Slashdot Mirror


Disney's Disposable DVDs Deemed Duds

An anonymous reader writes "It looks like disposable DVD's are headed the way of the dodo bird. Consumers (ahem, customers) in several markets are rejecting the $7 self destructing flexplay discs. Some stores have decided to stop selling. According to the stores, 'Customers aren't interested in paying more than $6 for a limited-play DVD when they can pay $2 at the video store. Even with a $2 late fee, it's cheaper than buying a disposable DVD.' and 'he hasn't seen one customer purchase an EZ-D, though some of them have been shoplifted out of the store.'"

41 of 527 comments (clear)

  1. Good. by AgTiger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    After the DivX fiasco (the DVD-esque player, not the codec) and now this, maybe they'll start to listen. Customers want to buy and own their products, not rent or license them.

    1. Re:Good. by Neop2Lemus · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Or we want to rent them at at reasonable price. $6.00 is still too much to pay to rent but since its' still signifigantly cheaper than buying the film, and theres' no cheaper alternative, people pay it.

      When you push for $7.00, and there is a cheaper alternative (i.e. renting as above), it shouldn't be any wonder that the product failed. Of course, I'm saying this in hindsight, but, had I know the price they were asking, I'd have predicted its failure anyways (BTW, I'm just a student, not a professional, I'm speaking as a consumer).

      As an enviromentalist, I'm pleased.

      --
      Needle Nardle Noo
    2. Re:Good. by Trigun · · Score: 5, Funny

      Naw, he just licensed it.

    3. Re:Good. by LostCluster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Blockbuster, Netflix, and cable Pay-per-view offerings are still standing, so rental content isn't exactly dead. Both this and Divx didn't fail because of their self-destruct element as much as the fact they were priced higher than the already existing systems...

    4. Re:Good. by Squonk01 · · Score: 5, Informative

      For those who missed the DivX fiasco the first time.

    5. Re:Good. by garcia · · Score: 4, Insightful

      strangely enough I do want to rent DVDs just not from video stores with no competition...

      When I first moved here the nearest Blockbuster was right down the street (less than 2 miles). DVDs were 3.99 to rent. Long lines on Friday/Saturdays (20 minute wait was my longest) and the prices were crazy. I didn't really have a choice as it seemed that everything in the immediate area was Blockbuster.

      Along comes Hollywood Video. 2.99 rentals with $1.00 back if you return it by midnight the next night (being that it is right across from BB they also dropped to 2.99 but no cash back).

      I have absolutely no need for long rental times so this $1.00 is a gift from god. Not all their movies are set up this way (obviously) but I have always found 1 or 2 that I wanted to watch from this group.

      I do want to rent. I certainly don't need an extensive DVD movie collection that I have to store, sort, and maintain. Paying $1.99 is fine for me for most movies. I'll wait till they come out at Target for $10 if they are really worth purchasing.

    6. Re:Good. by adrianbaugh · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Agreed. The only thing issuing limited-life DVDs will accomplish is it will make the general public much more familiar with DVD ripping tools. If someone buys a DVD and it'll only play once then it's not going to take long for them to decide that that single play is going straight to DVD:Rip or the hard disk so that it can be watched repeatedly.

      Of course, that's only if titles are only released in such a format: if there's a choice, consumers will just ignore the self-destructing option.

      New Line got it right with the Special Edition LoTR DVDs. They're lovely products, well packaged with high quality extras (and don't self-destruct ;-)).
      People will happily pay for something like that: they will be far less happy at movie companies that treat them like scum who can't be trusted with the content they're so graciously permitted to view.

      --
      "'I pass the test,' she said. 'I will diminish, and go into the West, and remain Galadriel.'"
      - JRR Tolkien.
    7. Re:Good. by Malc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And how long it takes them to start. I don't want ads for other films on a DVD I've bought. They put so much crap on their discs. They have no customer respect.

    8. Re:Good. by PhuCknuT · · Score: 5, Informative

      actually that's not true. The degradation is caused by a chamical reactuion with oxygen in the air, not by the read laser, so they can be watched as much as you want, for about 2 days.

    9. Re:Good. by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Both this and Divx didn't fail because of their self-destruct element as much as the fact they were priced higher than the already existing systems...

