Slashdot Mirror
Apple in Talks with Wal-Mart over Movies
Alex, Variety.com writes "If you can't beat 'em ... Apple and Wal-Mart are in discussions over an alliance that could allow the giant retailer to profit from iTunes video downloads. Apple would then gain access to titles from every major studio." From the article: "A deal could take the form of a digital download 'coupon' that would allow consumers to buy movies, TV shows or music on iTunes with Apple paying the retail giant a percentage of the proceeds, one industry insider said ... Hollywood has been closely watching Disney's relationship with Wal-Mart in the wake of the deal. When Wal-Mart caught wind of talks between the studios and Apple, it threatened to cut its order of 'High School Musical' over the summer. Disney CEO Bob Iger did the deal with Jobs anyway, and the rest of Hollywood has been watching to see if and when the other shoe drops."
that's what Apple would be doing... Grow some balls Steve...
1) Form giant superstore
2) ?????
3) Profit
For those of you not paying attention, 2 is "Join forces with another giant superstore"
Video Production Support
Apple would then gain access to titles from every major studio.
This is a huge jump in logic. It's assuming that the reason why Apple doesn't have access to these titles now is strictly because Wal-Mart is competing with iTunes. The fact remains Apple will still have to hack out distribution deals often on a per-title basis, and many of the studios don't want to offer most of their movies for download at all. It's got nothing to do with Wal-Mart.
All this deal would do is remove one of the smaller obstacles Apple faces in getting more films on iTunes (and my bet is Wal-Mart is probably the least of Apple's headaches). The big obstacles - copyright, DRM, distribution rights, contracts between various parties, etc. - would still remain.
But if it does, it would be nice to be able to download a movie then pick it up in the store at a later time for only slightly more than the cost of the DVD. Instead of spending $10 for the download and another $20 for the dvd you could spend something like $22 for both in a "package"
I'm not sure I see why this is a "If you can't beat 'em - Join 'em" deal. Was Apple trying to beat Wal-Mart?
Seems to me that they're just looking to a different channel to market their product since the first channel wasn't interested.
Is this DRM movies? If so I hope that I can still buy them in the shop. I mean I really enjoy watching a movie now and then.
+1 Agree -1 Disagree
So, does this mean I'm entitled to part of the profits all my competitors make, on basis that they're taking money I could have made had they not had a more sucessful and up-to-date business model?
Note to self: sue everyone!
Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
Wal mart runs rough shod over its partners and suppliers. When there's no more blood to draw, they find some other "partner." And you thought Microsoft played rough.
http://www.fastcompany.com/online/77/walmart.html
More music, fewer hits
Something doesn't add up. Why would Apple give Wal-Mart a portion of all of it's sales. That article is pretty poorly written, and seems to be rushed to be the first to report it.
As a shareholder, that's disappointing on several levels.
Wal-Mart's aleged threat to cut Disney orders if Disney started selling through iTunes would, in an honest administration, be an instant anti-trust lawsuit by the Department of Justice.
Its perfectly legal and valid for Wal-Mart to squeeze its suppliers when they sell to Wal-Mart, but to threaten suppliers because they are selling through other venues, when Wal-Mart has an unquestioned monopoly in many areas, would be asking for intervention.
However, with the current DoJ completely toothless, and prefering Seattlements (eg, the Microsoft anti-trust resolution) to actually going after entrenched business interests (especially hard-core republican supporters like the Waltons), Wal-Mart doesn't need to worry.
Test your net with Netalyzr
Whatever one things of Wal-Mart, they aren't run by idiots. If the on-line distribution of video is going to happen in the future, and surely it is, it would be in their best interest to get in on the ground floor with the best (ie most proven, most popular, and most profitable) of the companies doing this.
Then again, maybe there is something brewing with another of Apples products: maybe computers or iPods, which I've heard they still make.
The Independent: Reverend Spooner Arrested in Friar Tuck Incident - ISIHAC, Historical Headlines
It's a wonderful thing for Wal-Mart and I don't really fault them for doing it, but this is basically extortion on a grand scale. A new delivery model threatens the very thing that gives Wal-Mart its advantage (their distribution system), and instead of competing straight-up, they threaten their suppliers to the point that the new distribution model has to throw them some money to STFU. So the new distribution model has a chance to compete on a level playing field (being able to offer the same products.) Again, well-played by Wally World, but just sickening.
After all he's in deep up to his iBalls with this one.
Let me see if I got this right: Walmart is using their near-monopoly status to prevent movie studios from supplying Apple with movies unless Walmart get a cut of Apple's sales. Other than that, they are doing no work that deserves compensation.
Sounds like extortion to me.
I'm certainly not a Marketing Genius, but it seems to me that if the iTunes store really did sell $1,000,000 worth of movies in the first week, then maybe other studios will realize that pissing off Wal-Mart isn't such a big deal after all.
