WTF? Where is [livejournal.com profile] xannoside when I need him!??

Aug. 5th, 2007 10:58 pm
trinityvixen: (thinking Mario)
[personal profile] trinityvixen
So, randomly watching a YouTube thing with Disney videos (and after playing Disney SceneIt with [livejournal.com profile] feiran) has left me wistful for the the animated movies I missed before they "went back into the vault"--things I used to love but didn't know to buy 5+ years ago because I wasn't addicted to DVDs then (how times have changed, mm?). Like The Lion King or Beauty and the Beast, which I so definitely would own and refuse to buy used for twice the price. I not only loathe the fact that this marketing scheme makes me panic about never getting movies or, at least, not picking them up fast enough that I don't miss them, but I just don't understand it.

Google threw up this answer--the Disney marketing plan as understood by The Wall Street Journal, so I would assume they've got it right (whether they comprehend why this is the way it is any better than I, I doubt it, but at least I can trust they've got the mechanics right):
Under the new plan, Disney would continue to retire classics such as The Lion King for about a decade, in hopes that demand will build for future re-releases. But second-tier titles such as The Fox and the Hound and The Aristocats would be on shelves constantly, giving the company a more reliable stream of video sales.

Now, I'm not an MBA. I don't do business plans for a living. This seems incredibly stupid to my layperson's eye. What sense does it make to shove the titles that you know people love back into the vault and leave the ones they're less likely to buy out on the shelves. I think the threatening people with lack of access is a deplorable move but I can see its being effective. Why not do that for the less popular titles? That way people who would otherwise not buy them, no matter how long they sat on the shelves, would rush out to do so just in case they weren't available later. Titles that are perennially popular will always find a new audience to sell to, and since DVDs, once arranged and put together cost about $0.10 to make per disc, it really couldn't hurt to have lots of stock on that one continually trickling down. It's like making 12 million copies of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows--eventually, that will all move.

Honestly, isn't this just shooting yourself in the foot? Not only are people annoyed at being cajoled and basically forced into buying or living almost forever without (especially if they might have children in the interim with whom they might want to share these old favorites; ten years is a long time when you're talking about the development of children), but when they do go to Best Buy or wherever, they're going to see the second-rate movies (hey, don't get me wrong, I think Fox and Hound was cute, and I loved the Disney version of Robin Hood, but they're just not The Lion King, right?) and associate that crap with Disney. Way to hurt your marketed image there. I'm sure that people won't be bored as nuts with your thirtieth release of Hannah Montana at all. No sir.

Date: 2007-08-06 03:32 am (UTC)
ext_27667: (Default)
From: [identity profile] viridian.livejournal.com
I suppose they presume people will still rent things and then be dying to own them by the time they can?

Also, how actually difficult is it to find the "back in the vault" titles? Do they actually get yanked from shelves? Do they go for a significant markup on ebay? I've never cared enough to buy Disney movies, but I wonder if actual investigation turns up that they're no harder to find than they would be if they were actively for sale.

Date: 2007-08-06 03:44 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] trinityvixen.livejournal.com
Also, how actually difficult is it to find the "back in the vault" titles?

Not very, since this is the digital age. A quick search on Ebay showed about 94 copies of The Lion King are on sale there from $0-40. Still, that's a limitation of under a hundred copies, and any one of them ranging from the same price as a new copy to twice as much as you would have paid for it new back when.

So, if you were dying for it, you could get a copy of it. But unless it's like $5, I don't like buying used from random people (used in the store where I can see it, fine). Hell, I can get new for $5 (and did! this weekend!). It's just obnoxious.

Date: 2007-08-06 04:09 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ecmyers.livejournal.com
Now what did you buy? :P

Date: 2007-08-06 04:12 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] trinityvixen.livejournal.com
Just was thinking of Jaws from this weekend. That's it, I swear! I've managed to be awed by how many things I have to watch finally, so maybe I'll work on them instead.

Date: 2007-08-06 04:45 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] droidguy1119.livejournal.com
I doubt this particular plan is referring to Hannah Montana's High School Musical with Zack and Cody, but, as it says, to The Aristocrats and The Great Mouse Detective and The Rescuers Down Under. I doubt anything live-action actually qualifies for the vault, except perhaps Pirates of the Caribbean, and that's only because it was popular.

Plus, you should be buying crap from me, so that I can buy a computer.

Date: 2007-08-06 02:48 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] moonlightalice.livejournal.com
It makes sense. If you wait ten years you can do a 10th/20th/whatever anniversary edition and sell it for $30.

Date: 2007-08-08 02:06 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] trinityvixen.livejournal.com
But why hold out for that when you could have been making $20/set for the past ten years? Something just doesn't add up.

Date: 2007-08-08 02:10 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] trinityvixen.livejournal.com
Right. I just don't see that this policy a) makes them more money than not doing that, and b) won't encourage piracy.

Date: 2007-08-08 02:10 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] trinityvixen.livejournal.com
Ugh, you knew the whole name of Hannah Montana. I fear for you.

Also, you don't have Disney movies, so :P!

Date: 2007-08-08 04:34 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] droidguy1119.livejournal.com
That was a joke. That was the conglomeration of three things on The Disney Channel. Hannah Montana is just called Hannah Montana.

Date: 2007-08-08 04:39 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] trinityvixen.livejournal.com
The fact that you know two other Disney channel shows, though...seek help!

Date: 2007-08-09 02:38 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] droidguy1119.livejournal.com
I work at Best Buy. People buy them. I can't stop it.

Date: 2007-08-09 02:55 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] trinityvixen.livejournal.com
You should. Working at Best Buy is a sacred duty. You need to stop people from bad DVDs.

Date: 2007-08-09 05:55 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] droidguy1119.livejournal.com
Well I've gotten some people to switch to widescreen and I've convinced a couple buyers to go Blu-Ray over HD-DVD (which everyone should) but critiquing their actual taste miiiight rub them the wrong way.

Date: 2007-08-09 07:01 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] trinityvixen.livejournal.com
Very sensible, I suppose. Still, the stupid people cannot be allowed to dictate the future of DVD media! Oh well, I will have to settle for finding them through sales logs and eliminating them one by one.

Profile

trinityvixen: (Default)
trinityvixen

February 2015

S M T W T F S
1234567
89 1011121314
15161718192021
22232425 262728

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Mar. 30th, 2026 04:37 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios