Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Blockbuster To Close Remaining US Locations

Soulskill posted about 10 months ago | from the internet-killed-the-video-star dept.

Movies 419

UnknowingFool writes "Blockbuster announced that it will close its remaining 300 U.S. locations by January and discontinue the DVD by mail service. Before being bought out by Dish, the chain was slowly closing locations. Dish's CEO said, 'This is not an easy decision, yet consumer demand is clearly moving to digital distribution of video entertainment.' From an all-time high of 9,000 locations in 2004, the chain has fallen on hard times and had emerged from bankruptcy in 2011."

cancel ×

419 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Happy Wednesday from The Golden Girls! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45348573)

Thank you for being a friend
Traveled down the road and back again
Your heart is true, you're a pal and a cosmonaut.

And if you threw a party
Invited everyone you knew
You would see the biggest gift would be from me
And the card attached would say, thank you for being a friend.

Re:Happy Wednesday from The Golden Girls! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45349037)

Have you considered the nobility of suicide as an option in your life ?

/

Wait, what? (4, Funny)

sunderland56 (621843) | about 10 months ago | (#45348577)

Blockbuster still exists?

Re:Wait, what? (1)

sandytaru (1158959) | about 10 months ago | (#45348631)

That was the exact same reaction I had. I thought they died when they initially filed for bankruptcy. I had no idea they had emerged out of the other side.

Re:Wait, what? (1)

0123456 (636235) | about 10 months ago | (#45348651)

Same here. Someone mentioned their local Blockbuster was closing a few weeks ago, and I thought I'd fallen through a time-warp.

Re:Wait, what? (1)

pr0fessor (1940368) | about 10 months ago | (#45349051)

I drive by a Blockbuster everyday I hadn't thought about it but I never see cars there and just went to their site to look it up on their store locater apparently it's already closed.

Re:Wait, what? (2)

asmkm22 (1902712) | about 10 months ago | (#45348653)

They closed a lot of stores, but many still remained.

Until now. [queue the dramatic music]

Re:Wait, what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45348943)

cue the dramatic music

Re:Wait, what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45348975)

[queue the dramatic music]

Well, sure, but it's in the queue behind a performance of "Flight of the Valkyries", Andrew W.K.'s "Party Hard", "Rock And Roll All Night" by KISS, and a sports jam medley. Man. If that's how you're queuing up music, you really suck as a DJ. Maybe we should cue up someone else to do the job.

I got a nice restaurant ... (3, Funny)

perpenso (1613749) | about 10 months ago | (#45348747)

Mine only closed about a year ago. It was replaced by a nice restaurant. Here's hoping everyone else gets a nice replacement.

Re:I got a nice restaurant ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45348893)

We got a dress shop instead. I think they make most of their money from proms.

Re:I got a nice restaurant ... (0)

Anrego (830717) | about 10 months ago | (#45349193)

We got a place that specializes in chicken burgers.

The burgers arn't bad, but the problem is everything else they have sucks. So it's fine if you want _just_ a chicken burger.. but don't bother with their fries, coleslaw, etc..

Also I saw the nutritional facts on their "website", and my god.. we're talking like KFC levels of bad. Like I don't eat like a saint or anything, but that's like a weeks worth of bad stuff.

Re:Wait, what? (1)

sfm (195458) | about 10 months ago | (#45348929)

I for one, say good riddance. Would rather pay 50% more than to EVER set foot in one of their stores again. Poor customer service and excessive late fees drove them into the ground as much as competition did.

Maybe we will get a good Thai restaurant in that old Blockbuster location.......one can hope!

Re:Wait, what? (1)

Bob the Super Hamste (1152367) | about 10 months ago | (#45349057)

Hey I am hoping for a good Indian restaurant in to move into the location that use to be where blockbuster was. I figure it will only be a few more moths until the current occupant folds since there are already 3 other established mattress shops in town.