If I were in Apple's place, I think I'd wait a while before giving in to any major retailer. On the other hand, I don't know how gift cards sold at retailers work -- if everyone else who sells an iTunes gift card gets some cut off the top of the cost of the card, then I don't see any issue letting Wal-Mart play in that game, too (which, according to the article, they don't at present).
Didn't a lot of studios initially balk at the idea of TV over iTunes, fearing it'd hurt DVD sales? Somehow I think that movies would go the same way, with initial reluctance, phenomenal sales of the initial Disney titles, growing acceptance, and finally becoming just another standard sales channel.
Got a lot of friends who've been working for Wal-Mart for years and have been getting the shaft the whole time. Wal-Mart does not care about its employees or suppliers. I work in the health-care industry, particularaly with insurance providers. Wal-Mart contracts through Blue Cross of Illinois for benefits of their 'full-time' work force. (Meaning 40 hours a week, but they won't pay you overtime if you work 60 one week and 20 the next). You want a bad benifit package, ask a Wal-Mart employee. The government offers far better insurance for people below the poverty line and for much cheaper. And your average full-time (non-manager) Wal-Mart employee is at poverty-level income.
This sig isn't original enough, it's time to come up with something witty...
Just as the good old cringley said at September 14:
The success of Apple's movie download business right now depends mainly on not alienating Wal-Mart.
So for the moment Apple tells Wal-Mart that movies sold through the iTunes Store won't be a threat because of their lower than DVD
resolution. When that fails, Apple will point out that HD-DVD and Blu-ray are coming and Wal-Mart should stop worrying. But
eventually Apple will succumb to its need to sell yet more iPods and will point out that its little gizmo is a fine substitute
for an optical disc. Take your iPod to Target and fill it with movies. Or, better still, buy an iPod at Target and THEN fill it
with movies. Remember that in the end this is all about selling more razors, not more blades, so movie sales don't really matter much to Apple as long as iPods are flying off the shelves.
First of all, just let me buy something online via a download without any digital coupons or anything like that. A novel concept would be that I would go to a website, pick a movie and download it. It's pretty complicated, granted, but I think it could be implemented. But that's neither here nor there...
Secondly, and completely unrelatedly, from TFA:
If they're taking a loss at $13 per DVD what's the real cost? If Wal-Mart buys 300,000 copies of something, do you mean to tell me they're paying more than $12.99 per movie?! I thought they were these great negotiators, cutthroat distributer killers. Or does that only work on toilet paper and tools made in China?
Please don't use "umm" or "err" or "erm".
Apple's Wins:
...
1. Walmart sells a boatload of iPods. Apple probably wants to keep Microsoft out of the game... Given Walmart's purchasing power, Steve will insist on two things: a)squeeze Microsoft on cost margins further exacerbating Zune's losses b)iPod gets premium shelf spacing other players including Samsung and Microsoft get stored in the back c)iPod accessories get better placement (taking it further perhaps extending Apple's store within a store concept from CompUSA to Walmart d)leverage for margin negotiations over iPod sales
2. Fairplay.... Walmart does not take backstabbing lightly. Microsoft's strategy to drop PFS (remember Walmarts 88cent store is based on PFS) support and create a new DRM standard reeks of screwing their partners. Sure Microsoft thinks they can get away with it because they are a Monopoly. But Walmart is a monopsony.... when a monopoly meets a monopsony its like Godzilla meets Mothra..... Walmart is going to put its weight behind Fairplay... this will create quite a bit of momentum for Apple
3. Apple gets to have major studios onboard with Walmart's support
Absolutely. I can attest to your statement from personal experience. I sued Wal-Mart on behalf of an employee for disability discrimination for some absolutely ridiculous behavior; it was one of the best cases of my career (even though it was only small money). The problem is that in our consumer-driven society, people only want the bottom dollar price and will not consider the other costs of buying at Wal-Mart. DON'T SHOP AT WAL-MART! They suck the life out of the communities they infest.
I'm having trouble seeing why Wal-Mart has such a big deal with this, other than they can be dicks about it and get away with it.
It's my experience that the people who would be buying movies online are not necessarily the same people who regularly shop at Wal-Mart. There are overlaps, definitely, but on the whole the two markets don't overlap. And maybe that's just my own standard biased view point, but this just seems like a classic bully situation. Wal-Mart needs to be put down.
No sig for you. YOU GET NO SIG!
Bah, I live in a town where the Wal-Mart is all there is to do. It's the main attraction. There's no life-sucking going on; it's just the modern equivalent to the town marketplace. Just with more flourescent lights and people riding around in little scooters.
