this time.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

3.  

   I suppose

   

   Mike(no, not that mike), Nov 11th, 2004 @ 9:17am

   
   

   Well before hollywood video came along Blockbuster really kinda stuck it to their customers. I don't know if any of you remember the higher prices for less days and non-nogotiable late fees. When hollywood came along blockbuster actually had to start competing. I hope they stay seperate, not that I rent movies very often but I still don't like getting robbed when I do.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

4.  

   growth through elimination

   

   RJD, Nov 11th, 2004 @ 11:40am

   
   

   Buy the stores; collect the customers; sale the stores (assuming they aren't leased) there by making a profit on the buy out. Hollywood Movie stores aren't the competition anymore; it's Netflix and the vending machines that are starting to pop up. So you buy customers. Not an uncommon business practice particularly when the market is saturated and the opportunities for organic growth are little and none.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

5.  

   Don't believe the synergy BS

   

   Nate, Nov 11th, 2004 @ 1:15pm

   
   

   The point of buyouts is not to merge the two companies but to shut down competitors.
   Can this possibly make it through anti-trust? Blockbuster is practically a monopoly with Hollywood its only token competition.
   I am sure they will invoke NetFlix and pay-per-view to try to make the case that they are not a monopoly.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

6.  

   Re: Don't believe the synergy BS

   

   Anonymous Coward, Nov 12th, 2004 @ 7:20am

   
   

   Actually, the video rental industry is still fairly fragmented with lots of "mom and pop" stores.
   
   Blockbuster is definitely the largest corporate player, and there probably isn't a lot of mom and pops in large portions of suburbia so it is a defacto monopoly for a lot of people, but from a U.S.-wide industry standpoint they aren't even close to being a monopoly.
   
   There are two mom and pops as close to my house as there is a Blockbuster and a Hollywood, but I use Netflix, so I really don't care.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

7.  

   No Subject Given

   

   Anonymous Coward, Nov 15th, 2004 @ 7:20pm

   
   

   I think Blockbuster should try to buy Hollywood and take out all the competion.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

8.  

   Re: I suppose

   

   Kevin, Nov 17th, 2004 @ 11:33am

   
   

   In utah Blockbuster stores have a sick way of entertaining themselves. If you are late on a video return, they imediatly send it to a collections agency, followed by a string of harrasing letters from that agency. Hollywood is people oriented and has no problem with you paying the late fee on your next visit.
   I figure it this way. If you rent a video, you go past the return date. You might as well keep it for another week, they are going to charge you for the week anyway. In the mean time I don't need my $4.50 late fee turned over to a collection agency. If Blockbuster buys Hollywood. I will find somewhere els to rent videow.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

Add Your Comment