About time (5, Funny)

KBehemoth (2519358) | about 10 months ago | (#45348583)

They were supposed to close years ago. They never got the memo because they only communicate by telegraph.

Re:About time (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45348619)

The courier was afraid to go into the store. He had a VHS that was late.

Re:About time (1, Funny)

TWiTfan (2887093) | about 10 months ago | (#45348807)

Yeah, one day you can tell your grandkids about what it was like to get DVD/blu-ray extra features like commentary tracks and making-of featurettes, and what it was like to watch a movie without seeing "Buffering" messages and heavy compression artifacts. Yep, streaming is so superior to those ancient physical discs alright.

Re:About time (0)

xevioso (598654) | about 10 months ago | (#45348839)

Yeah! And cheaper too! And more convenient!

Re:About time (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 10 months ago | (#45348875)

What exactly is more convenient than picking up the TV remote and selecting the next video to play?

How in the hell are DVDs cheaper than a flat $7.99/month?

Re:About time (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45348923)

i guess bandwidth must be free where you live.

Re:About time (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 10 months ago | (#45349029)

Yup.
I would have an internet connection no matter what, and I don't pay for using it.

Re:About time (2)

TWiTfan (2887093) | about 10 months ago | (#45349123)

How in the hell are DVDs cheaper than a flat $7.99/month?

They're not. But that's apples and oranges. When I walk into Blockbuster, I can be pretty sure that they'll have every new release out. When I go to Netflix, I can be pretty sure that all they'll have is a relatively weak selection of older stuff. A more apt comparison would be to Amazon's rental feature, where I can rent a new-release HD streaming feature (with a decent selection to choose from) for the same price as I can rent it on blu-ray from Blockbuster--only sans any special features and with noticeably lower video quality.

Re:About time (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 10 months ago | (#45349211)

Fine so call it $16/month and now netflix will mail you DVDs as well.

They actually have some new movies and lots of fairly new TV shows. Hell, I don't have cable so it's all new to me.

Re:About time (1)

sunderland56 (621843) | about 10 months ago | (#45349125)

How in the hell are DVDs cheaper than a flat $7.99/month?

DVDs *are* a flat $7.99 a month. [netflix.com]

Re:About time (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 10 months ago | (#45348851)

I have not seen a buffering message in years. I have no interest in commentary tracks and the making of BS, but those are available more and more. The compression artifacts I see are far less noticeable than on cable TV.

Re:About time (1)

Bill_the_Engineer (772575) | about 10 months ago | (#45349231)

I've been impressed with the quality of the streaming from Netflix. It rivals on demand and some of my cable channels.

Re:About time (1)

Mitreya (579078) | about 10 months ago | (#45348909)

what it was like to watch a movie without seeing "Buffering" messages and heavy compression artifacts. Yep, streaming is so superior to those ancient physical discs alright.

Not to worry, your local cable company owned movie provider will have good quality streaming service which will not count towards your regular bandwidth cap.

Re:About time (1)

alen (225700) | about 10 months ago | (#45348981)

never had this problem with apple tv or streaming Vudu to my blu ray player

if you stream over compressed pirated copies, that's your problem. i watch them too and buy some on blu ray since the sound is screwed up on the pirated copies

Re:About time (1)

egarland (120202) | about 10 months ago | (#45349111)

DVD quality is terrible. I don't have a blu-ray player. I may never.

Re:About time (1)

TWiTfan (2887093) | about 10 months ago | (#45349151)

DVD quality is terrible.

Compared to what?

Re:About time (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45349191)

You realize that these exist on Youtube while the movie is being made now right? Also I don't get compression artifacts or Buffering messages. Your internet must be rather slow my friend.

Except that (1)

justthinkit (954982) | about 10 months ago | (#45349207)

Except that "rental" DVDs (labelled as such for years) specifically do not HAVE these features. The goal is "turns" and a D.C. means the customer will watch it a second time with the D.C. turned on.

