Slashdot Mirror
A Third of Americans Still Buy and Rent Videos (qz.com)
An anonymous reader writes: One-third of Americans still buy and rent videos, in addition to using streaming services like Netflix and YouTube, NPD Group found in its annual Entertainment Trends in America report. The research firm surveyed more than 7,000 members of its US online panel about their entertainment consumption during August 2017. Family films are still popular buys because kids will watch them over and over again. Spotty broadband service in rural America makes buying and renting more reliable than streaming for some. And some people just like to own and collect movies. Overall, 54% of people surveyed said they still buy or rent video.
Blu-ray video quality is still superior to most streamed video, in my experience.
... but buying can still be really really cheap. It takes very little time for a movie - especially on DVD - to hit the $10 or even $5 bin now. They've put so many movies into the "impulse buy" category now that it's no surprise a lot of people still buy. On top of that if I want something I can't stream I can often get a copy on DVD through an online seller.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
I have put together over the years, a pretty good AV setup.
I have a nice TV, and a very high end audio system to go with it....good for stereo and surround for movies.
When there are special movies with great sound and images, I prefer to view it from the medium with the highest fidelity I can get for both audio and video and that's not streaming.
I don't buy many videos with the exception of music and concert videos.
Those are things I"ll throw on to have in the background when doing things in the living area, or just to watch as that I don't get tired of those.
But I do at times think..."Hey, I invested quite a bit into my system, I should take advantage of it by choosing to view the best I can through it".
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Netflix has both streaming and physical movies. But the catalogues are not identical, so there are many movies that you can get on disc that you can't stream.
In addition movies on Netflix come and go with their streaming service. Thus it is possible that a movie you watched previously is no longer available for streaming.
And that doesn't consider that I have had my Netflix streaming service seemingly disappear for days at a time, only to mysteriously re-appear for no reason at all.
So in reality the Netflix situation is just another example of a cloud service ebeing "someone else's computer".
I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
We often "rent" videos from our local library. We don't pay anything for them (apart from our local tax dollars which I consider well spent on the library system and any late fees) but I guess you could consider them rentals. Yes, there is often a wait, but my library has an app to manage requests between library branches and renewals which makes it very easy. I'm currently on the waiting list for Spider-Man: Homecoming when a copy is freed up - and I'm the first person in the request queue - the copy will be sent to my library of choice and I'll be notified to come pick it up.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
"Renting" movies is when you put on your Walkman, ride your skateboard down to Blockbuster, and pay to borrow something that the rest of the world pays to stream or downloads for free.
Netflix's DVD library is pretty extensive compared to the streaming services, but so is TPB's.
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
The 54% is the percent that rent or buy over all sources, so physical and streaming.
the 1/3 or 26%(dont ask on that one) are from physical such as DVD or blu-ray.
DVDs and Blu-Ray. Free and you can hang on to them for a week. Not to mention a built in list of stuff I want to watch. The only downside is you don't know when you'll get the movie,
Red Box is just easy.
Plus you NEVER have to wonder if you are popping a data cap and it NEVER buffers on you.
It was nice while it lasted.
Thanks, Ajit.
Have gnu, will travel.
With GameFly and Netflix and Redbox it's easy and doesn't kill your bandwidth, plus you get the full quality BD. Now with UHD BD it seems more sensible than ever.
Twinstiq, game news
Internet providers limits the total amount downloaded per month. In our case, it just means throttling to ISDN speeds, for some friends and acquaintances it means extra monthly fees. It is often both easier and cheaper to just buy a disc to insert into the player than to log into a streaming service, find the movie, and watch cap rapidly come near. There is also the issue of licensing. If the streaming services no longer license a movie or series, then it is gone until found again. With a disc, as long as care is taken (good storage conditions, backup, and enough technical ability to convert formats) then there is much less concern with losing access to enjoyed media due to a third party short of full disasters.