I don't disagree.... but I still have to keep asking myself *why* people keep working for Wal-Mart, given the raw deals they offer? There are numerous articles out there about Costco offering a FAR better deal to employees than Sam's Club (owned by Wal-Mart) does - yet they're the same format of business.
Ultimately, no business can continue offering poor pay and benefits and survive, unless people keep on signing up to work at those poor wages.
I mean, I get why Wal-Mart might have initially gotten away with it. The business model involved building in small towns where there wasn't much else around. But these days, you've got several in every major city too - where there are surely plenty of other retails outlets a person could work at.
This seems like a clear violation of the The Sherman Act (1890), the Clayton Act (1914),the Robinson-Patman Act (1936) and Federal Trade Commission Act (1914). Why is this allowed to happen?
[sarcasm]Maybe they should adopt the diamond industry's business model and maintain an artificial scarcity to keep prices up.[/sarcasm]
These asshats don't have the first clue. I read this the other day.
The "added convenience" of DRM-encumbered files that I can't backup or watch on my other computers?! *cough, splutter*
I cling to the hope that the combined greed of Wal-Mart and the movie studios will reach critical mass and collapse into a metaphyscial black-hole that will take them both into the eternity they so richly deserve.
Insisting on "correct" English is like saying that there is only one, definitive recipe for chili.
Where is government when you need it?
So basically, the situation is that there is a very large retailer angry about new innovative competition. Rather than changing to be more competitive, the large retailer is playing dirty by throwing its almost monopoly powers around to force submission by competition by getting a cut of competitor profits... Why should Walmart get a cut of iTunes video sales and not Target, Best Buy, Fry's, Blockbuster, Hollywood Video, and the thousands of other video retailers in the USA.
The real danger is Wally World shoehorning itself into a position of an exclusive distribution channel, which raises the spectre of RIAA again. The $$$ isn't in the product, it's in the distribution channel and WalMart wants to be there. Maybe the revenue from their cut can go towards providing decent health insurance for their employees, but I'm confident they won't.
Eternity: will that be smoking, or non-smoking? I Corinthians 6:9-10
I haven't been following this too closely during it's evolution, but from what I could gather from the front page news bits, it seems like Wal-mart has just been whining and bitching and now Apple is just trying to get them to shut up. Is this really Apple "going to bed with the devil?" Or is it Apple just dealing with a nuisance that has grown into a problem? If Wal-Mart has had the effect of scaring off studios from dealing with Apple, then this is necessary. Very annoying and quite petulent of Wal-Mart, but necessary. In order for the whole movie aspect to work with iTunes, Apple needs to get more revenue than just Disney. They need the movies; if that means appeasing the childish needs of Wal-Mart, then no biggie.
If this is indeed the case, and there's no way to get an iTunes product without buying in to the WalMart crap, then I too will stop being a loyal iTunes Store customer... as are many friends and relatives with some semblance of ethics.
Apple specializes in selling low quantities of very expensive items. Wal-Mart specializes in selling high quantities of very cheap items.
Congratulations, this is why it could work out. You now have the spectrum of people who buy cheap (walmart) and people who pay the Apple Tax (apple). You have two different segments of the market that neither one can hack due to stereotypes. And when you combine their powers...
For a lot of these people, its wal-mart or nothing. (does wal-mart employ illegals from south of the border like some people do?)
I am sure that if these people could get jobs elsewhere (k-mart, target or any other place) they would. But they cant.
Another reason they don't leave is becuase all the other retail stores and other job sources are full. You work at Wal-Mart because you don't have any other choices. Not for the benifits of the job. Not for the low pay. Not for the 10% discount card (they'd more than make up for the discount at another job). Wal-Mart gets away with screwing their employees because their employees typically have no other choice.
This sig isn't original enough, it's time to come up with something witty...
So what did people do in your town before Walmart came? Did they literally do nothing? Or was there something else to do, and Walmart sucked the life out of it?
I think NYC is a major city and you won't find a Wal Mart here, in the suburbs sure, but not within city limits and I'm not driving to Jersey or Long Island to save a dollar on socks.
An international retail store chain. There are MANY of that kind.
The Internet, is BIGGER than not only wal-mart, but ALL retail store chains combined.
Wal-Mart, YOU have to adapt to the modern times. Modern times will not adapt to your ways.
Read radical news here
The two items that Apple is interested in selling, iPods and movies, are items that are worth making a special trip. If Walmart refuses to stock these items, their customers that are NOT willing to download movies off iTunes will just to to Target or Best Buy or one of the many other retailers who are more than willing to sell the title.
The problem is likely more related to nervous movie studios than any insecurity on Apple's part. Walmart can only refuse to stock so many items before people stop bothering to make the trip.
