DVD Empire listing the set for $79.98

[Jason R]

This was sure as f*ck news to me.
http://www.dvdempire.com/Exec/v4_item.a ... 45&redir=1

I actually predicted this might happen a number of months ago.

There are two possible causes:

1) When BMG creates a product, the UPC code is automatically released to retailers. It is quite possible that the retailers simply picked up the UPC code and listed the product (although I don't see it elsewhere). In that case, they would have it listed, but won't be able to get it.

2) BMG has expressed interest in selling the DVDs at retail. However, I basically threatened to be a thorn in their side if they didn't do three things:

a) Give a window until, at least, 2003 to allow fans to have "bragging rights." Anything else is treating the fans like garbage. The sales guy there didn't understand me, but his boss sure did.
b) Enforce a MAP (minimum advertised price) not to undercut the pre-order prices.
c) No bonus material or bonus packaging for the other retailers.

I just called AU, and they were also insanely pissed to learn of the listing at DVDEmpire.

I believe that #1 is the more likely cause. Per my conversation with BMG yesterday, there were no other retailers or distributors for the set. (Basically, AU would have had to approve it first, and they were not going to let someone else jump their release date). Other retailers and distributors did want it, but AU did not want to give them the rights to sell it.

Needless to say, I think this is BS. BMG must honor its word to the fans who purchased the set. They must honor their word to me. They laid me off almost exactly one year ago. And now it looks like they may be putting me out of business. I ask them to allow me to make an honest buck and not do this to me.

The only reason I think it may be an erroneous listing is that the bonus material is *not* on the discs being made by BMG.

Some earlier anonymous posts have eluded to other retailers getting the set. And yes, others have tried, but I hope that you will understand that I have tried to obstruct those deals. Hopefully, now with the listing at DVDEmpire, AU can stop blaming me for those posts and start to realize that other companies really are trying to interfere.

If the listing is erroneous, then I ask that BMG have DVD Empire remove the listing from their site. If the listing is not erroneous, I demand an explanation, as I am positive that the fans want an explanation. After all, the press release on BMG.com confirmed that this was an exclusive to AU.

Jason Rosenfeld

[innocentbastard]

I can understand the frustration, but what about the fans who either missed out on the preorder or the preorder disappeared and they can find no record of it from either the company or the consumer. I would have no problem waiting until 2003 for the set but at the same price or very close and with the same supplements as far as discs go and packaging. I am not concerned about the lunch box.

I only wish I could find proof of my order back in the very beginning when there was free shipping and we had to put 20 down. Until then it looks like no set for me unless the above turns out to be true.

[Jason R]

"Reliable sources," Gord Lacey actually, tells me that DVDEmpire has jumped the gun like this before. They offered a set for sale, and the set was an exclusive to another retailer.

The result? They had to cancel the orders and not process the charges. These items tend to appear automatically when the UPC is issued by the plant. Has happened to me at BMG, where titles were actually pulled from release.

If that's the case, sorry to accuse you, BMG. I've always loved you tons. Hugs and kisses, Jason

[Jason R]

I understand your viewpoint as well. That is why a few things have to happen:

1) enforced minimum advertised price by BMG
2) no release until 2003.

I understand that they are a business, and if they have a hot product, they want to sell the hell out of it. However, Gord can vouch for me that I took it directly to the top of BMG that I thought their intention was a slap in the face of all of the fans, as well as me and AU. The word from the top was in agreement with me.

I am not opposed to this product going elsewhere, but I do think that price and release date must reward those who preordered.

People who preordered expect, at the very least, bragging rights and a price incentive. The Senior VP of Sales and Marketing agreed with me, and said to his salesguy (in the presence of Gord) "No you can't do that. You have to let those who preordered get it first."

I even offered BMG to help them sell a ton of DVDs if they would only respect the "brag window." This caused some friction with AU, because it looked like I was trying to help competitors. All I was trying to do was give BMG reasons to not release the set in 2002.

I can understand the frustration, but what about the fans who either missed out on the preorder or the preorder disappeared and they can find no record of it from either the company or the consumer. I would have no problem waiting until 2003 for the set but at the same price or very close and with the same supplements as far as discs go and packaging. I am not concerned about the lunch box.

I only wish I could find proof of my order back in the very beginning when there was free shipping and we had to put 20 down. Until then it looks like no set for me unless the above turns out to be true.

[innocentbastard]

I am probably wrong, but I don't think you can control minimum price point by law. yes you can try to price a product so it can't be sold below a certain price, such as video game systems, but I thought that MAP was shot down recently in court. I believe the lawsuit was filed by retailers against the Riaa stating that by controling the mininum price point the Riaa was able to continue to raise the pirce of cd's. I believe this is why cd's at 11.99 and new bands at 6.99 are the norm now versus 12 and 14.
Don't get me wrong, I do think the preorders should be rewarded, I am just frustrated because my order vanished and without any proof I am guessing I am sol.

[Jason R]

email me at jasonr@mscl.com and I will find our where your order is/was. i believe you can still set a minimum advertised price. not a big deal, because you can always sell without an advertised price.

I am probably wrong, but I don't think you can control minimum price point by law. yes you can try to price a product so it can't be sold below a certain price, such as video game systems, but I thought that MAP was shot down recently in court. I believe the lawsuit was filed by retailers against the Riaa stating that by controling the mininum price point the Riaa was able to continue to raise the pirce of cd's. I believe this is why cd's at 11.99 and new bands at 6.99 are the norm now versus 12 and 14.
Don't get me wrong, I do think the preorders should be rewarded, I am just frustrated because my order vanished and without any proof I am guessing I am sol.

