|
|
Posted by Alan Hope on 10/29/07 14:32
Andy goes:
>"Alan Hope" <usenet.identity@gmail.com> wrote in message #
>> If the production company makes nothing on the sale, who cares if it's
>> lost?
>I think the OP's argument is valid. It comes down to economics of scale.
>If they can afford to give dvds away with papers we know the cost has to be
>bugger all.
Don't be stupid. The newspapers pay for those to give them to you, so
you'll buy the paper. The dvds in question have all passed their sales
peak, so they're doubtless pretty cheap, and it's worth it to the
company because they're shifting tens of thousands of units in one
day.
>Fox could and should sell blue & white striped stripped-down
>value box sets. They'd sell thousands, and anything's better than nothing.
Who's going to want to give up valuable store space to sell them?
That's a problem the newspaper give-aways don't have. If it's going to
be worth the shop's while, they'll need to add on a margin that bumps
the price up considerably. And how many do you think they could sell
that way? Not many.
>The true fans will still buy the expensive equivalents. Would be good if
>there was something on the market that made meople say "I can't be arsed
>with the torrent - I'll just buy it". I took Gunther's BA: advice and
>bought a couple of series of Wired last week.... I'd never have been
>interested on chancing something like that at its RRP.
The shops have enough trouble getting rid off unwanted stock in wire
bins, without somebody coming along and introducing a new line made up
of "Stuff Nobody is Going to Want Except a Few Chiselling
Cheapskates".
--
AH
http://grapes2dot0.blogspot.com
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|