Video Asylum

Put down the Kool-Aid

204.131.179.1

4season

In Reply to: RE: Retailers vs studios is apples and oranges posted by Jazz Inmate on August 23, 2007 at 12:02:27

"The Blockbuster "deal" was the result of executives at Blockbuster looking at both formats and seeing twice as many sales and rentals for Blu-ray and making a decision about shelf space."

Yes, and Paramount chose HD DVD because the spec was in a more finished state and it was easier to develop for. At least that's what the press release says. ;-)

"The Target thing is about an agreement where Sony puts in kiosks at its own expense so customers will be able to try out the system."

So...Target got paid? Sounds about right to me.

Relax, this is plain ole marketing.

Follow Ups:

Do you want me to post the NYT article? - Jazz Inmate 12:56:30 08/23/07 (2)
MS gave Paramount $150 million.

What did big bad Sony give Blockbuster? Not a rhetorical question. I genuinely don't know. Enlighten me.

Yes, target got paid. Target is a RETAILER. Paramount is a STUDIO. Do you not see the difference? If a customer doesn't like Target's decision, they can go to another retailer. If I want Transformers on Blu-ray (I don't, but my point is still valid), I can't go to a different studio because Paramount owns the movie.

Do you not see my point? It's very simple.
-------------
"I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)
- Think about this - 4season 16:58:25 08/23/07 (1)
  I don't have details about all that went on with Blockbuster, but didn't it strike you as interesting that we heard about both Blockbuster's and Target's move from the Blu-Ray group PR machinery rather than Blockbuster or Target themselves? Not what I'd expect if Blockbuster's had been entirely their own internal business decision.
  
  You can post a link to whatever MS-related article you want, but it ultimately doesn't matter where the $150M came: Microsoft, Toshiba, Intel, whatever: They are all Hollywood outsiders, so who cares? OTOH, The Blu-Ray group's hands are tied because Sony is both a major player in the Blu-Ray consortium and the motion picture industry. It'd be ironic as hell if Sony Pictures were forced to go format-neutral in order to keep the B-D consortium out of legal trouble.
  - RE: Think about this - Jazz Inmate 17:39:42 08/23/07 (0)
    > > I don't have details about all that went on with Blockbuster, < <
    
    Then maybe you shouldn't insinuate Blockbuster's decision was motivated by anything other than sales/rental numbers and shelf space. Frankly, all of Blockbuster's decisions are motivated by that.
    
    > > but didn't it strike you as interesting that we heard about both Blockbuster's and Target's move from the Blu-Ray group PR machinery rather than Blockbuster or Target themselves? < <
    
    I don't know what you mean. Corporate PRs go out across the wire and are picked up by all kinds of news agencies. The fact that groups promoting Blu-ray trumpeted the news louder is an obvious consequence of this particular news. I think the original news source I saw for this was Associated Press.
    -------------
    "I have found that if you love life, life will love you back." -Arthur Rubinstein (1887-1982)

Post a Followup:

FAQ

Post a Message!

Forgot Password?

Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
	Remember my Moniker & Password (What's this?) Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:

Message:	(Posts are subject to Content Rules)

Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:	Automagically notify you when someone responds.

To view your new posting or follow-up, click on the RELOAD or REFRESH button on your browser.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Atma-Sphere Music Systems, Inc.