How many Spencer Tracy, Katherine Hepburn, Alfred Hitchcock, or Charlie Chaplin movies are on Netflix? About half a dozen total (with zero Chaplins). A video store or your local library will probably have a few more. Every time I search my brother's Netflix for a movie or show (hmm, let's see... I'd like The Ghost and Mrs Muir, or Fantasia, or how about the real Avengers with Steed and Peel) it's not there.
I still rent and buy discs, in addition to cable/DVR and also streaming. I consider it a perfectly valid content format for a variety of reasons:
1) A disc never stops working (when treated right) :) )
2) Disc has best picture quality.
3) Disc has 3D capability (which I like, so shove it
4) Disc requires no internet access (which is important to many who have no, limited, slow, or capped Internet)
5) Disc rentals cover almost ALL movies out there, not just a sub-set available through streaming.
6) Purchased discs gives me the option to save it in varies different formats, resolutions, etc, and use it on any device I like, immediately, with no outside connection.
7) High-quality video on disc with no impact on network quotas.
8) Purchased discs give me the option to sell it later, or lend it to family/friends.
9) Discs have extra content- some of which is very interesting.
10) If you wait a while, prices on discs can be surprisingly, even shockingly cheap.
Of course, there are a some issues with discs:
* "Unskippable" content on discs I buy, which is infuriating (and they are shooting themselves in the foot.
* And discs CAN be damaged when not treated correctly- but I have never had that issue (except on some rentals, not discs I own).
* Rental discs often do not contain the "extra" content and sometimes have limited audio choices.
* Some [even natively shot] 3D titles are not being released on 3D discs, which is a shame.
* Having to physically store them... although this is hardly a big deal if you are willing to depart with the large, stock cases.
98% of them have a refridgerator too!
The more relevant question is, "What *fraction* of entertainment purchasing goes to physical videos?" and the answer is "almost none". But more than none.
I still prefer "owning" movies I really like rather than streaming. You aren't subject to the whims of the streaming companies that have libraries that are constantly shrinking ( Netflix ) or rights holders that pull their movies to stream on a competing service (Disney).
Like streaming music, the rights holders are slowly moving in the direct of a model where you'll pay every time you watch or listen to their product.
have you seen how low quality Netflix steam is compared to 50Mbps Bluray with lossless audio? duh! me and my friends have been renting Bluray since they came out and ripping them to our large storage systems then we stream from there to our devices. I have 50TB worth myself on my home server.
Netflix is like sub 10Mbps highly compressed steams with blocky audio and video in comparison.
https://www.trumpsweapon.com/
The article title says one third, but the content says 54% - quite a rounding error.
Because Blu-ray Disc's bitrate is up to 54 Mbps, its picture quality can greatly exceed that of HD Internet streaming or HD cable TV. But 2K cinema can have an even cleaner picture than a 1080p Blu-ray Disc because DCP reels use Motion JPEG 2000 with high dynamic range at up to 250 Mbps.
Renting is where instead of paying $10 to buy a video you pay $2 to watch it once then a $6 fine for returning it late or $60 fine if you lose or damage it.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Disc requires no internet access (which is important to many who have no, limited, slow, or capped Internet)
True of DVD. But don't players require occasional firmware updates to play new titles on Blu-ray Disc?
Disc rentals cover almost ALL movies out there
Still a big "almost". There are movies that haven't been rereleased on home video since the VHS days.
We use RedBox all the time, saves some bandwidth, get better quality picture & sound.
We buy great movies to try and show support for great content as a way of voting with our money what we would like the studios to be producing more of.
Headline: "A Third of Americans..."
Last sentence: "54% of those surveyed..."
If the author's intent was to present the facts without any bias they really screwed the pooch. The headline straight-up misrepresents the facts.
There's why one-third of Americans don't give a crap about net neutrality.
I know that it's easy to forget that some of us still live and work out away from the coasts but we do. Sometimes it's for family, sometimes it's for work, sometimes it's because we like the area. However universally I don't know of anyone that lives out here for the internet.
