RE: Pricing of DVD vs. Video.

["T. Scott Plutchak" <TSCOTT@LISTER2.LHL.UAB.EDU>]

As I understand it, the studios market to the video stores first and price
those early releases significantly higher, on the reasonable assumption
that making them available via rental will cut into the sale of consumer
tapes later on.  Once the rental market slows down, they'll target the
home consumer with the less expensive version.  Amazon doesn't replace the
older record (videostore price) with the new record (consumer price) so
you can frequently find both prices there.

T. Scott Plutchak
Director, Lister Hill Library of the Health Sciences
University of Alabama at Birmingham

tscott@uab.edu

-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Anderson [mailto:rickand@unr.edu]
Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2002 9:43 PM
To: Hamaker, Chuck; liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Subject: RE: Pricing of DVD vs. Video.

> On new releases. looks like DVD is much less expensive than video.

This is sometimes true for new releases.  On the other hand, go to the
"Hot New Releases" section at Amazon and check out the VHS prices: $25 for
Harry Potter, $15 for Bridget Jones, $23 for Ocean's Eleven... not a
single one lists at over $25 (except for the multi-tape box sets).  Those
$100-plus VHS prices are an anomaly, I think.  I'd be interested to know
why those pricing anomalies exist -- look up Moulin Rouge and you'll find
you can buy it on VHS for $110 or $13, and there's no apparent difference
between the two versions.  Anybody know why this is?