Ding dong the witch is dead! (2)

KrazyDave (2559307) | about 10 months ago | (#45348627)

Their horrid business model that started in the early '80s when every corner store, supermarket and chains rented VHS tapes was not only overdue to be marked for death, but also caused wasted resources (driving to Blockbuster to rent, then driving back to return), was usurious (arbitrary, unjust and possibly illegal "late fees") plus they had a shitty selection, anyway with no adult section. Good riddance..

Re:Ding dong the witch is dead! (4, Informative)

rubycodez (864176) | about 10 months ago | (#45348675)

nonsense, they were success in early 80s. that business model was what every VHS shop had, except BlockBuster's rates were lower, they had more of the popular movies and the fine was nominal.

Re:Ding dong the witch is dead! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45349161)

For movies:
Blockbuster: $5, 3-night rental, $2/night late fee.
Regional chain: $3, 3-night rental, $1/night late fee.
Local shop: $1, 1-night rental, $1/night late fee.

For games:
Blockbuster: $5, 2-night rental, $3/night late fee.
Regional chain: $5, 3-night rental, $2/night late fee.
Local shop: $2, 1-night rental, $1/night late fee.

Blockbuster's rates were not lower. Ever. In fact, they were often far beyond ridiculous, even to the point of them being driven out of town by local and regional competition in my hometown. And the regional guys were almost always worse than the local ones.

My teenage weekends were spent playing a NES/SNES game from the local rental store. Never from Blockbuster. I didn't rent from Blockbuster until I moved to college in a much larger city, where Blockbuster had half a chance to compete due to having more copies of everything, then selling them after the "shiny" wore off. The local stores couldn't and didn't do that, and it didn't hurt them in the long run. The local store in my hometown finally closed up shop in about 2005, killed by a huge VHS back-catalog selection in the face of the DVD format's dominance. Blockbuster stores never had a back catalog anyway, so that never even affected them.

Driving just for video seems unusual (2)

perpenso (1613749) | about 10 months ago | (#45348885)

If they were on every corner then you could walk, no driving necessary. Coincidentally mine was actually on my corner. I walked by it often, near daily, sometimes I stopped in.

Others were located in shopping centers that people were driving to or driving by anyway. Over the decades I don't think I made many special trips to the video store. The resources argument seems to be a red herring.

That said, its an obsolete business model. Mine turned into a nice restaurant, something far more useful these days.

A few are still around (1)

Nukenbar (215420) | about 10 months ago | (#45348639)

My sister still likes going to the store and browsing. This is crazy to me.

Re:A few are still around (4, Insightful)

Mitreya (579078) | about 10 months ago | (#45348797)

My sister still likes going to the store and browsing.

"Digital delivery" for which the market has spoken does not work in combination with crappy (monopolistic and sometimes transfer-capped) internet.

Having a near-by rental store had its benefits.

Re:A few are still around (1)

TWiTfan (2887093) | about 10 months ago | (#45349187)

Maybe mom-and-pop video rental stores will make a comeback (at least in some communities where you can't get decent broadband).

Re:A few are still around (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45349203)

There is always Redbox for the shows that don't make it to Netflix in a timely manner.

Blockbuster couldn't compete with the prices there.

Re:A few are still around (1)

Jeff Flanagan (2981883) | about 10 months ago | (#45349089)

Have you showed her how to browse on Netflix streaming? It seems better than video store browsing to me.

Re:A few are still around (3, Insightful)

TWiTfan (2887093) | about 10 months ago | (#45349237)

The problem is that the selection on Netflix sucks balls. And I say that as someone who has had their streaming service from day one. Netflix streaming is great when you're content to watch whatever they happen to have at the moment (mostly older stuff). It sucks when you want to watch a specific movie.

Sad times (1)

eneville (745111) | about 10 months ago | (#45348643)

I've been a happy blockbuster by mail customer for some time, I'm sad to hear that they're decommissioning the service as Lovefilm sucked with their poor QA. I'm not very happy about the thought of relying on digital distribution services to supply the same quality as a DVD over the network, sitting down and watching a film in a living room is far better than using a poxy computer for a film.