Angleyne: You can't bend that girder - it's unbendable! Bender: Well I don't know anything about lifting, so that ju
I wonder if Apple will open the iTunes Movie store up to independent producers? So I can get my new geek documentary into the store. It's very Mac orientated, featuring Woz, Andy Hertzfeld, Guy Kawasaki, and Jef Raskin. Check out the In Search of the Valley trailer.
Wal-Mart sucks the essense out of every product they buy.
There is no `essence` in sporting goods, cheap furniture, mass produced DVDs, diapers, and toilet paper.
If you want nice furniture that has `essence`, go to Robb and Stucky or some guy that builds chairs in his garage; but then you'll bitch about the high prices.
I will say that I am surprised that Wilson still has a lot of `hands-on` in the process of making tennis balls.
Wal-Mart provides goods that are `good enough` for the people that shop there.
I suppose you're going to bitch about the $4.00 prescriptions that Wal-Mart will offer saying that they will undercut the CVS, OSCO, Walgreens, and local drugstore pharmacies. Let's just forget about the people that will benefit from that because they should be paying $20/bottle just to be fair.
Wal-Mart pays their staff what they're worth and obviously what they're willing to take. You can't demand $1,000,000 for a $200,000 home. It doesn't work that way.
People aren't assigned employment at Wal-Mart, they voluntarily walk in the door and fill out an application.
Wal-Mart empowers people to have things that they normally wouldn't have and for rural America, provide a much needed service for thousands of people.
If you've ever lived in a small town where the real town was 20+ miles away, Wal-Mart is a very much appreciated entity.
I have my issues with Wal-Mart especially as it comes to property that the municipalities try to take away from citizens but I blame both the local politicians and Wal-Mart for that.
People may hate termites but they do have a place in the eco-system.
if you steal from one source, that is plagiarism, if you steal from many, well, that's just research.
Probably all gathered around some other commerce-based institution, I suspect. I suppose you could say that it "sucked the life" out of some general store or something but that would presuppose that an inanimate economic construct could have life to begin with. It's no different than hanging out at the mall, really. And the only difference between that and, say, hanging out at church is the economic gain to be had by Wal-Mart. So if there's an ethical difference between the two it must hang on the fact that for some reason being at a place that sells stuff is morally worse than being at a place that doesn't.
I won't even go near the place. If they are taking profits from Apple, I won't help Apple get those profits. I won't be buying video from iTunes if they make this deal with Walmart. For the sake of the entire global economy, not just the US, I hope nobody else buys. I think the digital distribution model is a good idea in general, buy if I have to give money to Walmart, I won't bother with it.
If this is true, it does seem like Apple is giving in to The Man, but it reminds me a little bit of that time when Bill appeared on the big screen behind Jobs and they announced some big stock deal (IIRC, the deal would provide for Microsoft Office's continued Mac development). On that day, it seemed like it was the first step toward a Microsoft buyout of Apple, or something similarly ominous.
But later on it became apparent that Jobs wasn't overtly concerned about keeping that deal... Apple took the money and later came out with it's own web browser, and with iWork, Apple is on the way toward having a very nice alternative to Office. Yes, Office is still available for Mac, but I wonder how long that will last. IE for Mac is already history...
So now I hear that Steve could be in bed with Wal-Mart, and I can't help but wonder how he's figuring on turning this into a future Apple advantage, even at Wal-Mart's expense.
Sam! If you will let me be,
I will try them.
You will see.
Currently itunes video's that i've downloaded were of atrocious video quality @dvd prices ($40ish for a full season of a series). Knowing that I'd get a DVD would be quite reasuring.
Amazon.com has me somewhat salvating. Prices are still decent but from the file specifications that quality might be much higher.
Hmmm... Pie...
I dunno if this is such a good idea. We're talking a huge collision in image between Apple and Wal-Mart. Apple's image is hip, liberal, urban. Wal-Mart's is working-class, conservative, and rural.
I didn't say they didn't serve a purpose at one time. Yes, they enable cheaper goods, but at the cost of another economy in another town that they're sucking dry. What I meant buy sucking the essense out of a product is like when they put Rubbermaid out of business because they would no longer buy products from them unless they cut their prices to below operating budget. Just like they do with all their product maker. They put other communities out of business. When they suck one of those dry, they find another and suck it dry. They've been doing it for years.
This sig isn't original enough, it's time to come up with something witty...
Wal-Mart is free to to not buy any product it does not want to resell. Most any retailer excludes third rate and/or niche specialty items from its store because no one wants to buy them or that the profit in selling them is not worth the time. Exactly whom is allowed to decide what movies Wal-Mart, Target or other retailers carries? Does they also get to tell the movie studios what movies to produce?
This is a huge jump in logic. It's assuming that the reason why Apple doesn't have access to these titles now is strictly because Wal-Mart is competing with iTunes.
That is not correct. The answer is subtly, but importantly, different - it is because Walmart is threatening studios that if they offer downloads through ITMS they will cut off sales.