This is the 'best' ISP where my mom lives: http://www.m33access.com/
And while the coasts are pissing and moaning about what Comcast might do with NetNeutrality they've given us the "fuck you" long ago. Even going so far as to lobby against us being able to set up our own Internet.
So no. We don't use Netflix. We don't stream Amazon. A station wagon of tapes (or DVDs) is still the best option.
Overall, 54% of people surveyed said they still buy or rent video.
So basically, not a third but a half still buy or rent videos. Original source says the same:
Overall, 54% of people surveyed said they still buy or rent video. It’s not all DVDs and Blu-rays. Physical sales have plummeted compared to digital, data from the Digital Entertainment Group shows.
Or am I reading it wrong slashdot?
One thing I noticed about Anime is that old stuff on DVD or BluRay can end up costing a lot over time because when the licenses aren't renewed they become impossible to find. I have some anime in my collection that are going for a few hundred on eBay. So when it comes to imports, buying is the safest solution if you want to be able to see it again in the future.
Renting is like leasing but without any of the bullshit double talk about eventually owning.
Now I have another question: What's Blockbuster?
Two thirds of United States Citizens (aka Americans) rent their houses, lease their cars, make frivolous purchases on credit, are unable to balance their checkbooks, and leave nothing of monetary or cultural value to their progeny.
The other third buys and eventually pays of their house, owns used cars outright, has no revolving credit, saves for retirement, and leaves their music and video collection to their children.
There are two possibilities. One is that journalists are innumerate journalism school grads. The other is that they're highly numerate and in fact geniuses of the level of Ramanujan but have a twisted sense of humour. Each figure they toss out is designed to make one possible rationalisation of all the previous figures untenable, until at the end of the article a numerate reader is forced to declare one or more of the figures a typo and work with the rest. Though with a sneaking sense that the decision as to which figure to ignore in order to produce a self consistent narrative is subjective and thus quantitatively speaking the article is entirely meaningless.
An astute player of the game will obviously aim for the mathematically beautiful result that the largest possible consistent subset of the figures they have quoted is 1, i.e. each figure is inconsistent with all the other ones.
Maybe this is what people learn at journalism school.
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
I choose to pay not pirate. Those who believe they can just take for free will never be convinced why it matters to those who refuse to take. But everything else follows as an economic argument only once you accept Iâ(TM)m a paying customer and compare means to pay.
Digital copies usually cost the exact same amount as a physical copy. Except the physical copy always comes with the digital copy bundled. So itâ(TM)s the exact same price for the exact same digital copy plus free discs.
Discs are usually a lot cheaper in sales than their digital copies, if youâ(TM)re backfilling a collection.
With price matching, you pay the lowest price, whichever store youâ(TM)re at, which almost always ends up cheaper than digital.
No matter how digital licensing terms change, no matter which services cease to be profitable and close, my physical copy remains.
I never hit an arbitrary limit of maximum disc players used. I regularly bounce off Vuduâ(TM)s maximum. A few games systems, a bunch of streaming devices, some smart TVs, a couple of phones, iPads and laptops and a married couple starts getting bugged to deactivate devices rather than freely use whichever one theyâ(TM)re currently using.
The federal government has sold out users. As net neutrality collapses, as users continue to get a single choice of ISP in each zip code and it sets bandwidth caps to stop digital video use and force users back to cable... my discs use zero bandwidth. I can watch my free digital copies when it suits me but Iâ(TM)m never beholden to cable ISPs.
When the internet goes out, my UPS stays up and I keep the exact same library.
1080P is now just about as good, streaming, over a decade after blu ray showed up. Even then, it often stutters and drops quality. A disc never does. And while itâ(TM)s great that streaming is finally there with blu ray, 4K UHD discs that play on any $200 Xbox One S still beat the hell out of most attempts at 4K streams over what US ISPs laughably get to call high speed internet.
