Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Wal-Mart Closes Online Movie Download Service

Posted by Zonk on from the hard-to-fight-the-flix dept.

eldavojohn writes "A year after opening its movie download service, Wal-Mart has abandoned the endeavor. They claim this is a result of HP's decision to stop supporting its video download store software. The article also notes that, unlike iTunes, Wal-Mart offered variable pricing which attracted a lot of studios. 'The world's largest retailer instead turned its rental service over to Netflix Inc. Wal-Mart still operates a music download service and continues to sell CDs and DVDs at retail stores and over the Internet for shipping by mail.' Is this evidence of the strength of unified pricing in media downloads or just another company being squished by the giant Netflix & Apple?"

136 comments

  1. Wal-Mart "squished"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Wal-Mart "squished"? I'd like to see that honestly.

    1. Re:Wal-Mart "squished"? by ByOhTek · · Score: 2, Insightful
      You beat me to it.

      I was gonna say.

      [...] or just another company being squished by the giant Netflix & Apple?


      You mean for once WalMart isn't the one doing the squishing? How'd that happen?
      --
      Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
    2. Re:Wal-Mart "squished"? by CRCulver · · Score: 2, Interesting

      While Wal-Mart has completely taken over small-town America, it is actively resisted by urban residents, and the company has been beaten back from establishing footholds on the outskirts of many city centers. See Fishman's The Wal-Mart Effect for more on this division between success in some areas and defeats in others. City dwellers (therefore a fairly large amount of Americans), have shown that Wal-Mart's offerings aren't too appealing, and the company has had no luck finding a way into their hearts.

    3. Re:Wal-Mart "squished"? by flaming+error · · Score: 2, Funny

      You could also try the book here, too.

      It's hard to be all things to all people.

    4. Re:Wal-Mart "squished"? by eln · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think you're misjudging city dwellers. In my experience, whether or not Wal-Mart is really challenged depends almost entirely on whether or not there's an aggressive neighborhood association in the area where they want to build. In cities where Wal-Marts are present, they are generally always crowded, and presumably make good money.

      Here in Austin, which is admittedly not a huge metropolis but is a good sized city, there are already several Wal-Mart stores, and I guarantee none of them are hurting for customers. However, there is a neighborhood association in north Austin that has been trying to block a Wal-Mart from being built near them for close to two years now. What's odd about that effort is that the area Wal-Mart wants to build in is currently occupied by a dilapidated mall that is mostly empty and rarely sees much traffic. They claim that having a Wal-Mart there would drive down property values (although I have seen plenty of very upscale neighborhoods located right next to Wal-Marts) more than having a mostly empty run-down mall does now. Personally, I think if another discount store that wasn't called Wal-Mart wanted to build there, no one would have any issue with it.

      Personally, I rarely shop at Wal-Mart mostly because it's always too crowded and the marginal savings on decent stuff (the really cheap stuff is almost universally garbage) isn't worth the hassle. However, I doubt Wal-Mart spends a lot of time worrying about how to make their stores less crowded for my benefit.

    5. Re:Wal-Mart "squished"? by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think the GP isn't talking about suburbs but the actual city. We're talking full blown cities. I have friends who live in and around Chicago. They walk or take public transportation everywhere. Their local deli, the local grocery store. Have maybe 15 parking spots total. Walmart doesn't fit into this 'life style' You don't have 5 acres to put a 800 spot parking lot and a huge store. City dwellers are happy not having to drive anywhere.

      In the suburbs, you have a huge sub division with cookie cutter houses and 2.5 children per house. No public transportation nothing. If you have to drive somewhere, you're probably going to want to drive one place rather than 100. This is where walmart is thriving. As population density drops it makes more sense.

      And yes, Chicago hates "Big box stores" because they're not union. Target, Meijer, Walmart, etc. They're all non-union and I don't think a single one is within City limits (there wasn't last time I checked).

    6. Re:Wal-Mart "squished"? by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      However, I doubt Wal-Mart spends a lot of time worrying about how to make their stores less crowded for my benefit.

      They have been fighting to open another store in your area for a while.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    7. Re:Wal-Mart "squished"? by bastafidli · · Score: 1

      I live in north dallas which is pretty much exactly in the middle of highly populated area (no suburbs) with several million dollar neighborhoods around it. Two years ago they torn down old mall and built walmart in its place. Walmart attracted many other stores (B&N, Circuit City, Petco, Ulta, DSW, ...) and restaurants. The area is now really hopping. I am actually really happy it is there.

    8. Re:Wal-Mart "squished"? by MBraynard · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Walmart doesn't fit into this 'life style'

      If that were true, then the city wouldn't have needed to pass laws to make it impossible for WM to open up.

      Chicago is surrounded by 42 Wall-Marts and the city-dwellers are exceptionally eager for WM jobs and services. Witness this from George Will's column on the issue:

      This suburb, contiguous with Chicago's western edge, is 88 percent white. A large majority of the customers of the Wal-Mart that sits here, less than a block outside Chicago, are from the city, and more than 90 percent of the store's customers are African American.

      You can read the full column here.

      Every political criticism of WM - everyone of them that I have ever heard - is a lie.

    9. Re:Wal-Mart "squished"? by eln · · Score: 1

      With huge metroplexes like Chicago, things are different for a variety of reasons. However, to clarify, the north Austin neighborhood I'm referring to is not a suburb, it's in the city of Austin, a few miles from downtown. Actually, according to a recent newspaper article, the neighborhood is almost exactly in the center of population for the Austin metro area.

    10. Re:Wal-Mart "squished"? by Shotgun · · Score: 1

      I've watched several documentaries on people "resisting" Wal-Mart. I can't think of any single 'resistance fighter' that wasn't a small store owner. The fact that these small stores, with their high prices and limited selection, go out of business so quickly would indicate that the great majority of people find their product offerings to be very appealing.

      I'm an urban resident, and I shop at Wal-Mart. I don't find their crap to be any less appealing than the crap at Lowe's, Home Depot, Target, Food Lion, the local flea market, etc. It's all the cheapest made object that will just barely do the intended job till the warranty runs out, because experience proves that is what people REALLY want. You can cry and whine that you're willing to pay more for a quality product, but the vast majority are eyeing the price tag, and not much else.

      $20 for a downloable CD? I, like many my fellow Americans, will wait till a REAL CD is in the bargain bin for $9.99.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    11. Re:Wal-Mart "squished"? by phoenixwade · · Score: 1

      In the suburbs, you have a huge sub division with cookie cutter houses and 2.5 children per house. No public transportation nothing. If you have to drive somewhere, you're probably going to want to drive one place rather than 100. This is where walmart is thriving. As population density drops it makes more sense. It's more complicated than "they win in the Suburbs" I live in Jax, Florida,we have (last time I counted) 15 Wally Worlds within 30 miles of Downtown, over half are in the city proper, and all of them have had a positive impact on commercial enterprises in the areas they are in, except for the small business owners who competed directly with them. On the other hand, small and large retail outlets the don't compete directly, (like restaurants, and specialty stores) seem to thrive in those areas, and some low level competition that offer either big box competition (Best Buy and Circuit city) or compete directly but have a special gimmick (the Apple store, or some smaller hardware stores) seem to do well.

      The neighborhood objections we've seen here have a two pronged motivation; either they don't want commercial establishments in the neighborhood
      or there is some objection specifically to Walmarts business practices. In either case, rejection of the Walmart in a given area here is pretty meaningless, since you are a maximum of 6 miles from any Walmart, and the vast majority of this city owns a vehicle. (Mass Transit in Jax is a joke...) so you are pretty much 10 minutes from a Walmart, no matter where you are (even if they atopped building them here, which they won't)
      --
      A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
    12. Re:Wal-Mart "squished"? by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      Even funnier is teeny little wal mart squished by "giant" apple and netflix. What alternate universe does the submitter live in anyway?