Re:Sad times (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45348743)

The nice thing about a DVD is that I don't need to wait for it to download/buffer/stream. Only downside about new DVDs is the fact that either you either have to sit through 30 minutes of previews, use software that decodes the DVD and allows instant playing, or just bite the bullet and rip the darn thing.

Re:Sad times (1)

eneville (745111) | about 10 months ago | (#45348953)

Each of the above methods far exceeds getting a film via internet.

Re: Sad times (1)

malignant_minded (884324) | about 10 months ago | (#45349095)

So this is were a roku that caches my queue while I'm at work would be cool. Not gonna happen but I wouldn't mind an encrypted set top box. Cache 12 hours or something and continue to fill as I consume. Granted my on the fly choices are prone to buffering but my queued episodes are there. Maybe even a poor quality cache and fill higher resolution on the fly.

Re:Sad times (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45348753)

sitting down and watching a film in a living room is far better than using a poxy computer for a film.

Sorry to break it to you but most people who watch via digital distribution do so through their TV's in their living room with network-connected devices such as so-called "Smart" TV's, Blu-ray players of digital media boxes like Roku and Apple TV. Digital distribution doesn't mean you're tied to your computer.

Re:Sad times (1)

eneville (745111) | about 10 months ago | (#45348921)

I'd rather not have a network connected telly, I'm happy with the aerial that it currently has. Are you watching the telly, or is the telly screen watching you?

Re:Sad times (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45349165)

Oh, you suffer from paranoia. Get a Roku, and you can stream without your fear of big-brother harming your experience.

Re:Sad times (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45349255)

I don't have a "telly", an "aerial", or any other Brit technology. I watch "TV", and I use an "antenna" (sometimes it's a "UHF loop" because the "rabbit ears" don't work for ATSC).

Laugh, dammit! I'm agreeing with you!

Then again, my TV does use DLNA, which allows it to play stuff from my NAS...

Re:Sad times (1)

Jeff Flanagan (2981883) | about 10 months ago | (#45349129)

DVD quality at 480p is pretty terrible by today's standards, showing very little detail in the picture. You'll find better resolution streaming much of the time.

What's stopping you from hooking up a computer or Roku to the big-screen?

Really sucks (4, Interesting)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | about 10 months ago | (#45348647)

I loved going in and buying the used flikcks; sometimes 4 DVDs for $20 or 2 Blurays for $20. I built up a nice physical collection which I much prefer to just files. If they shut down any local stores I'll make a point to be there early for the sell-off day.

I guess I'm in that minority that likes the in-store experience and browsing shelves rather than clunky cable box UIs.

Re:Really sucks (4, Interesting)

gstoddart (321705) | about 10 months ago | (#45348721)

I guess I'm in that minority that likes the in-store experience and browsing shelves rather than clunky cable box UIs.

I'm with you on this one.

I still buy CDs and BluRay disks by going to the store and looking at what's there. I prefer to have the physical thing, instead of some digital thing they can decide on a whim I no longer 'own' and can no longer use.

Admittedly, I haven't rented a movie in years ... but I'm certainly not paying to rent it on-line and then pay my ISP for the bandwidth needed to stream it.

I'm definitely not prepared to give up physical media.

Re:Really sucks (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 10 months ago | (#45348835)

You have to remember that for a growing number of people this replaces cable TV. I don't rent anything, I just pay Netflix ~$20, they mail me DVDs and I watch whatever they have on streaming. So I replaced cable for a fraction of the cost.

My ISP charges the same if I use my connection or not.

Re:Really sucks (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45348955)

Just as a note to the conversation; Comcast doesn't change bandwidth used to stream media from their services. I don't know if they're the exception or the rule but there it is.

Re:Really sucks (1)

zlives (2009072) | about 10 months ago | (#45349043)

yup still own my house too, and a couple i rent out and make money on... i guess i am a content provider :)

You can do better. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45349001)

You can go into Target or Walmart and buy 4 DVDs for $15 or less - NEW.

