RSS
If Hollywood Is Upset About $1/Day Movie Rentals, How Do They Feel About 6 Cents Per Hour Rentals?
from the it'll-destroy-Hollywood-even-more! dept
So Hollywood is all concerned that Redbox DVD rentals at $1 per day are going to do serious damage to the Hollywood economy -- except, of course, that the actual numbers say exactly the opposite. Still, if they're all freaked out (and some are in court) over $1/day rentals, you'd have to imagine they're not particularly pleased about rentals that could be even cheaper. Rose M. Welch points us to the news of a new DVD rental kiosk operation, called Big Box DVD, which is moving forward with a business model of charging a whopping 6 cents per hour for a new release (4 cents per hour for an older release). For folks willing to just rent the video, take it home, watch it and return it, that can be quite cheap. Of course, if you keep it for a full 24 hours, it'll be a bit over a dollar. How long until we hear about how much damage this is doing to Hollywood?
46 Comments | Leave a Comment..
- People Rushing To Give Hundreds Of Thousands Of Dollars In Just Hours For Brand New Adventure Game
- Another Answer To Dealing With Piracy: Keep Creating Better Tools & Business Models
- Publishing 2.0: Content Is Marketing, Profits Come From The Packaging
- Redbox Won't Cave To Warner Bros. Demands; Will Buy WB DVDs From Other Sources And Rent Them
- WB, HBO Continue To Suck At Economics; New Policies Encourage Piracy
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
costs review
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
;)
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
No? Nobody thinks so?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Some will of course, but given how hard a time other movie rental places have making enough money to satisfy themselves, this business won't make enough off the the average customer to pay for their costs, much less to generate any profit. It's going to burn through any venture capital funds and close in the blink of an eye.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Interesting thought ....
A Sys admin at local university said to me file sharing is down 95% but our encrypted traffic is up the same amount ... I wondered why? ... local encrypted VPNs on campus for movie and music sharing ...
yet another RIAA induced unintended consequence to watch happen large scale ... GRIN
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Double Standards are the norm...
Sounds like $1 devalues movies only if your not paying the studios.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
To: except, of course, the numbers actually say exactly the opposite.
Amirite?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Its free fucking MONEY
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
I'd like to see this shit happening in any other market. Oh you wanna sell on that necklace I sold you? Well you'd best be able to find someone who'll pay more than £1 Trillion for it, because I'll sue you if you try to sell it for any less!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
How long will they complain?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
How long will they complain?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: costs review
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
OMFG!!! This is going to completely destroy and obliterate all of Hollywood and lay waste to every single actor, actress, director, producer, executive producer, hair stylist, key grip, best man grip, dolly grip, special effects guy, animator, caterer, wardrobe maker, carpenter, lead carpenter, sculptor, lead coordinator, coordinator, apprentice coordinator, lead painter, painters, standby painters, apprentice painters, apprentice coordinator, storyboard artist, art department lead and staff, graphics coordinator, illustrator, payroll accountant, second accountant, lead accountant, accounting assistant, production accountant, key grip accountant, carpenter accountant, caterer accountant, production office lead, production office staff, production office assistants, production office assistant apprentices, production office assistants' accountants, dolly grip accountant, accountants' accountants, accountants' assistance accountants, accountants' assistances' apprentice accountants, pre-recording mixers, recording mixers, re-recording mixers, grip mixers, concrete mixers, prop mixers, mixers' accountants, sound design, key make-up artists, assistant costume designers (and of course their acocuntants also), vehicle supervisors, vehicle drivers, security guards, stand-ins, and pretty much everyone else with their assistants, apprentices and accountants, and any other title, position, representative and individual involved in the movies.
All of this takes money!!! How can they possibly pay all those people with 6 cents an hour!!! That's sacreligious, communistic wages that are so far under any possible pay wage that the actors couldn't possibly afford their four 125,000 sqft. manions, fifteen Bentleys, 350 flat screen 96" plasma televisions, 892 custom purses, 2,000 suits, and custom flooring made of marble only found in the deepest recesses of the Himalayan mountains that can only be dug out by 12 year old children and a goat with a gimp horn.
