Consumers Vs Marketing - The DVD WarMar 16 '05 Write an essay on this topic.
Popular Products in Phones
The Bottom Line Is the DVD industry becoming so greedy it's affecting their sales? I think so.
DVD has become a booming market. Family Guy was brought back after its cancellation because of high TVD popularity, Resident Evil 2 was given a green light partially due to the first movie’s DVD sales, and I have little doubt that plenty more examples exist for those that wish to find them. So naturally marketers want to milk it for all it’s worth while consumers want the most bang for their buck. The clash is inevitable. I have written a whole essay on the annoyance of the warnings, disclaimers, and previews that companies display before their movies. As bad as it is, though, it’s not going to be the decisive factor in a purchase decision unless it’s the final straw in an already existing list. So where do marketers cross the line and start making consumers mad enough to not buy the product? With DVD renting now so convenient in stores and through mail, I believe marketers will begin pushing consumers to buy less and rent more if they continue on their current trend. The Collector: I consider myself to be something of a small-time collector. I have over 150 DVD’s (counting multi-disc collections as one) plus several more my wife has bought for herself. I go to great lengths to get the widescreen versions of movies whenever possible even if finding them becomes a chore. I’ve made it point to get the limited edition of Men in Black, the double-disc edition of Red Dragon, the extended editions of all three Lord of the Rings movies, the imported Hong Kong versions of some Jackie Chan movies, and some rarities like R2-D2: Beneath the Dome. There are plenty of people out there with more money invested in DVD’s than me, but I’m not stingy when it comes to buying my own. I’m the type that likes to be able to watch a DVD whenever I’m in the mood for it, but that’s partially because I don’t watch TV much anymore. In fact, I would just as soon not have cable and instead spend that money on expanding my DVD collection. I’ll continue to collect my Jackie Chan movies and others, but I’m becoming increasingly annoyed with the DVD industry even to the point of being less interested in making a purchase in many cases. More Than A Movie: When DVD’s first came on the scene it was rare to find one with a great deal of extras. For one thing many releases were of older movies that might not have a great deal of other material floating around, and new movies weren’t yet planning ahead for DVD releases. As time passed trailers and cast biographies/filmographies became staples. I can remember a time when virtually every new release I got had those if nothing else. As the industry grew companies found ways to put more material on a single disc, and movie makers sometimes filmed documentaries specifically for the DVD. The amount and variety of extra features increased dramatically even to the point of double-disc releases not being uncommon. I, for one, have come to the point where I expect a certain amount of material beyond the movie from a release: a commentary, a behind the scenes feature, or at least the old staples of trailers and biographies. I suppose that sounds like I’m spoiled, but if I am it’s the fault of the companies - they have set and raised the standard, now I expect them all to live up to it. Considering the ease of copying material to DVD these days, the popularity of the industry, and the foreknowledge that DVD sales will be the life of the movie after its theatrical run, I see no reason for any release to be devoid of extra features, yet that has become surprisingly common. I had considered getting Garfield the movie until I saw that it has next to nothing extra on it (a commentary is the only thing I remember, previews for other movies don’t count). Passion of the Christ has nothing whatsoever. If it had been any other movie I wouldn’t have bought it either. I know there are more, but those two titles stand out in my mind because of my interest in the subjects before they were considered for movies. I’ve come to the point of feeling cheated when I pay full price for a movie that has nothing else on it. What’s the point of having a movie long-term if there’s nothing else to explore? A rental more than suffices for the watching of the movie by itself. If I can get it for $5 I won’t complain about a lack of extras, but if I’m going to shell out $20 or more, there will have to be something there to make it worth more than a $3 rental fee. Not to mention that a well-designed DVD is a great incentive to acquire the movie legitimately rather than downloading a pirate copy. The Same Old Song: Another factor that has become a sore spot with me is the release of the bigger, better editions after I bought the old one. I have bought a movie twice on two occasions. The first was the Nightmare Before Christmas. The original release was during the early stages of DVD when few if any had extras on them. As technology and interest improved someone decided it was time to give the movie the attention it deserved. They didn’t just stick a commentary and quick ten minute feature on it either, they created some very nice menus, included plenty of terrific extras, and added two Tim Burton short films. In other words, they did it right. It was such a drastic and worthy improvement that I did not grumble about buying it again. The second time was with Resident Evil. The second release was less justified than …Nightmare… since they could have easily made the first release a 2-disc edition and included all the extras from both editions on it. The only reason I bought it a second time was because it included a ticket to see Resident Evil 2. Since I had already planned to spend the money at the theatre, I went ahead and spent the little extra to get the DVD. If I’d had to pay full price for the second DVD, I don’t care what extras they added, I wouldn’t have done it. I think that there are times when multiple releases are done right. Take Lord of the Rings, for instance. There is a small version of each movie that came out soon after the theatrical run was over, but for the bigger fans there was the extended version on the horizon. The reason it was done right is because there was a choice from the very beginning. I knew not to buy the 2-disc set because the 4-disc set was coming; I just had to be patient. If they had surprised me with it, I would have been mad. Men in Black is another example. When it first came out there was a regular widescreen or pan & scan release and a Limited Edition out at the same time. If you wanted to spend a little more for the added features the option was available. That edition was later repackaged and replaced the standard edition on the shelves which may have upset some consumers, but since it was technically available from the start and very well designed I never felt cheated. What makes me mad is when movies like Spider-Man produce what looks like a definitive release just to turn around a few months later and have a bigger one because the next movie is coming soon. Had I known that was going to happen I would have waited and gotten the bigger version. The second release had nothing to do with an increase in technology or was because they weren’t sure if it was going to sell; they had every intention of getting the fans to buy it then trying to get them to buy it again when interest peaked, trying to fish out of the same hole twice as some might say. If they had released a cheap supplement rather than a full-priced edition or offered some kind of rebate for owners of the original I might not have gotten annoyed with it. Regardless of how much I might want to see the additional extras, and despite the enjoyment I get out of collecting the most complete versions of movies I like, I simply do not have the money to keep buying the same movie over and over. I guess what it boils down to is feeling cheated. With Spider-Man I felt like I paid full-price for a partial product. Knowing they were going to produce additional material they sold me two-thirds of the total package then wanted me to buy the full product a year or so later. I’m sure there’s always going to be some amount of that happening, but marketers need to know that it does negatively affect their sales. Every DVD collector I know is waiting for the definitive version of something. Some are waiting for the ultimate box set of Matrix, others are waiting to see if new editions of Star Wars will come out after the last movie, and I’m waiting on Spider-Man 2 as well as The Incredible Hulk and others. Maybe we’ll all eventually buy the currently available releases, or maybe we’ll become so enamored with whatever is new at the time or have such a hard time finding available copies that we’ll never make the purchase. Whether temporary or long-term, severe or not enough to make a difference, the possibility of a more definitive version of a particular movie coming in the future is causing people to not buy DVD’s they otherwise want. The solutions are simple: if a release has less than the norm in the way of extras offer it at a lower price or in conjunction with something else, make it worth springing for a little more than rental cost; design the DVD right the first time, but if multiple releases are absolutely necessary such as in the case of Lord of the Rings, have a good reason for it, make all the extras available on the bigger version (instead of some on one, different ones on the other), and let the consumers know ahead of time what will be available. I foresee DVD sales slipping the more the industry tries to get consumers to buy things twice or pay the same amount for less product. The industry will probably attribute that to people downloading movies off the internet rather than face the fact that it’s consumers tired of money-grubbing marketing attempts. Companies need to make a profit, sure, but not if it means unduly manipulating their consumers.  |
| Read all comments (1)|Write your own comment |
