var json_comments = new Array("
\"user-pic\"
pecan 3.14159265
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate | Flag for review

I've planned on buying Star Trek on Blu-Ray since the day I saw it in theaters and demanded to see it again right away. It was my favorite movie of the year.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
lmarconi
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@pecan 3.14159265: I just pre-ordered it for my Dad's birthday on DVD for $15 on Amazon, he's been a Trekkie since the first series...I really wanted to see it again too so it kills two birds with one stone!
Frankly, I'd still buy it from Amazon even if it's available at Walmart for five bucks cheaper. Amazon has better customer service than Walmart, so they're a step up in my book. I always order $25 worth so I like the convenience of free shipping to my door.
Plus, no receipt checking!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
pecan 3.14159265
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@lmarconi: Since the Blu-Ray version of Star Trek is $21.99 right now, I'd say that the studio is looking at recouping much of the cost from the sheer quantity they expect to sell. I'm going to check out the circulars for Target and Best Buy to see whether the deals are any better. Sometimes Target offers a $5 gift card for things.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
tonsilpool
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@pecan 3.14159265:


I prefer amazon because it goes straight to my mailbox with no shipping charges or sales tax.
Figure the gas and the time (at least 1.5 hours) to go to Wally World and you loose in the long run.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
pecan 3.14159265
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@tonsilpool: It takes you an hour and a half to get to Wal-Mart?! Wow. Target is about 7 minutes from me.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Oranges w/ Cheese hates what Christmas has become
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Meh, considering the things cost like $1 (if that) to produce, they aren't losing as much profit as they want to say.

Reply
6 replies
\"user-pic\"
xl22k
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Oranges w/ Cheese wants it to be winter already:


I was about to disagree with you citing the costs of production; however for any movie that does reasonably well in the theaters, the cost of production is already covered by the theater gross. Therefore, yeah, these things probably do cost about $1 to produce; however I'm sure that Target and Walmart will still be losing money on them.


Business School Term: \"Loss Leader\"

Reply
\"user-pic\"
NeverLetMeDown
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@xl22k:


\"the cost of production is already covered by the theater gross.\"


Basically, never. A movie that does very very well in the theaters will come close to covering its production costs through box office, but most don't. DVDs are where the studios, overall, actually make a profit.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
PsiCop
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Oranges w/ Cheese wants it to be winter already: The cost of physically producing and packaging the disc itself is only a tiny portion of the money you're charged for it. Any number of entities have their hands in the till, as it were: The production company, the distribution company (i.e. what most people refer to as \"the studio\"), and other third parties get some of that. Not to mention there are royalties and residuals paid to a number of people, including the director, script writers, and actors.

Not that I think none of these people should be paid ... just pointing out that they have to be, which is why the DVD you buy costs so much more than just the disc itself. Compared to all of that the disc is trivial.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
crimebll
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Oranges w/ Cheese wants it to be winter already: They may cost a dollar to produce, but there's still the matter of, you know, the studio maybe wanting some money, and whatever goes to the actors, writers directors... This isn't just a matter of spending a dollar to burn public domain images onto a disk.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Kimaroo - 100% Pure Natural Kitteh
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Oranges w/ Cheese wants it to be winter already: Hm.. Indeed. Maybe Wal*Mart will work out a lower price for them to purchase at as well.


There are few movies that I actually buy to own.. Most are just good to Netflix. Allthough I'm getting disapointed with Netflix because they seem to be favoring \"rental only\" versions of DVDs that are suverely lacking in extras, and I'm a nerd who loves DVD extras.


This price drop might actually get me back to buying some DVDs.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Loias calls you out if you can't RTFA
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Oranges w/ Cheese wants it to be winter already: My understanding is that Walmart is actually paying $18 for these and selling at $10, so they will lose money. They try to make it back with the assumption that if you buy a DVD there you will buy other things, too.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Applekid
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Loias: If only I were rich enough to buy each of them...

I could host my own \"I-bought-each-of-these-movies-so-Walmart-could-take-an-eight-dollar-loss\" movie party.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Applekid
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Applekid: \"so-Walmart-can-lose-8-bucks\" ... that was weird quote behavior.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Oranges w/ Cheese hates what Christmas has become
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Applekid: LOL that's a good idea.

