Consumer spending on DVDs falls while disc sales rise

And with all the talk of Blu-ray discs, sales are sure to rise!... oh yeah.. -Mike

<QUOTE>Overall consumer spending on DVDs fell in 2005 despite the amount of discs sold being higher than it ever was.</QUOTE> How can that be?! Piracy is DESTROYING the market and ruining the MPAA and RIAA's profits, remember? ;-) -Justin

That's pretty cool. I haven't touched a VHS tape in years. It's just natural progression. In the states, Wal-Mart has already stopped selling vhs tapes. I'm just wondering though,in Central and Eastern Europe why do only 12% of TV household have a dvd Player? Are there any underlying factors?

This is how i see it: " Overall consumer spending on DVDs fell in 2005 despite the amount of discs sold being higher than it ever was." DVD's (movie)sales are down but Disks (blank media) sales are up!

Only reason I ever bought a DVD player is because my rental store didn't have movies in VHS format. I buy a few DVDs when I see a good movies that I like. I don't have money to buy all the DVDs I like because I have other bills to pay.

just wondering though,in Central and Eastern Europe why do only 12% of TV household have a dvd Player? Are there any underlying factors? They are mostly poor countrys

This kind of thing happens because there are $5 dollar bins at wal-mart ..... why buy a $20+ movie thats new when you can get three in the bin that you know you like for 15 and save some money, so more disks and less money , I am sure its the same thing there. New Releases are way overpriced...... you know in several months that same movie is going to end up in the bin so ppl are showing that they will wait and get it when it goes down..... and that is leading to movie prices dropping also.... I know now at wal-mart where I get alot of my movies they are running specials like a new release with another movie so you get two for the $20 trying to boost sales on new releases ......... If the MPAA and RIAA would stop trying to Rob the consumer and drop thier prices alot more people would be buying at the lower price. Then Sales would go up for sure. All the complaints about piracy would go out the window if the pirates couldnt make profit doing what they do.......but then I belive that alot more gets blamed on them than they actually do. But the RIAA and the MPAA like the story because its a way to pay less to the actual performer, by saying they are looseing money to pirates ........ I wonder if some of those supposedly Pirated CDs and DVDs are not just made by the RIAA and MPAA under the table , maybe as soon as the performers walk out of the office they raise thier skull and cross bones flag right back up ?

@ Curm76 As you imply, don't trust ANYTHING the MPAA says or does. Check out this article from today's LA Times, which indicates how the MPAA breaks the very rules it claims piracy breaks. SUNDANCE FILM FESTIVAL MPAA finds itself accused of piracy By John Horn Times Staff Writer 6:08 AM PST, January 24, 2006 PARK CITY, Utah — The Motion Picture Assn. of America, the leader in the global fight against movie piracy, is being accused of unlawfully making a bootleg copy of a documentary that takes a critical look at the MPAA's film ratings system. The MPAA admitted Monday that it had duplicated "This Film Is Not Yet Rated" without the filmmaker's permission after director Kirby Dick submitted his movie in November for an MPAA rating. The Hollywood trade organization said that it did not break copyright law, insisting that the dispute is part of a Dick-orchestrated "publicity stunt" to boost the film's profile. Scheduled to debut at the Sundance Film Festival on Wednesday night, "This Film Is Not Yet Rated" examines what Dick believes are the MPAA's stricter standards for rating explicit depictions of sex than for gruesome violence. Dick also explores whether independent films are rated more harshly than studio films, whether scenes of gay sex are restricted more than scenes of straight sex, and why the 10 members of the MPAA's ratings board operate without any public accountability. Michael Donaldson, a lawyer representing Dick, has written the MPAA demanding that it "immediately return all copies" of the film in its possession, and explain who approved the making of the copy and who within the MPAA has looked at the reproduction. Dick said he was "very upset and troubled" to discover during a recent conversation with an MPAA lawyer that the MPAA had copied the film from a digital version he submitted Nov. 29 for a rating. ("This Film Is Not Yet Rated" was rated NC-17 for "some graphic sexual content," a rating upheld after Dick appealed.) The MPAA's copy of Dick's film was viewed by Dan Glickman, the MPAA's new president, the MPAA said. The filmmaker said that when he asked MPAA lawyer Greg Goeckner what right his organization had to make the copy, Goeckner told him that Dick and his crew had potentially invaded the privacy of the MPAA's movie raters. "We made a copy of Kirby's movie because it had implications for our employees," said Kori Bernards, the MPAA's vice president for corporate communications. She said Dick spied on the members of the MPAA's Classification and Rating Administration, including going through their garbage and following them as they drove their children to school. "We were concerned about the raters and their families," Bernards said. She said the MPAA's copy of "This Film Is Not Yet Rated" is "locked away," and is not being copied or distributed. The standard the MPAA is using for itself appears to be at odds with what the organization sets out for others: "Manufacturing, selling, distributing or making copies of motion pictures without the consent of the copyright owners is illegal," the MPAA's website says. "Movie pirates are thieves, plain and simple…. ALL forms of piracy are illegal and carry serious legal consequences." Donaldson said in an interview that the MPAA previously had promised in writing that it would not copy the film, but an e-mail exchange does not completely support that claim. Donaldson added that while he is not planning at this time to sue the MPAA for copyright infringement, he reserved the possibility of filing a lawsuit later. "It's my practice and style to wait and see what they do, go over all of our options, and then make a decision," he said. Dick, who was nominated for an Academy Award for 2004's documentary feature "Twist of Faith," said in an interview that his film crew acted appropriately in tracking down and identifying the anonymous members of the movie ratings board. But even if he didn't "follow all the rules," Dick said, "I don't know how that allows somebody else to break the law." Bernards said the MPAA has made copies of other films submitted for ratings, but did not identify any by name. When Dick submitted his film for a rating, he asked in an e-mail for assurances that "no copies would be made of any part or all of the film," according to a copy of the e-mail exchange. In a reply e-mail, an MPAA representative did not specifically say the organization wouldn't copy the film, but did say "the confidentiality of your film ... is our first priority. Please feel assure (sic) that your film is in good hands." The MPAA's Bernards, who said Glickman was unavailable for comment, said the organization was operating lawfully when it copied Dick's movie without his or his producer's authorization. "The courts recognize that parties are entitled to make a copy of a work for use as evidence in possible future proceedings," she said. The MPAA has not brought any legal actions against Dick, but did call the police when the movie raters complained about being stalked and were worried about their safety. The raters had no idea they were being followed as part of a documentary. Donaldson said he was unaware of any legal cases that supported the MPAA's position. One expert on intellectual property and copyright law said that while he was unfamiliar with any cases specifically addressing the issue, the MPAA's argument might work. "You can't make a copy as a general matter, but you can if you meet several tests," said Mark Lemley, a professor at Stanford Law School. It helps the MPAA, Lemley said, that it is not selling the copy of "This Film Is Not Yet Rated" for commercial gain. Dick "is right to say you can't make a single copy unless you have a legitimate defense," Lemley said. "But it seems that in this case, [the MPAA] may have a legitimate defense."

