1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

NewsCorp CEO Would Gouge D* Subs for New HD Movies

Discussion in 'DIRECTV HD DVR/Receiver Discussion' started by Nick, Mar 1, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Mar 1, 2006 #1 of 44
    Nick

    Nick Retired, part-time PITA DBSTalk Club

    21,899
    207
    Apr 23, 2002
    The...
    HDTV Viewers Are "Desperate"

    News Corp. president Peter Cherin says his company is likely to charge
    $25-30 to watch a single high-def film.

    News Corp. President and COO Peter Cherin told a financial conference
    yesterday that his company is talking to cable and satellite operators
    about charging $25-30 to watch a movie in HDTV 60 days after
    its theatrical release.

    Asked if the cost seemed high, Cherin said that some high-def owners
    would be "desperate consumers" because there is relatively little
    HDTV programming available on cable and satellite.

    He noted that more than one million Americans last year spent more than
    $25,000 on Home Theater set-ups. Those viewers in particular, Cherin
    said, would be ideal targets for the high-priced HDTV movie.

    Yes, there is relatively little high-def programming available. But who's
    fault
    is that? (bolding added)

    Read more on this disgusting development at www.tvpredictions.com/

    (Correction: Mr. Chernin is the COO, not the CEO as incorrectly stated in the inalterable title of this thread.)
     
  2. Mar 1, 2006 #2 of 44
    juan ellitinez

    juan ellitinez Icon/Supporter DBSTalk Gold Club

    1,982
    0
    Jan 31, 2003
    Gee it only costs 10 bucks in the theater. What the hell are they smoking!!!
     
  3. Mar 1, 2006 #3 of 44
    Geronimo

    Geronimo Native American Potentate DBSTalk Gold Club

    8,303
    0
    Mar 23, 2002
    A couple of minor clarifications. The article does not specifically target D* subs. They apparently think that they can get cable ops (and perhaps E*) to go along. And Mr. Chernin is the COO not the CEO. The CEO is Rupert Murdoch.

    I am not even an HD sub but I too hope this fails. Thanks for pointing this out.
     
  4. Mar 1, 2006 #4 of 44
    Earl Bonovich

    Earl Bonovich Lifetime Achiever

    30,092
    3
    Nov 15, 2005
    $10 a PERSON at the theaters....

    I just went and saw Curious George this weekend.
    Had a free coupon for my son... but I still dropped $25 for my wife, and "snacks"

    $25-$30 for an HDTV quality, in my home, less then 2 month old Theatrical release.. Where my family can enjoy it, (my wife, son, extended family, and friends)

    It could easily become a Family/Friends party on a regular basis.
    $30 is a good price IMHO for something like that.
     
  5. Mar 1, 2006 #5 of 44
    Nick

    Nick Retired, part-time PITA DBSTalk Club

    21,899
    207
    Apr 23, 2002
    The...
    Point taken, Earl, and you can even charge friends for admission and snacks to recoupe your costs. ;)
     
  6. Mar 1, 2006 #6 of 44
    Earl Bonovich

    Earl Bonovich Lifetime Achiever

    30,092
    3
    Nov 15, 2005
    I would never charge for admission.....

    Just you best have something in your hand in the form of a 6 pack, or peperroni to get in the door... :D
     
  7. Mar 1, 2006 #7 of 44
    NVBlue

    NVBlue Legend

    106
    0
    Aug 3, 2005
    Nobody would buy at those prices.
     
  8. Mar 1, 2006 #8 of 44
    Earl Bonovich

    Earl Bonovich Lifetime Achiever

    30,092
    3
    Nov 15, 2005
    Then I guess I am a Nobody...

    I have pretty much stopped going to the movie theaters because of the cost.
    (Only went to see Curious George as we had the coupon for my son, and we figured it would be a good first theater movie for him)

    I can EASILY see people willing to pay $25 to watch it at home.

    Why? Around here, in Chicago Land....

    It is a MINIMUM of $9.50 to go to a Friday Evening movie.

    Combo Deal #1 (Two Drinks and a Large Popcorn) $10.50

    That is basically $29.50 or $30 for a couple to go see a movie... Mix in the Babysitter fees, Dinner, The time away...

    Don't get me wrong... I love going to the theaters... but...
    If I can stay at home and get even MORE usage out of my home theater system...

    Bingo... ESPECIALLY if this is done in a VOD style or via the DVR where I can take it down when it is available, and then watch it when I want to.
     
  9. Mar 1, 2006 #9 of 44
    David_Levin

    David_Levin Icon/Supporter DBSTalk Gold Club

    1,227
    0
    Apr 22, 2002
    It certainly sounds plausable for a party with 4-6 people. I wonder if they will let us PVR these events?