Even if Walmart is losing money SOMEONE is making a killing selling them way over their actual value at wholesale.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
americangame
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Looks like Amazon is already responding. The Blu Ray combo pack for Harry Potter is going for $16 right now.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
Watcher95
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@americangame:

Amazon had Star Trek for 10 bucks yesterday.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
nbs2
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@americangame: I noticed that last night - it is cheaper to get teh BR/DVD pack than it is to get just the DVD ($21)

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
winshape
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

That is the same or slightly less than the price of the actual movie ticket. Less than half if you include a date's ticket!

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
shepd
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@winshape:

If you are fastidiously cheap, you and a friend can see the movies for as little as $2.10, if you manage to combine enough offers. My local theatres (more than one!) charge $4.20 on Tuesday, and one of them accepts a 2-for-1 coupon on that day.

It's about time, too, because a couple of years ago movies were over $13 a person 'round these parts, and the theatres would be, literally, empty apart from yourself. Now they're pretty much packed and the people going have some $$$ left to buy (overpriced, but understandably so) snacks. Also discounted to about half price on tuesday.

Why bother to buy the movies? Just watch them as they were meant to be seen!

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
The Cynical Librarian
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Wait; list price for a DVD is still around 30 bucks? What is this 1998?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
hamburglar
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I hope this price war is still happening when BLACK DYNAMITE is released on DVD.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
JohnDeere
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

walmart.torrents coming soon

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
AHepburnGuy
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Sorry retailers. As long as DVDs still retain the properties of a solid (most particularly mass) I will forgo the price wars and stream.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
downwithmonstercable
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@AHepburnGuy: I fear for the day when Comcast/Verizon/whoever start throttling bandwidth, or create tiered prices, or start charging for bandwidth.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Kuchen
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@AHepburnGuy: Agreed. That whole taking up space business is no good either. I don't want to store DVDs, especially if I am not going to watch most of them multiples times.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Outrun1986
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@AHepburnGuy: I have to agree, its not like a video game that you want to put down and likely pick up again, so buying that type of media makes sense, as you may play it many times over the course of a month.

Most people watch a movie and then aren't going to watch it 3x or more in the same month. I know that when I watch a movie I most likely never want to watch it again simply because there isn't enough time when I could be playing a game or watching another movie. I would rather not see a shelf of DVD's that I spent a lot of money on collecting dust and not being used.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Starfury
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

We buy DVDs that we'll want to watch multiple times. I plan on getting Star Trek and Watchmen this year; probably as Christmas gifts.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
hotdogsunrise
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Starfury: Same here. I rarely, if ever, buy any movie. Only those that I plan on watching again. And Star Trek will definitely be watched more than once. It already has. :-)

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Loias calls you out if you can't RTFA
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

So, if Walmart spends $18/each to buy and sells back to me for $10/each, am I hurting Walmart or helping them by buying from them? Seems like if we all bought those DVDs from them and nothing else, they'd losing a lot of money.


I'd rather shop at Target, but not if by doing so makes Target lose money!

Reply
5 replies
\"user-pic\"
VagrantRadio
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Loias: 30-40 consumerists readers aren't going to hurt Wal-Mart.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
captainpicard
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Loias: Yes, if you only buy the DVD from them then they will lose money, but if you buy the movie they are hoping that all of the other things you may buy while your in the store (toilet paper, deodorant, popcorn, candy, pop) will make up the difference.


The only thing newsworthy about the story is that Star Trek DVD is going to be ridiculously cheap, stores do it all the time. Milk, eggs, bread all discounted really cheap hoping that you'll buy steak, chocolate syrup, ceral, fruit to make up the difference.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
pecan 3.14159265
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Loias: I know, I'm in the same boat. If spending at Wal-Mart makes them lose money, hurray - but I'm still giving them money, so what's the right decision here?


I suspect that the best course of action is to not buy from Wal-Mart because a ton of people will, and they'll probably eventually make more profit anyway. Target is priced low as well, and I'd be more willing to buy from them because Star Trek wouldn't be the only thing I ever buy from them. They'll get more of my money by getting me in the door cause I'll browse the seasonal aisles and buy way too much Christmas stuff.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
mizike
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Loias: You would be helping walmart as it's always their goal to eliminate whatever competition they can. Since 99% of consumers only care about price, they know they can vastly undercut everyone else, eliminate all competition then charge whatever they want a few years down the road.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
frank64
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@mizike: It has been quite a few years for Walmart how far down the road are we looking? I think there will always be someone else.