It's not because Walmart is competing, it's because Walmart threatens NOT to compete and reduce the market availiable to studios!
many of the studios don't want to offer most of their movies for download at all. It's got nothing to do with Wal-Mart.
When the largest retailer in the world says "Hey, if you sign on with Apple we might just stop carrying your DVD's" the choices made thereafter have quite a bit to do with that threat. Disney called Walmarts bluff, but other studios may not be so self assured.
As for studios not wanting to offer movies for download - come on. They do today already via a few online stores with pitiful sales. Do you honestly think that the studios are not looking at Disneys announcement that the have sold 250k movies with no distribution costs and no work on the part of Disney, and are willing to leave that kind of money sitting on the table? That makes no sense. To understand studio desires is very simple, look where the money is. And a LOT of money is flowing into ITMS.
Really the studios have all the power here, if every studio went with Apple would Walmart stop sellign DVD's? I think not. It's a major source of profit for them as well.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Wal-Mart makes up for 40% of the $17bn annual DVD sales.
But here's the real question - if WalMart stopped selling DVD's, would people stop buying DVD's or simply go over to Best Buy which is generally right next door? WalMart does not exist in a vaccuum.
That's the truth of the matter, WalMart not selling DVD's just means WalMart is out $17bn in sales! It doesn't mean the studios are. Your figures are powerful proof of the original point, that the studios can blow off WalMart on this one. It's never good to let an outlet dictate your behaviour.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Job's balls have nothing to do with this issue. Wal-Mart sells 40% of the DVD's from Hollywood. The comapny has threatened the movie studios and so far they are not willing to work with Apple. The new move by Wal-Mart shows that they are an extortion racket. They are also the bigger player. Apple does not have the upper hand. And you should also consider that Wal-Mart can launch its own service. They do not need Apple.
Wal mart runs rough shod over its partners and suppliers. When there's no more blood to draw, they find some other "partner."
Yes but here you are talking about all of Hollywood.
If WalMart decides to stop selling DVD's, what are they going to do - only offer Bollywood DVD's? I guess they could do some tie-in marketing and have a sale on winter Saris. I'm sure that will make up for the ginormous revenue stream they would loose not selling DVDs.
It's not like there are other suppliers of the popular product WalMart is selling.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Why not (in addition to coupons and such) have ipod movie kiosks in between the DVD racks? I mean, the real advantage in going to a brick and mortar store is instant gratification. Some people have iPods and dial-up (primarilly ripping music from CDs and not fussing with video) or slower broadband (a full movie can take a while to download). I can see the benefits of a store like Wal-Mart having a library of titles locally cached that can be rapidly transferred to the customer's iPod . . .
Apple is blocked from selling movies from major studios (minus Disney because Steve owns shares). Wal-Mart sells 40% of the movie industry's DVDs. When they shook the table, the industry sat on their hands. A deal between Apple and Wal-Mart is a deal BETWEEN devils. Believe me, if Apple had the leverage that Wal-Mart did, they would employ the same tactics. Look at DRM and the .99 cent song.
If people don't like it they should continue to rent DVDs or buy them. This parnership marks a new way of doing business. Now that Apple can sell the movies online, the door is open to other online suppliers like AT&T, Comcast and Amazon.com. Microsoft will shuffle in the door late as usual.
This is an awful, awful development. As a Mac zealot, video iPod owner and labor activist, I am in a complete bind.
Wal-Mart is a ridiculously vile company. Their monopsonistic business practices, abuse of employees and generally un-American attitude make them completely unworthy of any financial support. When BusinessWeek rails against a company, you know it's fucked up.
What happened to Apple's vaunted concern for the community. Ugh. U-G-H.
go get it
Apple tries to project urban when it is really suburban. But getting to the point, how would Wal-Mart's cut of the deal taint the download of Lethal Weapon III as working-class or rural?
I remember Rubbermaid. Basically sold plastic slugs, vacuum formed in various shapes and were way overpriced.
I can understand the bias against Wal-Mart in stories like that but I'm sure there is another side as I've seen in local economies more recently in the dot com boom.
How much of that is Rubbermaids arrogance and sticking to a high price to keep inflated salaries?
If Vendor B can provide the same garbage can from the same plastic supplier and for 60% less, is it really the fault of Wal-Mart?
I've witnessed small businesses overcharge ( and when I say overcharge, I mean the large businesses had a budget big enough to cover the service because there wasn't market research done as to how much it should really cost and the small business took the budget ) large local customers for services that were sparse in the dot com era. The small businesses didn't diversify and had 70% of their income on 1 or 2 contracts that were these large customers.
Eventually the real cost of services appear after a few years and the small shop is out of business because it based payroll and other fees on the bigger budgeted services.