HOW CAN THEY POSSIBLY AFFORD TO LIVE ON THAT???
>>
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: costs review
30 days x 24 hrs = 720 hours
300 channels provided * 720 hours = 216,000 hours of potential content
216,000 hrs * .06 = $12,960 a month.
In reality I am paying about $0.0007 an hour for available content.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: costs review
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: costs review
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
then it makes it look like the movie studios hate poor people (which i am sure they do, it just isn't politically correct)
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: costs review
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: costs review
Nobody is making you drop it back after 24 hours, you could drop it back after 110 min (counting a short trip to and from the kiosk) and pay 12c.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Pay-per-view for 6p an hour of streaming + ads... their margins will probably larger than physical stores that way.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: costs review
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: costs review
However, they are not going to reconnect my cable every time I feel like turning on the telly.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: costs review
When I subscribe to cable and have 300 channels, I have 300 hours of content available to me per hour. I have the ability to jump around and consume bits and pieces of that content however I want. Obviously I can't watch it all, but it is available.
If I rent a movie by the hour, say .06, I am paying for the availability of the content. Under that premise, taking my $150 a month for TV, 300 channels available 24/7, my cost per hour is fractional and considerably less than .06 cents.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: costs review
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Two-Hour Reserve, Where the Film Studios Will Go.
Hollywood is not going to find a painless marketing formula which allows business as usual. It will have to get its costs down. Hollywood will go to Bollywood, that is, it will move its operations to India. As "Anonymous Coward" (Dec 11th, 2009 @ 10:19am) notes, the vast majority of the people involved in making a movie do not appear on screen. They are cameramen, gaffers, grips, soundmen, lighting men, carpenters, electricians, costumers, make-up specialists, film editors, and a hundred other specialized trades. However, this means that it does not matter if they are Indians. The Indian film industry is one of the most vibrant ones in the world, producing huge numbers of films in multiple languages, and distributing them to Indian audiences who are film junkies in ways which American have not been since the 1930's. At some point, American directors and leading actors will tap into this system.
Now, as for the extras, walk-ons, etc., the largest category of actor, such people have traditionally moved to Los Angeles, registered with casting agencies, and then found themselves ordinary jobs to live on while waiting for screen calls. They have worked as waiters or cab drivers, or the like, dead-end jobs where the employer expects a high turn-over, and doesn't particularly mind people leaving without warning or notice, and will hire someone on a day's notice without references. Allowing for precariousness of employment, bit-part actors have been paid approximately minimum-wage for the net time lost from their table-waiting jobs. Of course, an expatriate cannot do that kind of thing in India, but living expenses are much lower, and someone who is stage-struck can work in the United States for a couple of years, in the kind of job for which one does need references, eg. teaching school, and save up enough money to live in India for a couple of years. Indian producers and directors will discover that they can make movies for the American market, working with Americans who are not affiliated with the American film industry.
Once an industry moves offshore, its political influence diminishes. It is no longer a source of steady high-wage employment for Americans. The political base of the movie industry is someone like a cameraman. The cameramen, etc. are not like actors-- they are craftsmen. Within reason, a good cameraman can film any kind of movie, which means that the cameraman can work steadily at high wages, filming whatever is being filmed. He votes for whoever favors the film industry, just the way autoworkers used to vote for whoever favored the automobile industry. As the movie industry moves offshore to cut costs, it will leave the union cameraman behind. It will no longer have its own congresscritters like Howard Berman or Mary Bono.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Costs depend on number of views
So I think their business model depends on hoping people DON'T return it after 4 hrs. If there is a business model...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Credit Cards
And no one has brought up the security issue. For example, I rent a movie and never bring it back, how do they get their money? Do they take the credit card info to start with?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Fees for DVDs
Even so, if they find a way to stream it to my home for six cents per hour, perhaps pay per view will start to make some sense. Right now, we don't do pay per view (and movies? My wife sometimes does the Netflix thing, or finds something worthwhile on TV, but we recently turned down a free current movie.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Add Your Comment