      I think that there's also a big psychological element to the issue. If someone's going to rent something at home, it needs to be totally intangible, like a pay-per-view movie on cable or a rented tape. It comes and goes, and leaves nothing behind.

      If you "rent" them something -- even at the exact same price -- and it involves a physical object that "self destructs", people are going to feel ripped off. No matter what, part of you feels that you paid for the physical medium, not just the content, and having to throw it in the trash bin just feels wrong.

      It doesn't matter that returning a movie might add significant cost to a movie rental in terms of time and vehicle costs, or that throwing away a thin plastic disc is probably less wasteful than burning an extra half gallon of gas driving to return a rental. Right or wrong, people just don't think like that.

    10. Re:Good. by rblancarte · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well not exactly true. You do get to watch it as many times as you want, during the "good disk" period. But after that, you just throw it away.

      Now that all being said, I think that the EZ-D format had it's place. It allowed places like the gas station to sell disks. HOWEVER, they were on the pricy side. Make them $5, and then you might have something. I think it was not a horrible idea, just one that was not quite done right.

      --
      It is human nature to take shortcuts in thinking.
    11. Re:Good. by Oliver+Wendell+Jones · · Score: 4, Funny

      You need to take your DVD collection out for a walk around the neighborhood at least once every 2-3 days so it can compare itself against your neighbors DVD collections.

      You also need to worry about grooming, etc. Thankfully my neighborhood has a do-it-yourself DVD grooming parlor where they provide all the tools.

      --
      A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing -- Emo Phillips
  2. duh by jester42 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    That's an easy one for any marketing genius. Just raise (ahem adjust) the prices for rental videos and people will be happy to buy those.

    1. Re:duh by leerpm · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Without collusion among all of the various video rental retailers to raise prices(which is illegal), this would not work. And the distributors are not going to raise prices. That would just mean the independent films will be cheaper, so people would stop renting movies that only succeed because of the marketing behind them.

    2. Re:duh by smackjer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Some reasons that Blockbuster is still in business:

      1) There is still a "digital divide". Not everyone has or wants a computer with web access at home; unfortunately this is usually for financial reasons. Netflix is not a viable option for them.

      2) People want to be able to pick up a movie on the way home from work on Friday night. They don't want to have to plan spontaneous movie night a week in advance (to account for shipping time).

      3) New releases can be had the day of release at Blockbuster. With Netflix, you're lucky to get it a week later. Not a big deal for the patient, but some people want it ASAP.

      4) Not everyone rents enough movies every month to make the $20 worthwhile.

      I'm sure there are other reasons.

      --

      This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  3. Who didn't see this coming? by LostCluster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The cause of death on this idea seems rather simple to find... going rate for a movie that you get to watch once/twice then give back is $3-$4, and this came in at more than $6. Between this project and MovieBeam, Disney seems to be testing out every form of rental content distribution possible, but it seems like there's no such thing as one that works any better than the models that already exist. The Circuit City-backed Divx project should have been the first clue...

    1. Re:Who didn't see this coming? by Cramer · · Score: 4, Funny

      They don't begin to selfdestruct until AFTER you open the package.

      The solution is simple... get yourself an old (but still functional) lab quarantine box, put the DVD player in there with the unopened disc, fill with argon (available at any welding supply shop) and watch forever. Just be sure to seal the disc in an argon filled zip-top bag before opening the box to change discs. (Oxygen is what destroys the disc.)

      Personally, I give it a few weeks in hacker hands before someone figures out how to kill the reaction.

  4. poor shoplifters by skutters · · Score: 5, Funny

    I feel sorry for the shoplifters, they probably thought they were proper DVDs not coffee mats!

  5. Next Codec name prediction... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    flexpay ;-)

  6. Lack of respect by addie · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm glad. This kind of product simply shows a lack of respect for the consumer. Large corporations should all be putting the money into gaining consumer trust, rather than limiting consumer freedom.

  7. MPAA vs. shoplifting by corebreech · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If the MPAA were to combat shoplifting in the same way they combat file-trading, they would demand that consumers (ahem, customers) be made to wear lead helmets that would prevent them from being able to watch or listen to a movie unless they first invoked a key obtained when purchasing one of their products. Only then would you be able to remove this helmet, and then only for as long as they were watching that movie.