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    13. Re:Wal-Mart "squished"? by MyNameIsEarl · · Score: 1

      In NYC the resistance is the labor unions. This is a union town.

    14. Re:Wal-Mart "squished"? by Divebus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Wal-Mart got squished by doing what the studios wanted, not what the consumers wanted.

      --

      Most of the stuff on /. won't survive first contact with facts.
    15. Re:Wal-Mart "squished"? by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      That wouldn't happen to be the "Yuppie Walmart" by any chance.

      Not all Walmarts are interchangeable. They used to be but they
      seem to be getting away from that. As a company they seem good
      about collecting BI and actually acting on it.

      There are plenty of cheap bastards in the suburbs. Even people
      who otherwise have a dedication to paying good money, for good
      stuff and then keeping it and using it past the time it becomes
      an antique are attracted by the allure of "cheap".

      There are also people that want a decent head of cauliflower too.
      A market that can support more than just walmart will have more
      than just walmart. Not all of walmart's competitors are all
      sitting around contemplating new ways to run themselves out of
      business.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    16. Re:Wal-Mart "squished"? by geekoid · · Score: 0

      Bingo.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    17. Re:Wal-Mart "squished"? by farrellj · · Score: 1

      Wally's World sucks galactic muffins. IMOHO

      Sure, they have cheap prices, but a relatively limited selection of products. For example, I can go to a real music store, and find thousands of titles, but I doubt you will find even a thousand in a Walmart. Same goes for food, books, computers, and electronics.

      So if you want limited selection but cheap prices, choose Walmart. If you want selection, choose smaller stores that specialize. Going with Walmart limits your choice. With less choice comes less control over how you can spend your hard earned dollars...and with less control comes more monopolies. And when you get monopolies, you loose the "invisible hand" of the free market which can balance things out.

      ttyl

      --
      CAN-CON 2019 - Ottawa's only book oriented Science Fiction Convention! October 18-20, Sheraton Hotel, Ottawa, Canada h
    18. Re:Wal-Mart "squished"? by davidsyes · · Score: 1

      One can't help wondering whether Blockbuster is feeling Wal-Mart as a 'ball-buster', considering.

      --
      Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
    19. Re:Wal-Mart "squished"? by Artifakt · · Score: 1

      To clarify, Individual pricing meant the media companies looked for every opportunity to set a price even a few cents higher trying to get the absolute maximum profit on the most popular pictures. They didn't look at all the cases where setting a price a bit lower on not-mega-blockbusters would result in more overall sales of that title, because they don't regard those as an overall profit source. Instead, discounting a film is thought to just drag in bucks that the consumer would have spent anyway on a popular film if their choices were more limited.
            In other words, the media conglomerates wanted the additional sales they thought would come from Walmart advertising "Over 14,000 titles", but they didn't want to actually have to deal with setting optimum price points for over 14,000 titles. They thought that the same consumers that were attracted by the "Over 14K" claim wouldn't be turned off if more than half that inventory was priced at a base with no discounts, and the other fraction (the hot titles) was just about all priced higher. It looked to the consumers like bait-and-switch, and they responded accordingly.

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
    20. Re:Wal-Mart "squished"? by cashman73 · · Score: 1

      I guess I'm one of those "urban residents" now (just moved to Pittsburgh, PA, this month). While I do love being able to walk to work and most of the local stores in the neighborhood (Oakland & Shadyside areas), I will still drive to Wal-Mart, which is about 7 miles from where I live. The prices are good, and their selection really isn't that bad,... It's not the only place I shop, but I can't say I'm one of those Wal-Mart-hating urban dwellers ,...

    21. Re:Wal-Mart "squished"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People who hate Wal-Mart:

      1. Don't have a car to drive to it
      2. Don't want auto traffic in their neighborhood
      3. Communists
      4. Yuppies

    22. Re:Wal-Mart "squished"? by Adambomb · · Score: 1

      Idiocy knows no bounds of class, creed, or corporation.

      --
      Ice Cream has no bones.
    23. Re:Wal-Mart "squished"? by toddhisattva · · Score: 1

      However, there is a neighborhood association in north Austin that has been trying to block a Wal-Mart from being built near them for close to two years now. What's odd about that effort is that the area Wal-Mart wants to build in is currently occupied by a dilapidated mall that is mostly empty and rarely sees much traffic. It is an Austin-style confluence of old labor union Democrats and even older racist Democrats. They do not want Wal-Mart's "Mexican" employees driving through their lily-white neighborhood. Good G-d, some of them might even move their families there! A Mexican family near Shoal Creek, people will start using words like "posse" and "lynch."

      This was explained to me by one of my non-racist state employee Democrat friends. The labor union thing I got, since these people proudly display bumper stickers. But that there would still exist so many unreconstructed Dixie Democrats, a hundred and fifty years after they lost the war, shocked my libertarian brain, so he named names to remind me that I knew these people, too.

      Got to love the Democrat party. Always standing up for the little guys, unless they work at Wal-Mart!
    24. Re:Wal-Mart "squished"? by mrosgood · · Score: 1

      Citing habitual liar George Will somewhat diminishes your otherwise compellingly counterfactual argument.

    25. Re:Wal-Mart "squished"? by Raineer · · Score: 1

      Regardless of the resistance from local urbanites, the only thing which can slow down Walmart's progress is the presence of many Targets. People can proclaim how evil Walmart is, but the overwhelming majority still shop there. The almighty dollar will always be a driving force in society, and until someone else can provide grocery shopping for $60 instead of $100 (insert your own figures here), Walmart will always survive just fine.

    26. Re:Wal-Mart "squished"? by MBraynard · · Score: 1
      No, not at all. It's all about the evidence.

      If Bill Clinton told me you lived with your mom and had no girlfriend, as long as he cited your manga subscription being delivered to your mom's house and provided video survailance showing that the only time you ever left was to take out the trash, I would believe him, even though he is a degenerate and pathological liar.

  2. Cost and lack of extras the reason. by Jason+Levine · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I never used the service myself, but apparently, the movies cost $20 each. For that price you could back up to DVD three times, but not to a format that played in a DVD player. Also, you didn't get the extras that typically come on a DVD. So you paid more money, for less content, that could be used in less places. And they wonder why it wasn't successful?

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    1. Re:Cost and lack of extras the reason. by BrianRoach · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Exactly.

      Compound that with the fact that there is probably a Walmart (or some other large dicount retailer) within 5 miles of your home in most major areas.

      If I can get in my car, drive to the actual Walmart, buy the superior product for the same or often less than the one online, and be back at home in under 20 minutes ... erm, why would I buy the DRM restricted POS online?

      - Roach

    2. Re:Cost and lack of extras the reason. by gatzke · · Score: 1

      I just got a Tivo HD that works with unbox from Amazon. I think they have three different tiers of rental, a 24 hour period, some other deal, and a full on download and keep version. They seem priced fairly well, but oddly some movies are rental only or buy only. You would think they would all follow some scheme. And they include variable pricing schemes (some rentals are $1, some are $4).

      Online video distribution is slowly coming. They can't hold out forever. Music finally got here with itunes, video is coming. I just hope it is flexible enough to work with my devices. I don't want to have to buy everything from Apple...

      BTW, the Tivo HD is pretty slick. Put Tivo Desktop on a PC and you can watch videos on the Tivo, so it acts like a HTPC with a nice working interface and stable hardware. I have a flaky HTPC with Beyond TV that makes Tivo Compatible files, so now it is like having four tuners and extra HD space.