Reply
","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Smooooth
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Yeah Amazon had slashed prices on all of these DVDs to $10 as of several hours ago.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
shepd
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

But I thought piracy was why DVD sales were down? Why would lowering the price to anything but $0 reduce that?

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
HalOfBorg
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@shepd: Well you wouldn't have to go quite to zero. I'd buy far more DVDs if they were maybe $5. I do buy certain ones anyway like ST.

Or I just use SwapaDVD.com - it's free and great.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
someToast
November 13, 2009 4:36 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@HalOfBorg: I like SwapaDVD.com's testimonials.

I have tripled my DVD collection so far and it's still growing, plus I have saved so much money, and it's so easy to use [...]

I suppose MailAndRipAndMailaDVD.com is a bit wordy for a domain name.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
downwithmonstercable
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@HalOfBorg: If there's still a Blockbuster near you, go check out their used DVD's. They always have 3/$20 or 4/$20 deals going on. And for very recent movies. I bought a used Dark Knight for $5 about a month after it came out on DVD.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
suburbancowboy
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

HOORAY! Lets put all of the Mom & Pop stores out of business, so eventually the only job options left will be in \"food services\" and working at Wal-Mart!!!

Reply
8 replies
\"user-pic\"
antisane
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@suburbancowboy: I'll happily take walmart/target/etc lowering prices and putting businesses under if it saves me money on my crappy security guard pay (hey, at least I'm working!).

Reply
\"user-pic\"
captainpicard
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@suburbancowboy: i love it when people say that because walmart started as a Mom & Pop, they just grew, alot.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
suburbancowboy
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@captainpicard: I have no problem with a Mom & Pop business growing and being successful. I have a problem with it once they grow huge and predatory and do tons of unethical things that are just plain bad for America.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
captainpicard
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@suburbancowboy: predatory yes, unethical no. My wife and I had this argument last night. Yes, walmart sucks, yes walmart lowers prices to drive out competition, yes walmarts goods are of low quality, yes walmart does not pay thier employee's enough, yes there are instances of walmart managers (individual person) making employees work overtime without pay.


Yes, we all know that walmart sucks but at the same time we cannot ignore that walmart is a business (and a successful one) and will continue to do what is best for business.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Smashville
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@suburbancowboy: Um, where have you been for the last...30 years?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
pecan 3.14159265
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@suburbancowboy: I'm not aware of any mom and pop stores that sell DVDs. We're talking non-bootlegs, no pr0n, and establishments that are not on the alleys of Chinatown.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Outrun1986
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@suburbancowboy: To be fair its been a very long time since I have seen a mom&pop store dealing in things like VHS tapes, DVD's and electronics unless your talking pawn shops. Mom & Pop video rental stores went down in the mid 90s or earlier (RIP Movietime video).

Most successful mom & pop businesses (the ones that have been around for a very long time) here deal in a certain type of food, like italian or asian, or products you can't find at a B&M store like comic books or high end bicycles.

The rest were gone years and years ago so its not like its having an effect on the current economy since its been this way for 10-15 years or more over here.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
suburbancowboy
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Outrun1986: Where I live, my favorite Indie record store also sells a lot of DVDs. A good portion of the store is designated for DVDs.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
frank64
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Outrun1986: I think it was an anti Walmart rant. You don't need to be getting logical now!

Reply
","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
jedsa
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Amazon may not have publically commented, but they did reduce the prices to $10.

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
chocobo
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Walmart is taking a loss by selling a 3-cent disc in a 10-cent case for $10?

Reply
6 replies
\"user-pic\"
DefineStatutory
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@chocobo: Way to actually read the article. Good job, gold star.

If Walmart buys something for 18 dollars, and sells it for $10, it's a loss. No matter what producing the item cost.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Segador
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@chocobo: The electro-mages that etherically imbue the disks with the movie-essence charge like $30 an hour, though.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
yzerman
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@chocobo:

I don't think Wally world is paying $.13 to their distributors for those movies. Yes the manufacturing may have cost that much in materials but I doubt that walmart went direct to the stamping plants, everyone in the middle will take a cut plus management, etc..

so saying .13 is a big unrealistic and over dramatic.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
fantomesq
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@chocobo: If Walmart pays $18 for the same disc, then yes. Walmart doesn't manufacture them and you fail to consider the price of the rights to the film... film production ain't cheap.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
frank64
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@chocobo: You could say that about everything you buy. The raw materials and the manufacturing cost are only a fraction of what you pay for.

