Subject:
|
DVD madness?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.fun
|
Date:
|
Mon, 19 Feb 2001 23:37:56 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
84 times
|
| |
|
|
I'm posting this to .fun because it's not sufficiently weighty to merit the
"debate" tag, but while shopping today I noticed some irregularities in the
prices of CD's and DVD's, and I thought I'd share.
While browsing the CD racks I noticed that Pink Floyd's The Final Cut was
retailing for $16.99--truly mystifying because it's generally regarded (though
not by me) as some of their lesser work, yet it's priced the same as Dark Side
of the Moon, often regarded as their best. It's not simply a matter of
production costs, since those were surely met by the time I bought The Final
Cut on CD back in '93 for $7.99, and I don't think inflation accounts for the
rise, since Dark Side at that time ran for $12.99. And since someone will
probably suggest that price is set by what the market will bear, I cite the
Rick Astley debut CD from 1988, retailing for $18.99! Who, in all honesty, is
going to shell out nineteen bucks for that disc? I'm not putting a price tag
on Mr. Astley's alleged artistic merits, but doesn't it seem self-defeating to
charge so much for a 12-year-old CD that no one's likely to buy anyway?
Along the same lines, I noticed that Dangerous Liasons, a well-respected
piece of cinema, is selling on DVD for $14.99, which is especially peculiar
considering that Teen Wolf 2 was $24.99! I didn't even know there'd been a
sequel, though it's delightful to see some of Jason Bateman's neglected work.
What's the logic here? Teen Wolf 2 probably grossed about $24.99 at the box
office! Did anyone see it? Would anyone pay $25 to see it again and again and
again?
At this point someone usually points out that the manufacturer can charge
whatever it wants, and that's certainly true. But is there any sense in
charging so much for such a lackluster product?
End of rant. I'm not even ranting, really--just baffled!
Dave!
8^)
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: DVD madness?
|
| (...) The standard thing is to price all of an artist's albums the same. The only reason to price it cheaper is so that it will remain on the shelves when it otherwise wouldn't. That isn't a problem with Pink Floyd. Further, different stores will (...) (24 years ago, 20-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
9 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