    3. Re:Cost and lack of extras the reason. by fm6 · · Score: 1

      They seem priced fairly well, but oddly some movies are rental only or buy only. You would think they would all follow some scheme.
      Different movies come from different sources, which have different anxiety levels about digital media.
    4. Re:Cost and lack of extras the reason. by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      So you paid more money, for less content, that could be used in less places.

      Well, it worked so well with the music industry with their DRM (Dumb Music Restriction) laden, lossy, buck per song downloads.

      And I never bought any of them! Or rather, rented stuff. Why do they say "buy" when you pay money for something and you don't own it?

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    5. Re:Cost and lack of extras the reason. by Kristoph · · Score: 1

      How much do you earn an hour? If your an average software developer maybe $40-60, so that 20 minutes is $13-20. If your a somewhat experienced 'consultant' maybe you earn $60-$90 so that 20 minutes is $20-$30.

      Honestly for me, irrespective of salary, a 20 minute savings would be worth at least $20 because I simply don't have much free time.

      ]{

    6. Re:Cost and lack of extras the reason. by drjzzz · · Score: 1

      Finally, a post that addresses the point of the article! All the bricks-and-mortar stuff is way off topic.

      Netflix "watch instantly" is a killer competitor. There is no extra cost! Netflix subscribers are already comfortable managing their queues on line so moving to the viewer is a very low hurdle, something that cannot be said about WalMart. The viewer application is small and works great. One could quibble about resolution but for many things, especially TV shows, it's fine. Also, I wish Netflix would get a *nix application ASAP because their viewer app is the only reason I ever boot windows.

      Disclaimer: I have no stock or other interest in Netflix except as a satisfied customer.

      --
      to err is human, to forgive is divine, to forget is... umm...
    7. Re:Cost and lack of extras the reason. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a re-run of early 2000. Replace movie with music and movie studio with record label. What you have is practically a dupe. It seems to me that the entertainment industry seriously lack visionaries in post P2P world coupled with high speed Internet connection. They go the same scripts over and over.

    8. Re:Cost and lack of extras the reason. by Facetious · · Score: 4, Funny

      I simply don't have much free time... ...says the guy posting to /. (Sorry, I couldn't resist.)
      --
      Let us not become the evil that we deplore.
    9. Re:Cost and lack of extras the reason. by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Ok, then drop into walmart on your way back from lunch or on the way home.

      There's bound to be about 5 of them along the way.

      There are 3 along my commute home and another one on the other side of my particular 'burb.

      Then there are the 2 Targets and the used video shop along the same route.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    10. Re:Cost and lack of extras the reason. by BrianRoach · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Honestly for me, irrespective of salary, a 20 minute savings would be worth at least $20 because I simply don't have much free time.

      I guess I should feel lucky to have a job that lets me go to the grocery store. Where they sell DVDs. Often for less than $20.

      Sorry, but the "I make $X per minute" thing is just silly in almost every case. You don't work 24/7. You are not getting paid for your non-work time. My wife does not pay me $40/hr to take out the garbage, does yours?

      And anyway ... if you have no free time, then you don't have time to watch movies anyway. Problem solved.

      (On a serious note, if you literally have a schedule so full that taking 5 minutes to buy a DVD is an issue ... you might want to re-think whatever it is that you're doing. It can't be healthy.)

      - Roach

    11. Re:Cost and lack of extras the reason. by Gorimek · · Score: 1

      Perhaps removing a lot of those wasted 5 minute chores was the result of such a re-think?

    12. Re:Cost and lack of extras the reason. by BrianRoach · · Score: 1

      Then apparently he's the busiest man in the world, because he states he still doesn't have any free time.

      Again, unless you actually don't ever go to anywhere that sells DVDs (like the grocery)... um, the logic is simply flawed.

      And that's still ignoring the fact that you can buy DVDs on amazon and have them shipped to you for less money than downloading a DRM encrusted, lower-quality version ...

      - Roach

  3. Squished? by cheebie · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Do they actually think Netflix squished something run by Walmart?

    That's like saying the local burger joint is going to crush McDonalds! Sure, Netflix is a big company, but they're nothing compared to the Wally-world behemoth.

    1. Re:Squished? by timster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Sure they did. In this case, it wasn't even hard.

      Sometimes a big company will try some new endeavor to much fanfare, but not bother to try very hard, assuming somehow that they will win because they are big. When that happens it's easy to take them out. Wal-Mart had no plan here; they just thought selling some videos at terms dictated by the studios might get them some cash. If they ran their retail stores that way, those would fail too, but they put serious effort into their retail stores.

      --
      I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
    2. Re:Squished? by techpawn · · Score: 1

      they just thought selling some videos at terms dictated by the studios might get them some cash. If they ran their retail stores that way, those would fail too, but they put serious effort into their retail stores.
      Actually, I can't find the source off hand but I've heard that WalMart has quite a bit of sway with their suppliers and can dictate to them how much they want things to cost or even packaging. So, what you're saying is that they ran this download store the complete OPPOSITE as their retail stores and it failed.
      --
      Ask not what you can do for your country. Ask what your country did to you
    3. Re:Squished? by hedwards · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Honestly, your analogy is horrid. Netflix is the leader in the rent movies by mail model, and Walmart isn't a leader in anything at present.

      Walmart is large, but it is horribly inefficient, led by executives which willingly painted themselves into a corner, hated by pretty much all communities, and so this sort of thing is going to be more common in the future. That is unless they figure out how to run an efficient business. These sorts of ventures are more important to Walmart than they would be to a better run retailer.

      And yes, I do know what I'm talking about, the business ran for a number of years based upon lower than normal supplier prices, with that evaporating, and some suppliers charging more because its walmart, they're in a bit of a bind. It gets worse that they also have to deal with being further away than other retailers, paying more for labor than most other retailers.

      As their competition continues to catch up in their only area of strength, I would be surprised if their cap didn't start shrinking in the future.

    4. Re:Squished? by snarkh · · Score: 1

      Well, even a dwarf can hurt a giant's little toe.

    5. Re:Squished? by LMacG · · Score: 1

      Well, no, they don't. TFA makes mention of the fact that in 2005, Wal-Mart closed its DVD rental operation and handed off the customers to NetFlix. This download service is something completely different.

      --
      Slightly disreputable, albeit gregarious
    6. Re:Squished? by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "Walmart is large, but it is horribly inefficient"

      I hate my local Walmart as much as the next guy. And individual stores may be inefficient or suck. But the corporation as a whole is extremely efficient. I work in the trucking industry. Walmart is one of the companies that can afford to spend $1000 on an experimental MPG increaser. Whether it be APUs for the trucks, side skirts for the trailers, single tire rears, etc. If engine company X can provide .1 MPG extra per year on average, that's in the hundreds of thousands of dollars for Walmart.

      They forced use of APUs on ALL trucks after doing a trial run. At a trucking conference they presented their savings broke even at 16 months. Now a ton of other companies are following their lead.

      I thought I read on /. that they're going to RFID. As soon as Walmart forces RFID, maybe we'll see it everywhere. UPC is nice but old.

      I don't have a lot of nice things to say about walmart, but that they're inefficient isn't one of them.

    7. Re:Squished? by orclevegam · · Score: 1

      Sometimes a big company will try some new endeavor to much fanfare, but not bother to try very hard, assuming somehow that they will win because they are big. *cough*zune*cough*
      Yeah yeah, someone is going to mod me troll or flamebait for this, but it was too perfect, I couldn't pass it up.
      --
      Curiosity was framed, Ignorance killed the cat.
    8. Re:Squished? by markrages · · Score: 2, Funny

      How does Apu increase mileage?