    1. Re:MPAA vs. shoplifting by jared_hanson · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If I wasn't going to pay for it anyways, does that arguement still hold up? ... Granted, downloading something instead of buying isn't exactly ethical, but there's a difference between downloading something and stealing it.

      You've bit the classic argument hook, line, and sinker. Unfortunately you're wrong. Yes, the picture does get muddled when digital data is in the equation. However, most of the value of the CD lies in the music that is on it, not the CD itself. That same value lies in the download, but in most cases the person who created the value sees no return. This is wrong.

      Not that it matters for the sake of the arguement, but shoplifting is quite common.

      Come on, realise the comparison. I know shoplifting happens, I'm not denying that. However, how many people do you know who shoplift routinely? Probably 1 or 2, if any at all. How many people do you know who download music off P2P sites routinely? I'd bet a good percentage of all the people you know.

      The number of shoplifters are dwarfed, to the point of humiliation, by the number of people you download off P2P networks.

      Actually, customers started downloading music because they wanted their music digitally and there was no legal alternative.

      Excellent point, and the RIAA made a bad business decision when they ignored the demand. However, if you want change, you need to talk with your money in not spending it. As soon as you infringe upon the RIAAs distribution rights, you give up any voice you could have had. To make change, you need to stay on this side of the law and refuse to buy new music until its available as you want it.

      And that's not even getting into how the the RIAA treats the artists, or that many people who use P2P are downloading songs they already have, will buy, or things that are not copyrighted or are not for sale.

      Again, all valid points. There are very good uses for P2P networks and the RIAA is not always justified in its actions. But, they do hold the rights they are attempting to maintain.

      --
      -- Fighting mediocrity one bad post at a time.
  8. The person who thought of this should be fired by eaddict · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It was a horrible idea from the beginning. If they were a buck then it might work but as long as titans like Wal-Mart keep DVDs cheap to buy, and Blockbuster keeps them cheap to rent they won't sell. Even my kiddos questions why we would want to buy something that we would just have to throw away! In our (U.S.) society of lazyness I am glad to see the environment won a round even though it was through a left hook (ie price NOT recyclability).

    --
    "If you are on fire you can just stop, drop, and roll. If you fall into Lava you are just dead." - my 5yr old daughter
  9. $7? were they out of their minds? by real_smiff · · Score: 4, Interesting

    i thought self-destructing discs were supposed to be cheaper than normal rentals because you wouldn't need the return/inventory system. were they more expensive to make, or were they just out of their minds?

    --

    This is my Sig, this is my Gun. One is for Slashdot and one is for Fun.

    1. Re:$7? were they out of their minds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
      i thought self-destructing discs were supposed to be cheaper than normal rentals because you wouldn't need the return/inventory system. were they more expensive to make, or were they just out of their minds?

      Good old corporate greed. I just buy previewed DVDs from the local video store for $5-$10. They look just as good as the new ones unless someone scratched it in which case the store will take it back and replace it with another if they have one. I've bought 50 new and used DVDs over the past couple of years compared to 1 used CD I bought because I was on vacation and had nothing to listen to in a rental car. Take that RIAA. $18 for 45 minutes of music my ass..

    2. Re:$7? were they out of their minds? by mcwop · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Heck for $7-8 more (assuming it is on sale) you can buy the DVD outright and keep it forever. New, and not on sale, DVD's run around $20-25, which is cheaper than dragging a family of four to the movies. $7 for self destruction is indeed crap.

      --

      "I don't think it's selfish, to eat defenseless shellfish." -NOFX

  10. No Crap by Doesn't_Comment_Code · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One more "It's our property, and we don't trust you, the consumer, with it." from the big organizations has met consumers who are dissatisfied with their garbage and unwilling to pay for it.

    Great!

    And I hope the next time they try this it fails just as hard as this venture did. And eventually some executive will say, "Hey, wait a minute. Maybe it's not worth alienating all our customers to squeeze an extra million out of our already 100 billion dollar profits."

    Of course that executive will be ignored, and possibly fired for lack of vision. But it's a start.

    --

    Slashdot Syndrome: the sudden, extreme urge to correct someone in order to validate one's self.
    1. Re:No Crap by Red+Alastor · · Score: 4, Funny
      Then another "visionary" will say "let's apply it to software !".