    This could be another step in the direction of the extinction of all physical media.
     
  10. Earl Bonovich

    Earl Bonovich Lifetime Achiever

    30,092
    3
    Nov 15, 2005
  11. durl

    durl Hall Of Fame

    1,743
    0
    Mar 27, 2003
    I didn't like the reported attitude where HD subscribers are considered "desperate." (If we're desperate, then apparently there's a need which means economic opportunity....hello.)

    Still, $25 doesn't seem that bad of a deal to me. The key factor is 60 DAYS AFTER RELEASE. Some people might be willing to pay that price for being able to see the movie that soon after release. For a family of four to see a movie, that would be a bargain.
     
  12. carlsbad_bolt_fan

    carlsbad_bolt_fan Icon

    803
    16
    May 18, 2004
    Carlsbad, CA
    Kinda reminds me when I was in college when my residence hall would show movies. The fun ended when the movie studios found out they were showing the movies for nothing and said "you can't do that as rental movies are not to be shown to a crowd no larger than the 'family unit' ". They threatened to sue unless the residence hall paid an additional fee.

    How long do you think it'll take before the movie companies start doing the same thing here? Or has the law about this changed already? :confused:
     
  13. Earl Bonovich

    Earl Bonovich Lifetime Achiever

    30,092
    3
    Nov 15, 2005
    I don't think there was a "law" about it.
    I think it had to do more with the license agreements for those movies (we had a similar program in our dorms... but we had to pay $100 a month for the movies)

    I am sure there will be some "rules", but unless they are handing out webcams, theater screen glasses... how the heck are they going to enforce it?
     
  14. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Legend

    127
    0
    Jan 31, 2006
    Agreed. For $25 I would wait for the DVD to come out, buy and still have 5 bucks left over for snacks :D
     
  15. jcricket

    jcricket Legend

    211
    0
    Nov 21, 2005
    I might pay $10 for a HD PPV if it were available that quickly after theatrical release, but no more. Yes, I know movies are expensive, but the screen and sound are great, and I like getting out of the house. My setup isn't "theatrical" enough to eliminate going to the movies for me (Disclaimer: We don't have kids, I know it's different for people with big familes).

    I also know that DVDs aren't HD quality, but at 480p, they're much better than SD, pan-and-scan PPV. Plus, with Netflix, the rental cost is less than $4/rental (esp. if you watch a lot). Plus, the "DVD window" is shrinking to the point where movies will be available on DVD 3 months after theatrical release. So I can handle waiting an extra month and getting my pick of DVD-quality to save $25.

    I think this whole issue is why "On Demand" is such a big threat to Netflix, Blockbuster, D*, etc. If there was a on-demand library as big as netflix's DVD selection, I'd bet a lot of people would pay a subscription fee of $25/month to be able to rent (say) 5-8 movies/month.
     
  16. ajseagles3

    ajseagles3 Legend

    116
    0
    Feb 16, 2006
    If I want to see something bad enough (which is rare), I'll go to the theater.

    No way in hell I'd pay more than the monthly cost of Netflix to see ONE movie in HD on my TV. I'd wait for DVD every single time.
     
  17. carl6

    carl6 Moderator Staff Member DBSTalk Club

    12,520
    958
    Nov 15, 2005
    Seattle, WA
    Well, so far I'm not even willing to spend the bucks for HD (TV or service). I had seriously considered it, and decided it wasn't worth the cost.

    I also do not buy regular pay per view; I think they are too costly. If I can't find something on the premium channels that I do subscribe to, then I'll rent a dvd for $0.99 at the local supermarket.

    So it goes without saying that I'm not going to pay $10 or $25 for a ppv.

    Carl
     
  18. DaveTinNY

    DaveTinNY Legend

    174
    0
    Nov 8, 2004
    They can kiss my ass.... Wait 'til HD DVD (or BLUERAY) arrives. Then I'll spend more money on HD movies that I can own.
    Heck, with Netflix and progressive scan DVD player piped into my 38" tube HDTV, the picture is excellent. I don't know what this guy is thinking about.
    I'll watch the old HDNET MOVIES before spending that type of cash on a high def pay per view. I can afford it too; it's just highway robbery.
     
  19. Wolffpack

    Wolffpack Banned User

    4,642
    0
    Jul 29, 2003
    Yep, Netflix works for me. Nothing is worth that price.
     
  20. Tom J

    Tom J New Member

    8
    0
    Jan 24, 2004
    Mr. Cherin's comments only serve to confirm my perception of how News Corp views its customers and consumers in general.

    Besides, with "hundreds" of national HD channels available how will I possibly find the time to watch a $30 movie. :rolleyes:

    Tom J
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page