    9. Re:Squished? by mcsqueak · · Score: 1

      Actually, I can't find the source off hand but I've heard that WalMart has quite a bit of sway with their suppliers and can dictate to them how much they want things to cost or even packaging. Fast Company had a great article several years back which talks about those very issues. You can find it at http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/77/walmart.html. It's somewhat old, but I'm sure the information still holds true today.
    10. Re:Squished? by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      and Walmart isn't a leader in anything at present. Whether you love or hate Wal-Mart they are the world's largest single public corporation by revenue in the world according to Fortune so they are a leader in that sense.

      Walmart is large, but it is horribly inefficient, led by executives which willingly painted themselves into a corner Wal-Mart is large, but they are mostly fairly efficient, or at least more efficient than their competitors, or else they would never have become large (and they are certainly not shrinking although they have hit a few bumps in the road lately) and they are still quite profitable.

      As their competition continues to catch up in their only area of strength I think that it is true to say that Wal-Mart still has a fairly decent franchise on their management and supply chain organization competencies which cannot be simply copied without effort by their competitors. Their competitors will try of course (and that is a good thing for the consumers), but for now Wal-Mart does the direct from China to you thing substantially better than the competition on the retail level (Cosco beats them on wholesale vs SamsClub which is the Wal-Mart wholesale proxy).

      DISCLAIMER: I do not work for Wal-Mart nor do I own their stock, I am merely presenting my own impressions based upon what I know of their business and the retail sales industry in general.
    11. Re:Squished? by fm6 · · Score: 1

      Walmart is inefficient? They run the biggest logistics operation in human history! With their paper-thin margins, they'd go out of business in a week if they didn't have their huge supply chain in total lock step. Your local underpaid clerk and manager may be clueless, but that's a superficial problem, representing Walmart's calculation that people will put up with had service if it saves them money.

    12. Re:Squished? by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      Is an "APU" an Auxiliary power unit? I googled but I'm not sure I hit the right APU.

      If so, we called them "generators" in th eUSAF back in the seventies. But we called Phillips screwdrivers "crosshatches" too.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    13. Re:Squished? by mabhatter654 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think it was "me-too" to copy Apple with iTunes... One of the things NBC cited was Walmart holding their DVD distribution channel "hostage" if the studios didn't do something about Apple raining on their in store sales parade of music and DVD sales. Walmart's business is selling commodity stuff, cheap. DVDs fit the bill perfectly as there is no variation (Spiderman 3 is the same anywhere) and Walmart has a better channel than a zillion little stores to control for the studios. Everybody wants to be part of Walmart's success.. big media, Microsoft, etc... it lets them get whatever they want to try out.

    14. Re:Squished? by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes. Auxillary Power Units.

      Depending on how vertically integrated the Chassis OEM is, it may be more than a generator. Sometimes the coolant is used as the heating fluid in the cab. Yes they are just generators mostly, but that's what the industry decided to call them. Because the 15L engine is the "Main Power Unit" this is the "Auxilary Power Unit"

      California for 2009 has enacted STRICT Anti-Idling laws. Any more than 15 minutes idling and not in traffic, the engine must shut down. (Written into the engine software so the driver can't try to bypass it).

      Back when fuel was cheap, 0.2 gallon per hour or what ever to idle was nothing. So no one cared. Drivers didn't care because the company was paying for the fuel. Now 1 or 2 gallons saved a day per 1000 trucks is big money.

    15. Re:Squished? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Wal-Marts RFID attempt fails, gloriously.

      BTW, you didn't give any examples of efficiency. Cost savings, yes, but not efficiency.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    16. Re:Squished? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, not that I think WalMart was likely to win in the movie download business, but...

      From what I hear, yes, HP totally biffed this. HP was supposed to have the service running for the holiday period last year, but delivered late. Supposedly thanks to HP's screwed-up IT org. Then HP decided there wasn't enough money in this business, and closed down the whole department, laying off most of the affected employees just before Christmas this year. The group is in the Portland, OR area. If you know anyone in that area, ask for yourself, you'll probably hear a similar story. Merry xmas!

    17. Re:Squished? by Plaid+Phantom · · Score: 1

      I can't remember the article (or the name of the company), but I read once about a lawn mower company who walked away from Wal-Mart because Wal-Mart wanted them to drop the quality of their mowers to make them cheaper.

      --
      All comments are properties and trademarks of the voices in my head. Not like I'm gonna claim them.
    18. Re:Squished? by innocent_white_lamb · · Score: 1

      Snapper

      --
      If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
    19. Re:Squished? by philwx · · Score: 1

      The mp3's couldn't be "Made in China" (legally at least), so Walmart abandoned it for having a poor profit margin.

    20. Re:Squished? by irc.goatse.cx+troll · · Score: 1

      It's what they did with the xbox, and it worked.

      --
      Pain lasts, kid. Its how you know you're alive. Sometimes I think this growing up thing is just pain management-TheMaxx
  4. Wal-mart does what it does by beckerist · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Wal-mart is successful because it has a very efficient method of physical distribution. This has no baring on their success in digital distribution.

    1. Re:Wal-mart does what it does by Original+Replica · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Don't forget the other key to Wal-mart success, all-in-one convenience vs. smaller retailers. For someone with kids in tow, being able to buy groceries and shoes and school supplies all in one place is going to be much easier. Another factor that has no baring on digital distribution. A harder to measure influence would be stigma. Wal-mart is anti-glamorous, Netflicks and iTunes are moderately cool.

      --
      We are all just people.
    2. Re:Wal-mart does what it does by moderatorrater · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Let's not forget that Wal Mart was the first to really push a large number of stores in medium-sized cities. My hometown (~10,000 people) has three other comparably sized cities within a 5 minute drive and then one much larger city within a 15 minute drive. All of the other chains were opening stores in the large city 15 minutes away when Wal-Mart opened one in my hometown and one in the larger city. Effectively, this made it so that one Sears had to compete with two Wal-Marts but, since each Wal-Mart targeted a smaller area, only one of the Wal-Marts competed with the Sears.

      I read somewhere that 75% of all KMarts and Sears competed with a Wal-Mart, but only 33% of Wal-Marts competed with a Sears because of this strategy. When you can beat your competitors on price, location, and convenience, you're going to do well no matter what.

    3. Re:Wal-mart does what it does by LanMan04 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Your sig makes me want to kill you. :)

      --
      With the first link, the chain is forged.
    4. Re:Wal-mart does what it does by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry this is bothering me. "bearing" not baring.

    5. Re:Wal-mart does what it does by beckerist · · Score: 1

      LOL! Inciteful? Insightful?! Eh, Slashdot(ians) you amuse me.

  5. "Me Too" Products by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You would think that business would learn from the mistakes of the dot-com stock crash.

  6. It's Walmart by techpawn · · Score: 3, Insightful

    When the download becomes the same cost as buying/shipping physical media I think most Wal*Marx shoppers would rather have the physical media. Knowing a lot of people who WILLFULLY shop at their "super centers" and also Not so willfully work there, they are generally not the most technically inclined.

    HP Dropping support sounds like a cop out... but a believable one

    --
    Ask not what you can do for your country. Ask what your country did to you
    1. Re:It's Walmart by Almahtar · · Score: 1

      Wal Mart: (whisper) "HP, could you please drop support?"
      HP: (loudly) "WE ARE DROPPING SUPPORT."
      Wal Mart: (also loudly) "OH NOES THEY DROPPED SUPPORT. We quit."

  7. Businesses are NOT swiss army knives by mcsqueak · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Is this evidence of the strength of unified pricing in media downloads or just another company being squished by the giant Netflix & Apple?"