True, $2-$3 less might be closer to the value of watching a movie for me.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
Elginista
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I never really buy DVDs anymore, though I do often ask for them for birthday/Christmas gifts from my grandmas. It's nice being able to give a specific title to a gift-giver, especially something that they can find in their local Wal-Mart. I do the same thing with books.

Reply
","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
HalOfBorg
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Check out [www.swapadvd.com]

It's free and great.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
frank64
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I like box sets of shows. That way when you are in the mood you can watch them. Again, price is an issue with me, I stopped buying HBO shows a long time ago because of price, but did get some from ebay. If a series is cheap enough I might buy it, but normally just use Netflix.

Streaming ends up costing much more than Netflix, if I were to just watch shows streaming, one a night would cost me over $60 a month.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
pecan 3.14159265
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@frank64: Surprisingly, you can get some really, really great deals at Best Buy and Target for shows that the network needs to generate buzz for. I got the first season of True Blood for $25. Best Buy was offering a $5 gift card, but they were advertising True Blood for $35. I got them to reduce the price to match Target and I still got the gift card.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
IndyJaws
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Hmmm...moral vs. financial quandary...wife works at Target, get 10% off all purchases, which makes movie only $9, but Target loses money. Do I spend the extra $1 to buy it from Walmart just so they lose? Or will the $1 expense hurt me more than it hurts them?


Screw it...I'm getting it at Walmart. Hate those bastards.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
crimebll
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@IndyJaws: I guarantee, Wal-Mart doesn't lose money on this: If they tell the studio they'll pay $9 each for a zillion copies, the studio will sell them a zillion copies @ $9.

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
twritersf
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I hope Target pricematches because I don't want to give any money to WalMart

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
DefineStatutory
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@twritersf: In theory, if Target matches the price, and you but it there, you're hurting Target.

Buy it at Walmart, and make sure that they lose the 8 bucks.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
supercereal
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@DefineStatutory: With their net income reaching a tenth of a trillion dollars, an $8 loss means absolutely nothing to Wal-Mart...even if everyone in the country bought a DVD from them.

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
DefineStatutory
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

On a completely immoral and unethical thought process, why not just Netflix it, and make a copy?

[/starting trouble]

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
crimebll
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@DefineStatutory: Once a DVD is cheap enough, why even bother?

Reply
","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
crimebll
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Amazon has the \"no frills\" DVD for $10 as well

Reply
","","","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
H3ion
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

What do they charge for the Beta tapes?

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
NeverLetMeDown
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@H3ion:


$9.99 for the tape, $100 trillion to build the time machine to go back and find a machine that will play it.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
notlupus
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@NeverLetMeDown:

my uncle still has two, one he uses, he has the machines stacked on his tv in the following order, VCR - BETA - DVD PLAYER. He just got the dvd player like 3-4 years ago, he actually still has Star Trek 3 on beta in his basement. He has this thing where he is like stuck in decades it he just got out of the 70's - 80's and slowly getting into the 90's .....

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
zombie_batch
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'd start buying DVDs again if the MPAA and retailers would admit that it doesn't actually cost $18 to sell to the store and start charging realistic prices for the product. $10 is a realistic price for a DVD and Blu Ray. Would you rather have product more people buy, or product that fewer buy at a higher price? That's what these greedy subhumans need to figure out.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
frank64
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@zombie_batch: Yeah, I was thinking maybe $10 is the sweet spot if they sell 3 or 4 times as many, they could find they do real well.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
AvatarofBelle
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Netflix streaming wins my money. I don't want to own any dvds. Take up too much space.

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
nstonep
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Walmart doesn't pay wholesale.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
NeverLetMeDown
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@nstonep:


For the movie studios, yes, they do. Maybe they pay a smidge less (i.e. if Bob's Video is paying $18, Walmart is paying $16.50-17), but they're paying essentially the same price as Amazon, Target, Best Buy, etc.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
dvdchris
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@NeverLetMeDown: Plus they get back end deals like ad co-op funds and other considerations when they feature a movie title in a circular.
But since they buy direct from the studio, not through a wholesale distributor, their up-front unit cost is probably right about $17.

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
Darkneuro
November 13, 2009 4:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I say nice save with the whole loss-leader excuse, but I still think WalMart is laundering $ for the music industry, and has been since the PRC fiasco. But that's just my own paranoia.

Reply
","","");