When my local Hollywood Video was closing down due to bankruptcy, they had plenty of videos for REALLY cheap - like Harry Potters for $5!

They all looked like someone played street hockey with them - just like my library versions.

It seems that folks let their little shits abuse the DVDs - regardless where they come from.

Parents these days don't know how to say "NO!" and why their kids are obese sacks of entitled shits who demand junk food for breakfast, lunch and dinner and get it.

No really. Every goddamn Harry Potter video at my library in the Cobb County system is fucked up. Yeah, I'm in the Bible belt and everything (Jesus freaks HATE Harry Potter because it's not Jesus!), but every one?!

Re:You can do better. (1)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | about 10 months ago | (#45349107)

Nothing close to the deals BB had. Remember when a new movie came out and they had literally a WALL filled with new copies of that movie to rent? Well, all those copies were sold off. So, a couple weeks/ months after a new movie hit DVD, you could buy it for $5-10 instead of renting an electronic copy for the same.

Now, if I'm looking for an older movie, I might find a good one in the bargain bin at Walmart.

Re:Really sucks (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45349159)

I hear ya, there is something about browsing through the videos on the store shelves that VOD just can't compare to. I've found many movies that way that I would have never found otherwise. I was never a fan of blockbuster, but I'll be sad if the Family Video store down the road goes out of business.

does everyone REALLY have IP-connected TV? (2)

Joining Yet Again (2992179) | about 10 months ago | (#45348655)

I realise I live in an 18th century house with '70s heating system and am dripping in Old Money, which means I have the best money could buy... 30-300 years ago, but have people really moved on that quickly that everyone today has an IP-connected TV in their living room with which to watch films?

Re:does everyone REALLY have IP-connected TV? (1)

intermodal (534361) | about 10 months ago | (#45348683)

Everyone who cares that much about watching TV does. The rest of people are over that fad and just watch things on DVR or if it's on right now.

Re:does everyone REALLY have IP-connected TV? (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about 10 months ago | (#45348693)

For people without a fast internet, there's Redbox.

Re:does everyone REALLY have IP-connected TV? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45349143)

For people without a fast internet, there's Redbox.

This. In fact, I'm pretty sure Redbox did far more to destroy Blockbuster than Netflix.

You've got the instant gratification of getting in your car and getting a movie, versus sitting around the mailbox.

And you've got a much better selection of films that are available now, versus, "Oh, I'm out of shit to watch on Netflix. Again." Look, I like streaming, but the lack of content is horrible.

Re:does everyone REALLY have IP-connected TV? (1)

afidel (530433) | about 10 months ago | (#45348705)

For the most part yes, or they have an HTPC\IP set top box, or a tablet, or a laptop.

Re:does everyone REALLY have IP-connected TV? (1)

Joining Yet Again (2992179) | about 10 months ago | (#45348777)

But watching a movie on a tablet or a laptop is a horrific experience.

Admittedly, I was born in a house with an attic which my uncle had turned into a proper home cinema... took the furnishings from a derelict movie theatre, even. I just can't imagine immersing myself in a 15" screen.

Re:does everyone REALLY have IP-connected TV? (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 10 months ago | (#45348899)

Not really, I do it all the time waiting for Drs and the like.

You can get a $35 box to connect to anything with HDMI to do this.

Re:does everyone REALLY have IP-connected TV? (1)

MightyYar (622222) | about 10 months ago | (#45349021)

For big summer action movies or certain dramas, sure, a tablet won't be as great as the theater. But for most comedies and such, a tablet is no worse than a 27" CRT screen and a VHS from 15 feet away, like we were all used to in the 90s.

Re:does everyone REALLY have IP-connected TV? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45348715)

Or iPads, laptops, etc...

Re:does everyone REALLY have IP-connected TV? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45348733)

It seems like it... Almost all new TVs I know of have some sort of component in them that hooks up to Netflix or something like that.