    I think this is evidence of businesses trying to be too many things to too many people and slowly discovering that no, you can't be everything to everyone. "Jack of all trades, master of none" indeed.

    Focus on a specific market and DO THAT WELL.

    1. Re:Businesses are NOT swiss army knives by stewbacca · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Exactly what I wanted to say, but you beat me to it. Wal-mart can only half-ass so many products before it finally catches up to them. This holds especially true with technical deals like this one (anyone can sell cheap Haynes underwear, but not everyone can sell digital content). You can't just throw money at something you have no expertise with and hope it makes money for you. You actually have to get involved and understand the technology that you are counting on to make you some money.

    2. Re:Businesses are NOT swiss army knives by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Various conglomerates seem to be quite successful, and I believe there is also evidence that companies can successfully penetrate multiple markets. The Xbox 360 seems fairly successful, for example.

    3. Re:Businesses are NOT swiss army knives by mcsqueak · · Score: 1

      I'll agree with you to an extent. As another poster said, they have the physical distribution model down pat. When I was getting my marketing degree several of my professors held up their supply chain management system as the best in the industry (which it is, despite my dislike for Wal-Mart on a personal level).

      Gasoline is a physical good which can fit into their existing supply chain model. Plus, it has the added advantage of being something people need when they happen to already be at their stores ("shoot, I need to fill my car up.. HEY, Wal-Mart has a gas station now, great!"). I feel the online download market is a completely different beast which Wal-Mart will never get right unless they out-and-out buy a company, such as Netflix, to do it for them. It doesn't fit well into their existing business model, IMHO.

    4. Re:Businesses are NOT swiss army knives by moderatorrater · · Score: 2, Insightful

      anyone can sell cheap Haynes underwear, but not everyone can sell digital content That's only true if you assume that you can get cheap Haynes underwear in the first place. The reverse is true (at least for my skill set) when you consider how easy it is to set up a website compared to how hard it is to get the physical store, negotiate price with the supplier, buy from the supplier, distribute to the individual locations and manage the employees that are required to sell those products. Wal-Mart is exceptionally skilled at all those things and their size has made them even more so.

      Unfortunately, the only thing that they can leverage from their retail success is their name recognition. Those things that make me love Wal-Mart evaporate in the digital world: their lenient return policies, multiple locations and low prices are all nullified by the fact that it's not a physical medium.
    5. Re:Businesses are NOT swiss army knives by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      The reverse is true (at least for my skill set)
      Well stated post. The quoted part of your response points to why Wal-mart failed at the digital downloads. Their skill set is in physical supply chains, like you stated. They are a fish out of water when it comes to exploring other delivery methods.
    6. Re:Businesses are NOT swiss army knives by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      I think you're thinking of the companies in question too much like products with certain capabilities. There is no Netflix model robot who happens to be really good and doing online stuff against the Wal-mart model robot with a different skill set.

      Both these companies are indeed good at different things, but that's only because of their employees and management. Shifting one or both of them can yield the same expertise as another company.

      Put another way: with the right people Wal-mart certainly COULD make a competitive downloadable content service. The fact that it's Wal-mart behind it is irrelevant, because with a corporation that big the download part of "Wal-mart" isn't the same group as the physical "Wal-mart".

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    7. Re:Businesses are NOT swiss army knives by capitalistnihilist · · Score: 1

      While I agree with the "jack of all trades, master of none" cliche you have invoked, I'd have to say that if any company could prove you wrong, it would most certainly be Wal-Mart. Also, for the majority of its customers, I highly doubt that "mastery" is required. The average Wal-Mart shopper has got along just fine with many a crappy product/service for years so I doubt Wal-Mart will have to master anything else it wishes to push on its customer-base.

    8. Re:Businesses are NOT swiss army knives by mcsqueak · · Score: 1

      Indeed, they COULD hire the management and employees to do such things. But will they? I don't think so. To me, the fact that this failed because Wal-Mart was behind it is totally relevant, because it seems that whenever I read about Wal-Mart's management this is exactly the kind of thing they do.

      Rather than hire the talent and devote the resources to doing it in-house (the expensive and hard way) they outsourced it to HP (the easier and cheaper way). This totally fits into everything I have ever read about their management style. Not to say it couldn't change once some of the old guard retires/dies off and younger managers with potentially different styles come into play. However, I think shifting the style that a company runs in (and in Wal-Mart's case, the style that has made it the huge company it is today) is a lot easier said than done.

  8. Nonono you got that wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    You have to at least pretend to be on-topic.

    Like this:

    WALMART ONLINE MOVIES SUX0RZ

    or if you liked the service

    WALMART ONLINE MOVIES SHUTDOWN SUX0RS

    See, that wasn't so hard, was it?

  9. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  10. Outside the Core Competency by RobBebop · · Score: 3, Insightful

    While hindsight is 20/20... this is a classic example of an "Old media" company failing to adapt to the "New Media" because they didn't have any expertise in the current technology.

    Wal-Mart's core competency is managing their supply chain. They make money by being the most efficient supplier of products that are in local demand. They operate their integrated technological systems marvelously. They don't know jack-shit about the internet and "download-able content". They should partner with Amazon to run their webpage... though that would probably start to enter into an anti-trust area.

    --
    Support the 30 Hour Work Week!!!
    1. Re:Outside the Core Competency by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      Since as another poster pointed out, the download movies cost twenty bucks vs the DVD of $5 to $15, has DRM, and doesn't have any of the DVD's extras I'd say it was a case of someone putting a retard somewhere in management. I mean come on, if brains were dynamite whoever thought up that harebrained scheme wouldn't have enough to blow his nose.

      While hindsight is 20/20
      Gee I wish I hadn't called that policeman dirty names...

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    2. Re:Outside the Core Competency by RobBebop · · Score: 1

      While hindsight is 20/20

      Gee I wish I hadn't called that policeman dirty names...

      I was implying that it doesn't do any good to say that this was a bad idea for them after the failure occurred. I'm not sure if you took my meaning, but I agree that cops get mad when you do anything to question their authority, such as name calling or (my favorite) urinating on their squad car in the donut shop parking lot.

      --
      Support the 30 Hour Work Week!!!
    3. Re:Outside the Core Competency by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      (my favorite) urinating on their squad car in the donut shop parking lot.

      Heartbreak Ridge, great flick!

      Cop: I don't give any serviceman's discounts
      Jarhead: Too bad, your old lady does!

      Don't watch that movie on TV, the censorship ruins it.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
  11. That is only half of what Wal-mart does by AHumbleOpinion · · Score: 1

    Wal-mart is successful because it has a very efficient method of physical distribution.

    That is only half of what Wal-mart does, they are also very good at negotiating low prices from suppliers.

  12. Too many restrictions... by log1385 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Wal-Mart put some annoying restrictions on their movies. Here's a quote from their FAQ:

    Due to licensing restrictions, you cannot copy or transfer your video files and play them on a different computer. What if I want to watch movies on my laptop and my desktop? What if I decide to buy a new computer and can't watch my movies anymore? Wal-Mart should realize that people can just download a movie via P2P and not have to deal with any restrictions like this. I for one and much more willing to pay money for media if I can do whatever I want with it.
    --
    Seek and ye shall find.
    1. Re:Too many restrictions... by pak9rabid · · Score: 1

      I think this is more of a restriction being forwarded from the studios.

  13. The real reason Wal*Mart got out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They eventually realized that in the case of internet downloads, importing from China does not help them undercut their competitors.

    1. Re:The real reason Wal*Mart got out by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      Really?

      I would think they could save a lot using Chinese distributors and not he studios to get their files.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    2. Re:The real reason Wal*Mart got out by cashman73 · · Score: 1

      It's rather hard to compete when your competitor is bittorrent,... ;-)

  14. Technically inclined also prefer physical by AHumbleOpinion · · Score: 1

    ... they are generally not the most technically inclined.

