|
|
Posted by Richard C. on 07/07/06 13:56
X-No-archive: yes
"Scott en Aztlán" <scottenaztlan@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:guhra25ltm8u5chb50q8krbiq6d9920kjm@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 6 Jul 2006 14:55:22 -0700, "Richard C." <post-age@spamcop.net>
> wrote:
>
>>> Still, Araxen is correct: Laserdisc never achieved true mainstream
>>> market penetration in the way that DVD has. And LDs were very
>>> expensive - another barrier to mass acceptance. They were basically a
>>> niche product catering mainly to wealthy videophiles.
>>
>>This is an "urban myth".
>>Most laser discs were 1/2 to 1/3 the price of VHS tapes when released.
>
> You can't compare "priced for rental" VHS tapes with LD prices, since
> nobody bought them. You have to compare the typical retail prices
> these tapes actually sold for to the prices that LDs actually sold
> for.
==================================
Sure I can! For many months, that is indeed the price you would have
had to pay for the movie on VHS. For many that was the retail price -
period.
==================================
>
>>New VHS tapes were in the range of $80 to $120 and LD were about $30 to
>>$40.
>>
>>Fact!
>
> FACT: the prices on VHS tapes rapidly fell to the $5 to $20 range soon
> after release, after the initial rental market evaporated.
==================================
Many movies never got released at that lower price.
For a lot of them, the retail price remained at $80 to $120 forever.
=====================================
> LDs, on the
> other hand, stayed in the $40 and up range. And don't even ask about
> the "special edition" CAV boxed sets, which regularly sold for $90 and
> up - stuff that you can buy on DVD nowadays for $20.
===================================
But they were never on VHS.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|