If Wal-Mart has a `good enough` product for a fair or cheap price, I'll take it.
If Wal-Mart has a product that isn't `good enough`, I'll shop elsewhere, case in point, their produce sucks where I live so I go to the local supermarket and pay a higher price, gladly.
if you steal from one source, that is plagiarism, if you steal from many, well, that's just research.
Will the movies be the "Wal-Mart Censored" version?
A friend bought a copy of "Fast Times at Ridgemont High" at Wal-Mart.
Everything about the abortion was missing from the film.
I've heard other stories about movies from Wal-Mart as well.
Apple Fanboy shocked to find out that Apple is a business.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Walmart is a distribution channel and crossmarketing opportunity for Apple to tie-in its brand of product. Hollywood would like a single source of supply on software for consumers to easily obtain their offerings. Hollywood wants the best broker for the customer to make the experience positive and repeat.
The deal here is Apple's proprietary format getting in between the consumer and the content. Walmart doesn't want to have Apple/Disney ransom the format against consumers unless they pony-up the AppleCare Agreement, ULISA Agreement, DMCA Agreement and pay Apple royalty for use of its proprietary licenses.
Job's is going to position Apple, its products, and iTMS service in the broker position abstracted above Walmart, Hollywood and the consumer in exchange for transaction fee. Walmart want's Apple to earn their $.99 or whatever on value-add versus leverage in the channel.
Church may not directly do so, but indirectly, they sell fancy clothes. Church is a veritable fashion show I tells ya.
--
WHO ATE MY BREAKFAST PANTS?
But see, your explanation just goes to show that Wal-Mart has no need to offer their employees more. Apparently, they're functioning just fine by using employment of apathetic or depressed people -- groups who don't seem to be good enough workers for anyone else to hire.
When you look at it that way, it seems like a bad idea to complain that they should pay their workers more! Why reward apathy? People always have "other choices", really. They just don't have other choices they're willing to put forth the effort to take advantage of. (And hey - that's human nature. I know *I* could do better for myself, financially, if I was willing to make some sacrifices I don't choose to make. But that's my own personal "comfort zone". And it sounds like for some of these Wal-Mart workers, theirs is having a steady paycheck and a job at "poverty level income", vs. having to learn new skills or deal with personal problems they may have.)
I've not been too impressed with some of Wal-Mart's recent actions, but that, my friend, is a flat-out lie. I have seen a manager fired for doing just that with only a few minutes of time.
How many Mac users shop at Wal-Mart, or how many Wal-Mart customers buy Apple? I mean, Wal-Mart is towards the bottom of the retail chain, and Apple is at the top of the computer chain. Why would somebody who pays the Apple premium lower themselves to go to Wal-Mart?
FTA:: "Customers who throw a disc in their shopping carts spend an average of $75 per trip to the store -- far more than those who don't pick up a DVD."
Walmart's air supply is DVD's, period.
FTA:: "Studios are trying to calculate how much longer DVD sales -- 40% of which go through Wal-Mart -- will be a cornerstone of their business."
Walmart is sucking thin air unless they replace sales lost to Digital downloads.
FTA:: "Studio sources say the rest of the majors (Hollywood studios) are very close to joining Disney in a deal with Apple but are holding off until the end of the key fourth quarter (Xmas), when half of all DVD sales occur."
Walmart is out of air after Xmas.
Walmart is the next Luddite if they don't transition with their customer's, Hollywood and popular culture going over to Digital.
In play are Walmart customer's, who's going to win their Entertainment dollar$ and live off the follow-on patronage represented by that $75.00 shopping basket. I would venture that Amazon is looking pretty good to Walmart right about now. A Bricks&Clicks deal would put Walmart's distribution behind every Amazon click to bring real leverage to the marketplace.
Lots of people around big cities want to work for Wal-Mart. Earlier this year Wal-Mart opened a new store in suburban Chicago and had 25,000 applications for 325 positions. Last year they had 11,000 applications for about the same number of jobs in Oakland, California.
Oh, and all forms of entertainment on earth will be destroyed, taking with it almost all life on earth except for the main characters who are probably working in the mall or at the cable company with you. It's a side effect of piracy. You might have seen it in such Hollywood blockbusters as "Armageddon", or "Volcano", or even "The Day After Tomorrow". You see, without Hollywood, we wouldn't have known that these catastrophes were even possible, much less how we might actually survive them. I for one thank God every day for Wal-Mart and the Big 5 [name it]'s whom without which we would all be dead. And Tom Cruise.
You sure about that? I can (won't, for obvious reasons) give you plenty of phone numbers to people who get jerked around like this all the time. They are told that their paychecks are 'averaged' over an 80 hour work week. Well, I know it's illegal, but if the employees don't care enough to stir something up, why would I?
This sig isn't original enough, it's time to come up with something witty...