    When digital has no significant price advantage over physical the technically inclined may also prefer physical. Rip the DVD or CD at the fidelity you choose, re-rip in the future as technology improves, consider the disc a backup as well.

    I'm also hesitant to consider someone who buys digital to be technically inclined. Most kiddies can manage that.

    1. Re:Technically inclined also prefer physical by moderatorrater · · Score: 1

      I agree. I'm very technically inclined (spending at least 8, but usually 12+ hours on the internet per day) and I always buy the physical/digital combination when offered. the physical media is faster and more portable for now and is an easy backup. If offered a choice between the digital and the physical, I'll choose the physical.

  15. All of Wal-Mart's eggs were in HP's basket by Sloppy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Is this evidence of the strength of unified pricing in media downloads or just another company being squished by the giant Netflix & Apple?
    If you believe Wal-Mart's explanation, it sounds like this is caused by relying on single source software maintenance. Hey, software users: GPL is for you. It's not a hacker thing.
    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    1. Re:All of Wal-Mart's eggs were in HP's basket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's official, someone on /. will always find a way to inject a GNU/Linux reference into something, no matter how much a stretch it is!

  16. It's neither by Hawthorne01 · · Score: 1

    It's just a dumb business plan.

    Trying to do a downloadable media store without taking the iPod into account is like trying to market an office productivity suite that doesn't read/write MS Office docs: You're doomed to failure from the start.

    If (and this is a BIG if) the movie studios wake up to the benefits of DRM-free downloads like some record labels have, the big winner here could be Amazon.com. They're uniquely positioned to equal, if not better the success that Apple has had. They're platform agnostic (for music, at least), , are known and trusted brand, have a working system for movies in place already (I've found that downloading those free Bugs Bunny cartoons to my TiVo was VERY easy), and have as much juice with the studios as Wal-Mart does.

    --
    "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
    1. Re:It's neither by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      Perhaps, but the studios will be reluctant, just as the music labels were reluctant and finally dragged kicking and screaming by Apple into the download market, to deal with either Amazon or Wal-Mart (and Wal-Mart especially so) because they know that both retailers will push them hard on price in order to access their distribution channels and that would accelerate the erosion of their current pricing power which is already being squeezed by cutthroat competition between the likes of Amazon, Cosco, and Wal-Mart in the packaged for sale DVD market and Netflix in the DVD rental market. To the studios, DRM is like the mirage always just over the horizon, with promises of wealth without compromises and they will be reluctant to give up that hope, even though it is almost certainly in their long-term best interests to do so.

  17. No contract with HP? by NonSequor · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why didn't Walmart, of all companies, get a contract that insured that HP couldn't bail on them?

    --
    My only political goal is to see to it that no political party achieves its goals.
  18. My name is Inigo Montoya, you killed my software.. by Gavin+Scott · · Score: 2, Interesting

    In a statement, Wal-Mart spokeswoman Amy Collella said the company closed the store after Hewlett-Packard Co., which provided the software running the site, ''made a business decision to discontinue its video download-only merchant store service.''

    Walmart fell victim to one of the classic blunders! The most famous is never get involved in a land war in Asia, but only slightly less well-known is this: never buy any kind of application software from Hewlett-Packard! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Ha ha ha...

    Seriously, HP has the worst cace of attention deficit disorder of any company I've ever seen. I've spent 25 years watching them announce "the next big thing" only to completely forget about it a year later after having sold it to three big customers (who are then completely screwed of course). Anyone who buys a proprietary solution from them at this point deserves what they get.

    G.
  19. Re:My name is Inigo Montoya, you killed my softwar by acvh · · Score: 1

    you made me think of my favorite piece of HP software - New Wave. I was even a New Wave "evangelist" for a while, trying to sell it to corporate users. I even still use my New Wave mousepad.

  20. DRM is what kills it for me. by headkase · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I refuse to download anything that has DRM on it. Especially considering that right *now* I buy my DVD's through retail channels and rip them myself (my country doesn't have DMCA idiocy preventing that) to the format of my choice. And when I switch around operating systems I don't fall into the trap of "sorry you're unsupported". Buying retail and ripping myself is what suits me best right now. Maybe when online retailers realize that DRM actually does nothing to stop piracy and only pisses off the people who actually do buy the product they'll drop it. And when/if they do drop DRM then I'll buy online instead of retail.

    --
    Shh.
    1. Re:DRM is what kills it for me. by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      I get that DRM is bad for ownership, but how is DRM relevant at all if I'm RENTING a movie to watch one time. I'm not paying for the right to own it, I'm paying to rent it. I don't think I should be allowed to keep a copy on my video iPod, Zune, VCR, computer, DVR or any other device. This is where the anti-drm crowd starts to lose me.

    2. Re:DRM is what kills it for me. by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      Oops, sorry, I thought I was in the Apple + 21st Century Fox to offer movie rentals thread...

    3. Re:DRM is what kills it for me. by headkase · · Score: 1

      I hardly ever rent movies, what I'm talking about is buying them. With my computer hooked up to my big-screen tv it makes it a very nice experience to have a movie "jukebox" at my disposal. And I don't want to re-buy them just because I've found a better operating system for my home-theatre-PC. DRM in the buying-context is an extra risk - what about 5 years from now, 10?. Newer versions of even the same operating system may not support the old-and-clunkly DRM systems of today and that leads right back to having to re-buy what you've already bought. And I'm not going to do that.

      --
      Shh.
    4. Re:DRM is what kills it for me. by stewbacca · · Score: 1
      But people rebuy stuff all the time. I think I own the Scorpions, Love at First Sting, in album, cassette, CD AND iTunes variations. If Apple went bankrupt, and iPods stopped working, I'd buy it again to work with the next player's format.

      Technology changes, media formats change, which sucks, but I'm the sucker who keeps buying the newest format. I think the trick is to try and predict which format will last the longest before the next change. Ideally, your vision would be nice, to have completely system-agnostic media files, but I just don't see it happening (as hard as we all lobby for it to happen). But then again, we are on slashdot, so we are nerds, and we'll always know (or be) that guy who figures out how to bypass DRM for our player-specific needs.

    5. Re:DRM is what kills it for me. by Drooling+Iguana · · Score: 1

      The current administration is confused between what is right and what is legal.
      Seems to me that they've adopted the strategy of just avoiding both at all costs.
      --
      ... I'm addicted to placebos
    6. Re:DRM is what kills it for me. by Kjella · · Score: 1

      If it plays where you want it to play, fair enough. With a rental DVD, I can pop it in my Linux machine and play it but with any kind of DRM I can't. Yes, I know I'm not supposed to be able to do it on Linux either but when you're comparing DRM vs reality instead of DRM vs should-be the DRM is limiting the watching too. I honestly don't care because I don't rent tho.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    7. Re:DRM is what kills it for me. by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      If you're rented something, there's no good reason you shouldn't be able
      to play it ANYWHERE for the duration of the rental period. That means
      that you should be able to play it on your ipod in the plane going on
      vacation or on your archos during lunch or on your living room TV.

      Ripping it and playing it anywhere is not about "keeping it".

      It's about "ripping it and playing it anywhere".

      Even with perfect 4:1 re-compression you reach a point where you just
      can't store stuff anymore. Even if it's free you have to consider the
      cost of storage.

      Most people don't want to bother.

      Force them to pirate and they will get into the habit of bothering.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    8. Re:DRM is what kills it for me. by Sloppy · · Score: 1

      I don't think I should be allowed to..