      Imagine the customer : "Damn! I can't save, I burned the menu the last time I used it !"

      But seriously, I'd really not be surprise if Bill G. was thinking about using this technique. Software that only install once, after the CD is worthless.

      --
      Slashdot anagrams to "Sad Sloth"
  11. Netflix by TheWickedKingJeremy · · Score: 5, Informative

    First off, what video store costs only $2?! Its more like $4-5 here in Boston.

    And second, I don't see how any of these models (rental, disposable for $6, etc) can compete with Netflix, other than if you happen to need the movie right away (and how often is that the case?) Right now I average about 12 movies per month on Netflix, all for $20! And the foreign and independent selections is *far* better than at local video stores.

    Ok, I'm a fanboy...

    --

    my religion lies somewhere between buddhism and super monkey ball - pamphlet?
    1. Re:Netflix by Deagol · · Score: 4, Informative
      Ditto the fanboy comment. I'm currently on the 8-DVD/month plan (~$42/month, includes taxes), to get my wife and I through the slow winter months.

      It's awesome. We live in small rural town, and though I like to support local businesses, the 2 local video rental places suck. The first, a grocery store, has decent prices ($1 for old flicks, $2.50 for new releases, for 2 days), but nearly all of their movies are full-screen (eeewwww!), and their selection is pretty limited. The other store, charges $2-to-$4 for one day (!!!), though their selection is fairly eclectic.

      Netflix beats them, hands down. The turn-around is pretty quick, so I can get movies in 2-to-3 days delivered, plus another 2-to-3 days to return. In batch mode, I can cycle through about 4 lots of 8 DVDs in a month ($42/32=$1.31 -- not bad per rental, eh?). Sending movies back at the rate I can watch them is roughly 1 movie per day, about the same prie per disc. When we get into "marathon mode" we can crank up the rate even more.

      I always have a few TV series DVDs on-hand and a few movies for both my wife and and the kids. Right now we're cycling through the X-Files (just finished Season 2, DVD 7) and Battlestar Galactica (my kids -- 5 & 8 -- love this show).

      The mix of available movies and genres is awesome. The kids enjoy anime (they have Castle in the Sky, right now), and my wife and I have gone on a foreign film binge: watched Open Your Eyes (the Spanish original to the US's Vanilla Sky) 2 days ago, watched the German film The Winter Sleepers last night, and will watch the French film Venus Beauty Institue tonight.

      My only gripe is the sometimes-long wait for certain movies. I've been waiting for Disc 4 of the Bubblegum Crisis Tokyo 2040 series for months, and it looks like it's a long wait for the first season of Sex In the City and the new DVD release of Underworld. Also, the rate of shipping slowed down between Thanksgiving and New Year's, I assume due to the backlog of the US Postal service dealing with gifts and holiday deliveries.

      But overall, the experience has been very worth-while. I encourage anyone to check it out.

  12. Re:Counter? by Dr.Zong · · Score: 4, Informative

    From the website: How Does it work?

    --

    Party?!? What kind of party is this? Where's the damn keg?
    Virtus Junxit Mors Non Separabit
  13. Landfills of plastic by rjelks · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Now if we could just convince AOL to stop producing those throw-away CD's. There must be a large landfill somewhere with stacks and stacks of AOL (1000 hours of free access) CD's laying around. I'd rather pay a few bucks for some kind of video on demand service over the internet or cable. I'm not sure why anyone would want to buy a disposable movie.

    -

  14. Commercials by Chagatai · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I always got a chuckle whenever I saw a Disney commercial advertising a particular movie on VHS or DVD, where they would swear that this was the absolute last time you could possibly buy a copy of the film. "Buy your limited silver-plated collector's edition 2000 version copy of Cinderella now, before it goes back in the Disney vault forever! We mean it! It won't be coming back in two years as a special gold-lithographed edition, we swear it!" It makes me wonder how they could advertise these self-destructing DVDs...

    "Get your limited copy of Beauty and the Beast now! And we do mean limited! This film will expire in two weeks and after that you will have to wait until we rehash this film and sell it again in another two months! Don't even think of renting a copy from Blockbuster, because we own them, too! This film will only last in your memories!"

    Seriously, though, here's the amazing truth: people like buying crap that doesn't break. Imagine if your copy of Detective Comics #27 spontaneously combusted after 60 years of age. Who would want to collect and read that?