And you've hit the nail on the head. And I believe it explains part of the undeniable sense of depair I feel whenever I have to walk into a Wal-Mart. Especially the 'ghetto' Wal-Marts that have fallen into K-Mart levels of disrepair.
This sig isn't original enough, it's time to come up with something witty...
The only thing that holds consumers back on making that sort of purchase is price.
Uhh... I don't know where you live, but around here I don't have a reliable 10Mbps/s stream to download a DVD quality movie and watch it while it downloads. If I have to wait 2+ hours for the damn thing to download it isn't much of an "impule purchase" is it? I could drive to the blockbuster and be back in 1/8 that time.
Before the retail channel will be a success, the national infrastructure has to be in place. And all download caps across ISPs need to be *eliminated* - right now I have a 60 GB cap on my monthly downloads - now you really think I would waste 1 Gb of that on a sub-part movie download when I can just rent it at the corner store? No thanks.
Those deals are only for the BIG suppliers with SHORT turn-around deals. Wal-mart is a vicious customer, but can deliver HUGE volumes. They have also moderated themselves, as suppliers stopped working with them when they got too cutt-throat. The buyers have been reigned in, because big accounts like Rubbermaid became problematic. A friend in marketing at Rubbermaid was telling us that while the "buy on sale," where Walmart accepts the inventory at their cash register has pushed the inventory holding risk to the suppliers, it's only on products that are sold within 2-3 days of being in the store. Wal-mart doesn't waste shelf space on items that don't turn-over.
The suppliers are actually happy with the arrangement, because it's a deal point, and they can extract better pricing by working with that system. While I'm sure that Wal-mart has played hardball as you described, it's a little overstating to suggest that that is the normal way of doing business.
My friend also suggested that the buyers have been becoming less adversarial, and trying to produce more win-wins. Sure the Wal-mart culture is there... normally buyers get taken out to lunch with salesmen who entertain them... a bit of sneaky corruption, the buyers are pushed to gives a little bit of the company's money to get well treated by the salesmen. At Wal-mart, salesmen go to Wal-mart HQ, no meals are allowed. All negotiations take place in a small room at Wal-mart HQ. By keeping their buyers from trading favors with salesmen, they keep their costs down.
Walmart does MANY things... they are aggressive, but not necessary under-handed. However, they have a LOT of maneuvering room in the industry, and if they can make real money by selling Apple iTunes movies in the store, they WILL bring market pressure on the studios to play ball.
Alex
I've been paid under 80 hours regular with overtime on the same check, so, yes, I am sure. There is no process to 'average' hours to compute ovetime hours. If people are getting jerked around it's by individuals, and I feel terribly sorry for them. These people need to call the ethics hotline and get something done about it, but as you said they have to want to do that.
No matter what studios think, a digital download does not have as much intrinsic value as a packaged Disc.
I'm sure the studios realise this, the same way they realise DVDs look more "filmey" if you put them in a box the same height as a VHS tape, and the same way they realise someone won't pay twice as much for two films on a single disc. It's not about the bitrate, or how much will fit into a given physical space, it's about psychology.
"... zero cost to ship any copies..."
Uh... I submit that the bandwidth needed to download a 1.2GB file has SOME cost, as does building and maintaining the infrastructure needed to ensure that thousands, if not tens of thousands, of people can do so simultaneously.
Anytime you want to talk about delivering a million copies of anything I think you'll find the costs are far from inconsequential.
As far as that goes, I'd almost be willing to bet that once those costs are taken into account, the actual costs of delivering a movie online is perhaps only a single order of magnitude away from that of delivering a piece of plastic to a store.
The actual cost of a mass-produced disc is pennies on the dollar anyway. You pay for the content.
Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
First of all Apple is is using H.264 as the compression method, which is more efficient then MPEG4, and orders of magnitude more efficient them MPEG2 (the DVD encoding codec).
Thus the resulting file size has NOTHING to do with the picture quality. Indeed H.264 solves many MPEG2 artifact problems which a present no matter how high the bit rate. (Check out the geometrical pattern on Rosalind Russell's suit in His Girl Friday). Well transferred/compressed/authored DVDs do indeed look better than Apple's downloads on a HDTV or computer, but has to do with the DVDs higher resolution: 720x480 vs. 640x480.
Two points though -- regular TVs have a resolution of 640x480, so most people can't notice the difference. And Apple is in no way tied to their current resolution -- they will no doubt increase it in the future, going higher than DVD if they wish.
"How much of that is Rubbermaids arrogance and sticking to a high price to keep inflated salaries?" By arrogance, you mean a salary that will pay a mortgage and allow one to raise a family in America. Tell us about the Chinese shantytown you enjoy living in. (In your analogy, chinese workers making 60 cents or whatever a day are "vendor B".)
That's my point.