      There is no way to prohibit (through technical measures) the things you shouldn't be allowed to do, without also prohibiting things that you should be allowed to do. The only way to prohibit certain activities, is to lock the user into using some particular software, and thereby create interoperability problems. And those problems will exist (must exist) even if the user isn't trying to do anything bad.

      In the old days, prohibitions weren't enforced by technical measures. You're not allowed to copy an expensive book with a photocopier, but you can. Imagine a world where you can't. (No, really: try. It's a mind-bender.) That's going to be one fucked-up book, and I bet you won't even be able to read it.

      You can't implement "shouldn't be allowed to x" without one of the rules being, "You shouldn't be allowed to use just any player you happen to like." Well, that's a dumb rule. I've already chosen a favorite movie player app. If someone's content doesn't work with it, that's their problem and no transaction is going to happen until they use a a standard format. If they want my money, the burden is on them to be interoperable.

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  21. Alternatives... by yddod · · Score: 0

    As interesting as these movie download services are, it seems as though most have had trouble picking up enough steam to stay around. I run a few swapping sites and one them is specially for DVDs. (swapadvd.com - Shamless plug) There are other sites that compete in this same space but with slightly different models, peerflix.com, titletrader.com and switchdiscs.com. I would love to hear what the Slashdot crowd thinks about the swapping of media, books, CDs and DVDs.

  22. Sales force by abes · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Someone else pointed out that part of the issue is that Walmart sells DVDs already, and thus they were competing with themselves. I suspect they started the digital distribution because they realized long-term DVDs are dead. Even if a winner is ever found for Blu-Ray or HD-DVD, it might be too late now. Not that people won't buy them, but for most movies digital distribution seems likely to become the preferred method.

    However, short-term, DVD is still king. So do they cut into their current sales for an uncertain future (can they really win against the other big-players? .. it's certainly out of their area of expertise), or do they go ahead with their current sales with the knowledge that they'll lose out later on? One thing to consider, their primary market is not exactly tech-savvy, and therefore will likely continue with DVDs for the next 10-15 years.

    Another possible explanation, is perhaps they realized getting into variable-pricing was a mistake. If history gives us any lessons, the media companies are greedy bastards. They don't seem to give much thought into long-term planning. This is one case where the intelligence of Apple really comes through. They realized that unless they could control the prices, companies would try to charge more money than the physical media costs. I suspect after some grace period, in order to save face, NBC will come back to iTunes.

    1. Re:Sales force by stewbacca · · Score: 1

      I suspect after some grace period, in order to save face, NBC will come back to iTunes.
      Let's hope. Their web episode player is the worst of the tv channels. The quality is so bad (frame rates, download speed, video quality) that they are practically unwatchable. I don't know how they managed to muck up the web player, because ABC's player is pretty nice.
    2. Re:Sales force by MrCopilot · · Score: 1
      Someone else pointed out that part of the issue is that Walmart sells DVDs already, and thus they were competing with themselves.

      Are you serious? Digital Downloads don't compete with DVDs, these are two very different customers. One uses a DVD player for entertainment the other uses their computer. Rare is it indeed, when I stick a DVD in my computer that was not made by me. I do however watch a crapload of Movies and Videos. Even Rarer is my wife using the computer to watch something instead of popping a DVD into the box under the TV.

      --
      OSGGFG - Open Source Gamers Guide to Free Games
    3. Re:Sales force by abes · · Score: 1

      Hmm.. let's see, you can hook up an XBox to TV. At least on the XBox you can download movies and TV shows and watch them. You can route your computer's contents to your TV with products such as the AppleTV (and its competitors). At least in NYC, many people don't have room for a full blown TV, so the computer monitor will often double as the TV. Indeed, while I do own a TV, I still watch a lot of TV shows on it (e.g. The Daily Show and Heroes).

      Perhaps your in your personal life there is a clear separation, but I don't think it's safe to assume that holds true for everyone. The difference between the TV and computer are diminishing, and many technology companies are working actively to make that difference even smaller.

      Besides which, think about it, the people who download the digital content are watching movies on their computer (which is against your point). They could have instead bought the DVD which would also play on any computer. Thus the two are indeed in competition. Name an instance where someone would both do the digital download and buy the DVD.

  23. Bad Summary by LMacG · · Score: 1

    Yeah, I know, welcome to /. and all that.

    The line in TFA about turning over the rental business to Netflix relates to something that happened in 2005. Nothing to do with a download service at all. No squishing involved, on anybody's part.

    --
    Slightly disreputable, albeit gregarious
  24. letting the studios set the variable pricing.... by pxuongl · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Wal-Mart initially offered films from $12.88 to $19.88 and individual TV episodes for $1.96 -- 4 cents less than the iTunes store. Wal-Mart's online store sold older titles starting at $7.50, compared with the $9.99 charged by iTunes.

    Many studios have resisted signing deals with iTunes in part because of Apple's desire to sell movies at one price. Studios prefer variable pricing such as Wal-Mart offered.

    what's to note here is that films were offered between $13 and $20 a pop, with older titles at $7.50. When will it occur to studios, in regards to how variable pricing won't work, that if there is no demand for an "older title," then there will be no purchases, even if you sold them at a buck a pop.

    the ones that are in demand, that people want to buy, are being sold at or above the price of a regular dvd! sounds more like the studios are trying to make a download service fail.

  25. Unified pricing is short sighted. by east+coast · · Score: 1

    I can't speak for this service but it irks me to find stuff on iTunes (mostly classical, in my experience) that I can buy for cheaper at Borders on CD than I can from the iTunes store.

    And I have a feeling with CD sales on the decline we're going to see more of the same. Especially compilations that will come in under the 10 USD watermark that will offer more than enough tracks to make it worth getting tracks you don't like for the ones that you do.

    --
    Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
    1. Re:Unified pricing is short sighted. by ducomputergeek · · Score: 2, Insightful
      However, there are a great number of us who don't have a boarders near by. We do have a Barnes and Noble, but it lacks the CD/DVD section that you find in other stores. All it has is book and a small cafe. There is the CD store in the mall, but their prices are jacked up and then Best Buy, which doesn't stock a lot of classical music.

      iTunes, however, offers most of the tracks I want and with no waiting. Usually I can't get them any cheaper from Amazon. Plus there are a lot of times i don't want the whole album. I want 1 or 2 tracks. For $2 I can download and have it right there. For another $.50 (for the CD) I can burn to a CD-R and play it in my car.

      iTunes was the first with an easy to use interface, pricing that made sense, and a flexible enough DRM that balances out what the studios wanted and fair use.

      That's not quite the case with the video downloads. I bought season 3 of Battlestar Galactica last year because we didn't get SciFi at the time through the condo's cable plan. I backed them up to data DVD's when I switched to a new machine (and for archival purposes), but I can't go over to iDVD (or even DVD Studio Pro) and burn a playable DVD

      Personally I like unified pricing. One of the reasons why I use Dish network is that they'll play hardball with the content providers over price. If CBS suddenly wants 30% more to air 7 channels that I probably don't watch anyway, Dish yanks the networks until the CBS folks come down on their price. I'd like to see Al la carte pricing since I could get by with about 20 cable channels that I actually watch.

      --
      "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
  26. New slogan. by palegray.net · · Score: 2, Funny

    Wal-Mart: We Sell Out For Less!

    --
    512 MB RAM, 20 GB disk, 200 GB transfer, five datacenters. $19.95/month.
  27. this is just wrong.....it can't stand by tacokill · · Score: 1

    Walmart is large, but it is horribly inefficient

    Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

    Walmart is one of the most efficient retail operators in the world. Bar none. Efficiency in the retail space equates to managing your inventory. And Walmart are MASTERS at that. Don't you read case studies on Walmart IT? While the company does have it's problems, IT, efficiency, and inventory management are not among them. Calling them inefficient is just....well....wrong.