    --
    --Chag
  15. I don't think their that bad by squarefish · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I thought they were a little over priced, but did buy one in october right before heading to the airport to fly back to chicago. I bought Frida and it was a great movie to watch on the plane and when I got home gave it to a neighbor to watch before it died. I wasn't going to return it.

    they should sell these things in airports and the $7 wouldn't seem like a big deal at all. I also like some of the test marketing things they were doing down there that allowed pizza and other delivery services provide a dvd with your delivered meal- no worry about a return and it comes to you on demand. I didn't really appreciate the idea of the extra waste factor, but face it- we live in an extremely disposable world and I doubt one product would make a difference.

    overall, I like the convenience the one time I tried it and found it to useful and assumed that once they were mass marketed the prices would become more reasonable.

    --
    Creationists are a lot like zombies. Slow, but powerful and numerous. And they all want to eat our brains.
  16. This just in... by pubjames · · Score: 4, Funny

    Today, the Association of American Publishers announced a revolution in book publishing. A spokeman said "The book sector has been suffering for years from consumers abusing our products. Some of them read their books more than once. Many lend out books indiscriminately, sell them or even give them away for free to charity. This type of criminal behaviour must be stopped."

    "Fortunately, we have come up with a solution. Our publishers will start to offer books which have been written in special ink sealed and are sold in vaccuum packs. Upon exposure to air, the ink gradually fades over the period of one week. We envisage law abiding consumers will love this new format, especially when they realise it is no more expensive than the old, inferior format."

  17. Re:$7? were they out of their minds? - maybe not! by dreadlocks · · Score: 4, Funny

    they probably got their info from some marketing guy who figured that there was a huge untapped market for people who drive Hummers. If they never had to make the trip back to the rental store, they would save $4 in gas for the roundtrip, so they'd come out ahead!!

    yea that worked out well didn't it.

  18. Overcaffeinated by Chazmati · · Score: 4, Funny

    Not with my positive-nitrogen-pressure DVD player! Although piping the vent outside so I didn't suffocate was a pain. And it's a bit of a hassle lugging around all those nitrogen gas containers. Ah, I guess there's no free lunch.

    1. Re:Overcaffeinated by dasmegabyte · · Score: 4, Funny

      Ah, I guess there's no free lunch.

      No, it costs $7. And it's probably just a pathetic rehashing of an earlier lunch, with worse songs.

      --
      Hey freaks: now you're ju
  19. Unfortunate, but acceptable by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I was actually rooting for this tech.
    However, current pricing is definitely the greatest barrier.

    But what I was hoping to see was a DVD vending machine offering DVD's for $2.00 or $3.00 a piece. If they could deliver the tech for a low price, it would definitely be a netflix killer. Why wait 1 day for the dvd to arrive via snail-mail when you could get a movie at your works breakroom, cornerstore etc and no worries about late fees or scratched discs?

    Really, this is a superior solution but is being killed by it's very non-competitive cost... can we say Beta-Max anyone?

  20. Price was the death knell by *weasel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    At $4 they'd still be more expensive than renting from Blockbuster, but in-line with what people are willing to pay for the no-late-fees-ever rental experience through PPV. They'd have had a shot.

    at more than double the 'renting from a store' rate they were guaranteeing failure.

    It isn't hindsight whatsoever, it's price-sight. If they'd said '$7' when they were talking about the tech everyone would've told them it would bomb. But they kept saying 'for a little more than the price to rent a movie from blockbuster'. which made everyone assume $3-4.

    $7 is certainly not 'a little more' than $3.

    Perhaps the rental chains squeezed them to stratify the pricing intentionally, i don't know (Blockbuster may have appreciable pressure now that Disney isn't the only kids-content creator in the game).
    I just know that at $7, they shouldn't have even bothered.

    --
    // "Can't clowns and pirates just -try- to get along?"
  21. Thank God - Score 1 for the Environment by cpane · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just what we would have needed, more small round disks to put in our landfills.

    Could you imagine the impact if this had really taken off? It would make the waste that AOL generates (Free AOL CDs) seem like nothing. I already throw out about 2 AOL disks a week. Imagine if the entire US was renting these DVDs instead of the reusable ones.