If it costs 10 cents to make 1000 garbage cans and you feel that $20 a can is what people should pay then so be it. More power to you.
If vendor B says that there is absolutely no educated skill is required in putting a plug in a vacuum form machine and that $5 a can is what people should pay and have the company still make a profit, the more power to them. The market will sort it out.
Basically the market told Rubbermaid that $20 a can isn't going to cut it.
Rubbermaid had some overpriced crap and I mean crap. How many rubbermaid clothes baskets have you gone through in your college years? How many overpriced garbage cans have had their lips tear?
If I'm going to pay $15 for an 8 gallon garbage can, I don't expect to replace it every 3 years. At that rate, I'll buy the $5 one.
if you steal from one source, that is plagiarism, if you steal from many, well, that's just research.
Rubbermaid went out of business? I never noticed.
I've not been too impressed with some of Wal-Mart's recent actions, but that, my friend, is a flat-out lie. I have seen a manager fired for doing just that with only a few minutes of time.
Maybe that Wal-Mart was sued? Because, yes Wal-Mart has been busted for messing with people's timeclocks numerous times. This of course is not company policy, but when upper management has the unstoppable force of "you must get all your work done" meet the immovable object of "you must not pay overtime", something is going to give in middle management.
In your analogy, Rubbermaid would go ahead and cut costs and quality to meet the $5 price of that cheap chinese import. But then Wal-Mart asks for a 5% cost reduction the next year. And the year after that, and after that, until Rubbermaid goes out of business. It happened to Vlasic. Wal-Mart is also single-handedly driving offshoring through this pracetice - before, companies would offshore to match prices out of a need to compete with cheap Asian imports, or for executive greed. Now companies have to offshore just to survive thanks to Wal-Mart's greed. So please, spare us the elitism, and the "arrogance" here is not coming from Rubbermaid.
I think that's more a sign of people wanting jobs than people wanting to work at Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart does provide jobs, but not good paying ones, and frequently destory other jobs in order to do so.
The file is an mpeg4 file (.m4v) and is 1.2 GB in size. The movie is just under 1:48 total running time so the overall data rate is about 1600 kb/s. The picture is 640x272 at a 2.35:1 aspect ratio (which the theatrical release also was). It is not 'DVD' quality because (among other things) it is not 720 pixels wide. At the same aspect ratio, a frame from the DVD would be 720x306 pixels so it's a little over 10% lower rez in each dimension. The audio track is a stereo 44.1 khz 128 kb AAC audio track, exactly the same format as the standard iTunes song. So no it's not 5.1. The video is H.264 encoded video as compared to mpeg2 on the DVD. It comes with chapter markers which appear in the iTunes player - like scene selections on the DVD, and it has a nice hi-rez 'album art' poster for the film. It cost $9.99 and it is a Fairplay protected file (sharable between 5 machines and can't export it to other formats but can otherwise archive the data on other media)
All in all I'd give it a B+/A-. It works great as a kind of impulse buy and is extremely easy to use and deal with. It is very well integrated into the whole iTunes experience. The DRM obviously is limiting and the sound can't compare with 5.1 But there was no waiting at all and the image qualilty was fine. It is completely on par with buying a movie on-demand via digital cable except without the bad remote and interface design. It will be much more compelling with the next year's iTV when you can browse and buy with a simple remote in front of the TV. And I'm sure they will sooner rather than later have high-def versions of the films available, just as they now have a 'lossless' audio format for music. (I'm guessing that a 720p version of Hitchhikers would be 3.5 to 4 gigs, pretty easily downloadable over my connection in less than 2 hours -- so it should basically stream.)
Wal-Mart's pay and benefits are comparable to other retailers in their sector, like Target. Wal-Mart gets singled out for criticism because they are the biggest. And because the unions are trying to bust them.
FREE DEAL OF THE WEEK
FREE 30GB iPod VIDEO [Black/White]
Offering Site : Flashipods4free.com
Offering Company: TRAINN - Transcedent Innovations
30GB Video iPod
How to Complete the Offer
1) Sign Up at FlashiPods4Free.com; look on the bottom right for the signup box.
READ THIS! IMPORTANT!
At signup, you are presented with a choice of a referral account or point account. The difference is, once you complete an offer, you will either refer friends to sign up or complete offers for more points. Once you finish points or finish your referring, you will receive your iPod regardless. Its a matter of personal choice. Referral or points!
2) CompleteONE offer; the easiest current offer is Stamps.com, which is free if you cancel within 28 days. It is also listed as INSTANT Credit. Over 50 different offers are also available!
3) Start referringonly 5ofyour friends to do this! Or if you signed up for the points option, complete more offers until you satisfied the amount of points needed.
4) Once the offer has been approved and your friends have signed up for an offer, a Free iPodWILL BE recieved!