I like being a collector. That wall of discs, as a quick trigger into memories of being a kid and watching Flight of the Navigator or the first time I discovered Cabin In The Woods is awesome.
I can loan a physical disc as often as I want (so long as Iâ(TM)m happy to trust friends and accept when it fails to return). I love that I can share my love with others. I love that I can introduce rare gems that are a nightmare to track down on streaming services.
But it really comes back to... The digital costs just as much as the physical and digital combined. If Iâ(TM)m buying anyway (sorry pirates, Iâ(TM)m a fool, I get it), why no have all the advantages of digital AND all the advantages of physical, for the same price.
We'll still rent movies by using the 'On Demand' feature from our Cable TV provider (Telus Optik TV).
Last Christmas the kids wanted to watch "Home Alone" for the first time. Wasn't on Netflix so we just pushed the button on the remote and rented it for five bucks. A minute later and we were watching Kevin McCallister's antics on the flatscreen.
Well put. I missed the 26% problem. Many journalists seem to pride themselves on not being numerate, not knowing how to use a hammer, etc. The career path from high school paper to journalism-school-with-summer-internships to job means that they have never experienced the real world inhabited by their readers.
If you buy a DVD/BluRay your kid will want to watch it over and over. If you rent it, it has to go back to the store :) Family Video has most of the Disney stuff in the FREE section so it is just like going to the library and I don't have to store it and watch it endlessly. Just like the song in Frozen says, "let it go, let it go, I'm not holding on the DVDs and BluRays anymore."
Yes, I've bought a few FLAC "CDs" online, but the last time I compared, the bits in the FLAC files with similar sample rate were mostly but not exactly equal to the bits on a real CD, and in interesting places. That tells me that downloaded copies are likely tagged by purchaser, with some unknown effect on sound quality.
Classical music is also very poorly represented by online services. I even need to go international to buy some of the better but out-of-print CDs.
Also, last time I checked, my shelf of DVD/Blu-ray discs has only a very tiny representation on the streaming services, and only somewhat better even with Netflix' DVD service. So I would otherwise have to wait some indeterminate time to view any of the media represented by my discs online. Never mind the extra material on the discs.
So I remain heavily into physical media, though I play my ripped CDs via a Squeezebox setup.
Netflix streaming gives me great series including awesome originals but is mostly worthless for movies. It is the replacement for the TV of old (I cut cable). If I want to see a good movie, the basic choices are rent from Red Box or get Netflix disks by mail. I don't ever own because that's just a piece of clutter in my house.
The one third buying their house and cars may well be doing the right thing. It's a bit easier to justify renting movies, though, as there are very few you are going to watch more than once. As for inheriting a music or video collection - (a) it's probably in some obsolete or inconvenient format (33rpm, VHS, laserdisc), and (b) who wants every episode of Matlock?
I have good web with no data cap nonsense. I'd stream happily, but many films aren't streamable. They make you mail discs back and forth instead...
Renting is cheap though, since the online prices for a one-time showing of a year old movie are much higher. Sometimes the online cost of a one time showing of a movie can be the same as going to the theater. This may surprise some slashdotters, but saving $10 for some people greatly outweights the value of never leaving the basement.
I still rent movies from Redbox sometimes. I can't really see paying 6 dollars for a streaming rental if I can rent the same movie on Blu-Ray for 2 dollars a day.
Netflix streaming was great at first - they had lots of good movies to watch. I seem to recall that their library was over 100,000 movies at one point. But that didn't last long. The movie studios starting charging a lot more and sometimes building their own competing services, such that it looks like we're trending toward 100 streaming sites with 1,000 movies each.
That's a made up figure of course, but that's just to make a point. The point is that with the splintering of the streaming services' film libraries, my local video store becomes competitive again. At this point they have a much better library of titles that I would like to watch than Netflix streaming does. And since I don't watch movies frequently enough to justify the monthly price for Netflix disc rentals, or to subscribe to multiple streaming services, the local video store wins by default.