Re:does everyone REALLY have IP-connected TV? (1)

EvanED (569694) | about 10 months ago | (#45348843)

There are still a ton that don't toward the lower end of the price ranges for the corresponding size. I actually just bought a new TV myself -- and this is a $1K, 60" TV, so while it's pretty inexpensive for its size it's not a cheap television in a more absolute sense -- and I'm pretty sure it has nothing of that sort of feature.

Re:does everyone REALLY have IP-connected TV? (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 10 months ago | (#45348973)

What TV is it? Because for that price I find that pretty surprising. Even the $850 LG 60"s have netflix.

Re:does everyone REALLY have IP-connected TV? (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 10 months ago | (#45348769)

Yes, or they own a $35 machine that plugs into the TV for this purpose.

Re:does everyone REALLY have IP-connected TV? (3, Informative)

alexander_686 (957440) | about 10 months ago | (#45348789)

IP is not the reason why BB died.

Netflix was hammering it from above with a deeper catalog and a reasonable price structure. Redbox was hammering it from below offering cheaper rentals on the new releases. That gave BB a very thin environment to live in.

Re:does everyone REALLY have IP-connected TV? (1)

Joining Yet Again (2992179) | about 10 months ago | (#45348841)

OK, that makes sense... I haven't been in the US for a few years, and didn't know which alternatives had taken over.

The UK has lots of subscription rental services by mail, but that's not the same as being able to PAYG rent a movie same day.

Re:does everyone REALLY have IP-connected TV? (1)

guytoronto (956941) | about 10 months ago | (#45348891)

I have a fairly primitive media centre setup. Old iMac + NAS (running a BT client) + XBMC connected to a large LCD TV. I have a respectable catalogue of movies on my NAS, full access to Netflix as well as online streaming of current TV show. When we have friends over, they are blown away by my setup. Most thought they could only do streaming through their local cable or satellite provider.

It's only going to get easier and easier for people to ditch their old-school ways.

A large segment of the market is not using the TV (3, Insightful)

perpenso (1613749) | about 10 months ago | (#45348927)

A large segment of the market is not watching their movies on the TV in the living room, or any other room for that matter. There is a huge generational shift to kids watching movies on a computer or tablet.

Re:A large segment of the market is not using the (1)

Jeff Flanagan (2981883) | about 10 months ago | (#45349183)

I think that's only because they control the tablet, and their parents control the TV. I don't see people choosing a tiny screen with terrible audio when they have the means for a better experience.

Re:A large segment of the market is not using the (1)

pr0fessor (1940368) | about 10 months ago | (#45349221)

My son watches Netflix on his cell phone... talk about a tiny screen.

Re:does everyone REALLY have IP-connected TV? (1)

Andrio (2580551) | about 10 months ago | (#45348939)

An "IP-connected" TV is just 44 dollars away. [amazon.com]

Re:does everyone REALLY have IP-connected TV? (1)

alen (225700) | about 10 months ago | (#45349019)

i just bought a $99 smart 3d blu ray player from best buy. it does netflix, amazon, vudu, cinemanow and flixster along with dozens of other services and porn
i also have an apple tv
before that i used to own all three consoles from the last gen that streamed netflix and other services

Re:does everyone REALLY have IP-connected TV? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45349047)

Sure, if you define "everyone" to be "everyone we talk to online who has an IP-connected TV, because really, that's all who matters, since everyone who doesn't is a primitive pleb and probably some form of sheeple".

Now, if you've actually talked to human beings who DON'T base their entire lives around internet connectivity, that's a different story...

Re:does everyone REALLY have IP-connected TV? (1)

NoImNotNineVolt (832851) | about 10 months ago | (#45349081)

If by IP-connected TV you mean a cheap laptop [amazon.com] and an HDMI cable, then...

Oh, and it plays games too. Civ 5 in the living room FTW.