Now just remember the MPAA will always have a legal defense, they make the laws (well they pay big money to be backed by them).

3 factors and 1 misinterpretation: 1) DVD's drop in prices, people do buy in clearence, and more people are buying recordable media in bulk. 2) Populations in either poor or even 3rd-world contries probably see having to own a DVD player the last thing on thier priorities list. I'm sure food, housing, and just about everything else should come first, then you can waste money on necessities. 3) DVD's are not the only source of media out there. I'm sure most of those people would either still use VHS, their computer, or CD's, CDV's like in some Asian countries. DVD's are just a replacement for some of these things. And the Misconception: The MPAA and the RIAA don't control the pricing of discs. They only regulate illegal trafficing and misuse of copyrighted works (even though most of their actions are mostly unethical in nature). If you have to blame something for sales prices, blame the economy, the record companies, the bad talent's that need the turbo-jet, and all the stupid people who are still okay with this.

There are also a lot of people who can't get access to retail version of their favourite movie, and they have no choice but to copy/download it. -Mike

Hi, 1. Yes, people in central and eastern europe have other priorities too, but beside this the fact is DVDs in the local languages is scarce (example older TV Series on DVD), or too late. Also buying habit is also different, not many people bought VHS tapes either, they rented it, they collected own recording of Tv series and movies from broadcast.(I also have 3-4 full series recorded on 4hours tapes, but not touched them in years) 2. When the price of a new movie on DVD is equal of a standalone DVD (DIVX :) player, then nobody will by them. When the movies arrive in the bargain bin, they've also seen them on the TV, so even if these costs 5$ not too many buys them. 3. The more educated knows how to use the internet also know English, so they can grab the originals before these appears on the shelves... :) George

Nothing to do with the sale of blank discs. Tis simply economics: More and more people own DVD players and for whatever reason, feel compelled to build a library. Probably because of their investment in their new home-theater set-up. Let's face it. The DVD brought us home theatre. Now that every movie ever made is available on DVD, you have a ton of cheap selection. I mean, how much do you expect to pay for Smokey and the Bandit on DVD at K-Mart? Four or five years ago, the DVD was reserved for new-releases at $19 a pop. More discs sold...less money spent.

I haven't bought a DVD in over a year, but I have purchased tons of blanks, this is all thanks to afterdawn.com...

@tjhorne But of course you used all those blank discs to archive all the home digital movies you took.

Why of course, I don't buy movies, I rent them is what I meant to say. All of those blanks are for backing up home movies, pics and all of my legally downloaded music...

I have to agree with ripxrush

Quote:

---

This is how i see it: " Overall consumer spending on DVDs fell in 2005 despite the amount of discs sold being higher than it ever was." DVD's (movie)sales are down but Disks (blank media) sales are up!

---

I agree, Netflix is much cheaper, 17.99 a month and you have access to an unlimited selection of movies.

I agree with most of the posts but want to add 1 opion. Movies coming out are crap latly.... No story line or thay are a remake... I mean come on the last movie everybody in my area was busing about was open water.... did anybody see that, the only reason i stayed awake is cause i was getting a ............. well you know. Nothing that has come out or is coming out really makes me want to run out and RENT. Never buy, $20.00 for a DVD kiss my @##. So in conclusion, Make better movies, lower prices, then lets see what happens. I'd like to see who had more sales, a comedy like wedding crashers.....or a serious movie like......ah who cares. LD

I own tons of dvds. All store bought. The reason why I havent bought any dvds in the past year is because its all crap. Everything is a remake or a sequel. Stop remaking classic tv shows cause they are classic. you dont mess with classic.stop putting out crap. Crash did well for itself because it was a fresh idea that the everyday market looks forward to.A reality they hadnt seen before.Not to mention, with over 2000 dvds, I'm a sucker now that high def dvds are coming out

There are still good movies coming out, you just don't hear about them. Here are a couple of recommendations of great movies I've seen within the last year that are well worth the price: Poolhall Junkies Boondock Saints Serenity (did OK at the theatres, really good flick) I'm sure I have a couple more, I just can't think of them right now...