[IAmMeIAm]

I am probably wrong, but I don't think you can control minimum price point by law. yes you can try to price a product so it can't be sold below a certain price, such as video game systems, but I thought that MAP was shot down recently in court.

MAP still holds, but it has nothing to do with how much you can sell a DVD for. MAP is just the lowest price you are allowed to advertise. If your sale price is lower than MAP, you cannot state the sale price in any advertisement (this is why Best Buy ads frequently refer to "Low Price" or "Hot Price" for new releases--they're selling the items below MAP, so all they can do is promise that the price is good).

[innocentbastard]

Thanks for the explanation and that does make sense.

[Jessica Popsicles]

aww I hope that being on there is a mistake

[Jason R]

I quote the press release on BMG.com:

The entire nineteen-episode set is available exclusively at http://www.AnotherUniverse.com/mscldvd for $115. Due to international demand, the DVDs have no region coding and will play on any system around the world.

Sounds like someone has some 'splainin' to do.

I now believe it to be an erroneous listing.

aww I hope that being on there is a mistake

[David Lambert]

Actually, Gord's reliable resources was ME!

I was exchanging some e-mail with him related to the TVShowsOnDVD site, and he tacked onto the end of it "Jason is freaking out over this: http://www.dvdempire.com/Exec/v4_item.a ... _id=451656. I don't blame him. Gord"


This is exactly my reply to Gord:

Well, Jason DID state quite a long time ago, IIRC, that it was possible that the set would be "solicitated" through e-tailers as a result of them simply picking up filings of the, uh, I think he said it was the BINC code (DVD version of the ISBN # on a book).

So, that's probably what happened here. BMG finally listed the thing, since it now has a release date, and DVDEmpire picked it up automatically as a listing. They used the originally filed price of the 1-14 set, which is $99.99, right? And they calculated up an appropriate discount.

DVDEmpire did the same thing recently with the DVD for "The Final Countdown" (the 80's movie starring the USS Nimitz). They listed it for a few weeks, then realized that the piece of s**t was only available direct from the shithouse that put it out, Pacific Entertainment or something like that, and then delisted it from their system and sent notice to anyone who ordered it that the order won't be filled.

So tell him to quit worrying; it's a mistake. Just tell him to call DVDEmpire and inform them, and then tell the world.


DAVE

So everyone relax; I'm sure it's still an AU exclusive. God help us!


BTW, I posted this same note at HTF a short time ago as well...

[dTheater]

On to more important issues: the DVDEmpire description mentions commentary. Is this a cat out of the bag or a mistake?

[Jason R]

mistake.

On to more important issues: the DVDEmpire description mentions commentary. Is this a cat out of the bag or a mistake?

[somamoon]

Man, what's with all the typos in that DVD Empire listing? Do the have the same grammar-impaired AU employee working for them?

[David Lambert]

I want to mention this morning that DVDFile (http://www.dvdfile.com) is also now talking about the MSCL set "coming to retail". Richard Michael Clark, a fellow HTF (Home Theater Forum) member who I believe I've also seen posting here at MSCL.COM, brought it up over at HTF. As I said to him there: it is clear to me that DVDFile is simply working off of DVDEmpire's bad listing, and perhaps those of other e-tailers who we haven't discovered yet. All the evidence that Jason has is that it WON'T be in stores, at least for a long time. See above for the explanation.

For now, I will send a note to Peter Bracke asking him to check the HTF thread for those explanations, so his readers can be correctly informed.


Moving on to this other HTF post about what I said there and repeated here at MSCL.COM:

Second; Slightly off-topic question here. David Lambert said whilst quoting Gord;

...I think he said it was the BINC code (DVD version of the ISBN # on a book).

Dave, as a former Borders employee (Wayne, NJ), this makes me curious. Isn't the BINC coding system only used by Borders?

It's been six years since I worked on getting the music and video SPO's out to customers, but I'm pretty sure the "B" in BINC is for "Borders". I'm just wondering if Gord got his acronyms crossed or if I've had the wrong impression about it all along.

First, to be clear, I wasn't quoting Gord. Everything said there was MY statement TO Gord. Gord didn't say any of that, so don't blame him for my screw-up.

Second, and most important, here is the explanation for my screw-up: I am pretty sure that there is another number used to mark home video releases, similar to the ISBN # on books, that is NOT the UPC (Universal Product Code) #. I may be wrong about that, but last night when I wrote Gord I was sure that it exists. In writing what I did to Gord (which I quoted here at MSCL.COM), I recalled that Jason had said the problem would be based on SOME code # being listed, and I decided (for whatever demented reason in the mood I was in last night) that it *couldn't* be the UPC #, so I decided it was that other number that resembled ISBN #'s on books. So what was that called? Well, I remembered that at Border's website (http://www.borderstores.com) you can look up any DVD and always see a number that ISN'T the UPC #, and isn't the Studio's Catalog # (which is a different format from studio to studio, so I knew that wasn't what I was looking for).

So when I got to Borders' site, I saw the BINC# and went with it.

Now the former Borders employee tells me that the BINC# is the Borders version of a SKU, and not universal at all. And, in the meantime, Jason posts here separately that it WAS the UPC # that was the vital # I was trying to recall. So I'm an idiot any way you slice it.

Sorry about that confusion. I was trying to fill in the blanks. As you saw from my post, I tried to not be authorative about what I was saying, because I knew I didn't have ALL the facts in front of me. I'm sorry I took y'all down the wrong path with the type of # used; it was late and I was tired. But please keep in mind that, aside from that mislabeling, everything else I said was pretty much spot-on.

Don't be too hard on me, and certainly don't blame Gord or, worse, Jason. It was my screw-up. Thanks,