    1. Re:this is just wrong.....it can't stand by mabhatter654 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Walmart's problem is that "efficient" is not "unique". really look at the shelves and variety is gone.. they sell just 2 brands of most items, novelty items (toys, specific #2 name brands, back catalog of any type of media, etc) are the most generic version or scarce. They're good for staples (vegies, cereal, milk, bread), but poor for unique interesting things... the ones you get to mark up a bunch.. that's why Target is eating their lunch selling everything Walmart CAN'T because Walmart has beat up too many people and demands too much in their favor to be "efficient".

    2. Re:this is just wrong.....it can't stand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Walmart's problem is that "efficient" is not "unique". really look at the shelves and variety is gone

      This is pretty much spot on. They're only "efficient" at defining what they do. Anything that's "too hard" goes. I can be incredibly efficient at math, as long as I get to drop long division. And multiplication. And subtraction too. Hell, as long as the answer's a single digit. But dammit, I'm "efficient" at math!

    3. Re:this is just wrong.....it can't stand by hedwards · · Score: 1

      Except they aren't. Walmart was a master of efficiency 20 years ago, but since then a number of retailers have caught up, and the paper thin profit margin that Walton used to create the empire is being eroded by the losses of efficiency which have been catching up to them.

      I for one think that it is fair to label any company that is willingly flushing money down the drain on easily fixed problems, to be horribly inefficient. And Walmart flushes a lot of money down the drain on those types of things.

      I'm not really sure where you got your definition of efficiency, but if it doesn't involve things like cashflow and profits, it's as irrelevant to sound business practice as Beef is to vegan cuisine.

      The other thing to keep in mind is that a relatively large number of stores can match or beat the prices that Walmart is able to offer, and they can do it with smaller stores located in more convenient locations, that takes far more inventory management savvy, than getting everything to a large store that people have to ask for an employee to get the item that they wanted with a fork lift.

      Walmart was once the king of the retail sector, but those days have been over for a few years at this point. If they don't fix the regressive business practices and return to something that is workable as a business strategy, they're really going to be hurting in the future.

  28. Probably had code escrow but... by SuperKendall · · Score: 3, Interesting

    You can't have a contract that compels another company to do something forever, that's just not practical.

    I would bet they did have a code escrow agreement - in the event HP decided to back out of doing the software (which they did) WalMart gets access and use of all the HP source.

    The fact that Wal-Mart is shutting down operations shows exactly what use code escrow is - jack and squat. What is WalMart going to do with a bunch of hacked together HP code, without any of the people who worked on it?

    Plus in general a problem with code escrow is that you can't look at the source before you take it over to see how feasible that proposition really is.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Probably had code escrow but... by mcpkaaos · · Score: 1

      What is WalMart going to do with a bunch of hacked together HP code, without any of the people who worked on it?

      Hire a team of engineers to document and maintain it? We're talking about a video download website, not kernel development. Their reason sounds more like an excuse than anything else.

      --
      It goes from God, to Jerry, to me.
    2. Re:Probably had code escrow but... by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      Hire a team of engineers to document and maintain it?

      And how long would that take to ramp up? Not to mention that WalMart is not in the business of media server software development, so it's impossible to say they could actually even just maintain the software very well, much less add new features...

      I agree that Wal-Mart probably wanted out anyway and this was a good excuse. But that does not negate the fairy serious challenge they would have faced going forward, more serious than I'm sure they guessed at when they first arranged to use HP software.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  29. But they sure do take returns! by Bobb+Sledd · · Score: 1

    I know there is a lot of hatred for Wal-Mart. I don't like them and I don't like going there either. But, let me tell you something... I will continue to shop there because their returns policy is crazy-in-my-favor. I have taken back things that were bought well over a year ago. I have taken things back with no receipt, no tags, and they still gave me back what I *said* I paid. I think I have even taken back things that I purchased at another store. As long as Wal-Mart carries it? I seem to get the money back.

    Now try that with Office Max or Office Depot. I have purchased things that didn't work out and when I went to return them, found they only had a 30-day policy -- even with a receipt. WTF?

    Until someone has returns policies like Wal-Mart... I'll keep going because I know I can take it back.

    --
    "They said I probly shouldn't fly with just one eye," "I am Bender. Please insert girder."
    1. Re:But they sure do take returns! by geekoid · · Score: 2

      "I will continue to shop there because their returns policy is crazy-in-my-favor."
      Thanks for letting us know your price for doing something you don't like.

      "think I have even taken back things that I purchased at another store."
      Ah, you lie and commit fraud, that explains it.
      You sir,are a Dick, and the reason places like wal-mart stop being customer friendly.
      You, and people like you, are the knife that is killing 'The Customer is always right.' policy.

      Dick.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:But they sure do take returns! by Bobb+Sledd · · Score: 1

      I think you have judged me most unfairly. Sometimes I do not really know where I got some things. Ever heard of a gift? I don't always get a gift receipt (and I'm not going to ask the giver for one if it isn't provided). But if I need to make an exchange, I need an exchange! So I walk to the counter and I explain that I do not know if I got this item here, and will they let me return/exchange it. If they say yes, I fail to see how this is lying or fraud.

      And how am I killing the "Customer is always right" policy? On the contrary; because of this, my first choice on where to buy something is now Wal-Mart because I know the return policy. I think Wal-Mart *know* this and uses it to their advantage. I will no longer buy electronics from Best Buy, Circuit City, Office Max, or Office Depot (if I can first get the item at Wal-Mart) because those places' return policy is sometimes 30 days, sometimes 7 days! Wal-Mart has no date limitation that I know of, and that is the way it should be in my opinion.

      Sorry, but I am going to bring my business to whomever has the best offer for me, where I can get the most for my dollar. (That is usually Wal-Mart.)

      --
      "They said I probly shouldn't fly with just one eye," "I am Bender. Please insert girder."
  30. Another Mom and Pop store destroyed by Netflix by elrous0 · · Score: 1

    I tell you, some days it seems like the little guy just can't win.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  31. What is seriously behind the scenes here? by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 1

    Microsoft seems to be able to eat its own tail & live.

    "is like trying to market an office productivity suite that doesn't read/write MS Office docs: You're doomed to failure from the start."

    As in "The file that your less informed coworker has a 4 character extension that no one has ever heard of, so you can't open it. However, you can try downloading a converter".

    Wallmart's deadliest trick is Loss-Leading the undead blazes out of stuff. "Tell you what. Buy anything else in our store and we'll pay you a dollar to try our movie service! Look! We got market share!". If they went for some ridiculously high price, then that means some Suit got swindled.

    Meanwhile, on the other side of the fence, AOL just caved Netscape. Maybe the code will go into a discount bin at Wallmart, who will make a killing on it at 25 cents a copy for developers looking for Zombie Code.

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  32. Perhaps it's a sign of something else... by argent · · Score: 1

    Rather than a sign that Apple/Netflix rolled over Walmart, it may be a sign that online movies are simply not the hot item that online music is.

  33. Wal-Marts Movie Download Service by iviagnus · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I'll tell you the reason at least one person (moi) didn't attempt Wal-Marts Movie Download Service beyond the first try . . . it didn't work with my non-IE browser (yes it's in the top three most popular). I expressed this concern to Wal-Mart through email, essentially stating that they should be producing web pages that adhere to W3C standards so that all browsers will work, and got back the standard auto-response. You know, the one that basically states, "We want it to work so we can take all your money and it doesn't, but we don't care if you know the reason it isn't, we'll keep doing it our way just the same." You know, that response.