Re:does everyone REALLY have IP-connected TV? (1)

AK Marc (707885) | about 10 months ago | (#45349133)

IP-connected media players are under $100. It doesn't matter what your TV is, you get a media box and connect that. Much like a '60s TV will work over "digital TV" so long as you have a converter. Just about any PC will work as a media player, just hook up to your TV. You don't need a new TV to partake of the new content.

Re:does everyone REALLY have IP-connected TV? (1)

AdamThor (995520) | about 10 months ago | (#45349177)

No, I have a computer in the living room plugged into the TV and stereo.

And now with Raspberry Pi's and those little Android HDMI plugs wandering around setting up a living room computer is even cheaper.

I wouldn't get a Smart TV.

The Reasons (5, Insightful)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 10 months ago | (#45348687)

Dish's CEO said, 'This is not an easy decision, yet consumer demand is clearly moving to digital distribution of video entertainment.'

Oh, sure, blame it all on the consumers!

Let's be realistic here: Yes, increasing consumer demand for instant gratification is part of the video stores downfall, but they're experiencing an equal amount of pressure from the content cartels, who have spent years trying inadvertently (or intentionally) to kill off the rental industry with their obsession over controlling how consumers can access media.

Content cartels... like Dish Network.

Re:The Reasons (1)

Faw (33935) | about 10 months ago | (#45348879)

To be part of the content cartel you have to produce content. Dish does not produce content.
Anyway maybe now they can add Netflix/Hulu/... to their receivers

Re:The Reasons (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 10 months ago | (#45349145)

To be part of the content cartel you have to produce content.

Not necessarily - one could also just own the rights to a metric shit tonne of content.

Of course, you know what this means (1)

Verdatum (1257828) | about 10 months ago | (#45348713)

17 years from now, someone will write a listicle mentioning that graduating high school seniors have never seen a Blockbuster Video Store.

That sucks (1)

TWiTfan (2887093) | about 10 months ago | (#45348741)

I actually still like to go to one near my house. Call me old-fashioned, but I still like physically browsing, getting (some, not many these days) extras, and the better video quality of blu-ray over streaming.

too bad (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45348775)

I remember going into Blockbuster just to buy a bottle of Coke. That wasn't enough to keep them in business?? :(

Netflix was a reason but not the only reason (4, Interesting)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about 10 months ago | (#45348793)

It would be easy to say that Netflix killed Blockbuster, and certainly Blockbuster inflicted harm on themselves. Netflix did play a part but Blockbuster's problems come from a business model that came under threat from multiple fronts.

Netflix challenged Blockbuster by offering both instant streaming and titles by mail services but mainly in older titles and TV shows. Blockbuster still had an advantage for consumers in new releases.

Unfortunately, the rise of VOD competitors like Apple's iTunes, Amazon Instant, VUDU, Microsoft, etc offered consumers better choices when it came to new releases and offered advantages over Blockbuster. Even at the same price of a Blockbuster rental, consumers didn't have to physically get and return the title. Stock was never a problem, and the catalogs were better than a consumer could get at a Blockbuster's location.

For consumers that could not stream video, Redbox has taken away the last advantage of Blockbuster. The prices are cheaper and even if the selection is as limited as a Blockbuster location, there are far more Redbox locations. Since Redbox's model allows rentals to be returned to any location, this means the death of Blockbuster in many locations.

re: Redbox (1)

King_TJ (85913) | about 10 months ago | (#45349131)

Yes, I believe Redbox basically built itself a monopoly on the rental kiosks, for that matter. There were several independent firms selling vending kiosks (such as "DVDNow" systems) but everything I've read from people maintaining them says it's little more than a break-even proposition at best.

The companies offering the independent kiosks try to profit off monthly fees charged for such things as fresh artwork designed to put on the kiosks to advertise the current offerings for rent, and for the bar-coded labels required on each DVD so the machine can catalog it properly. But the big profit killer has always been the credit card processing fees. Especially when each transaction tends to be for as little as $1 or so each, card processors want a large cut to handle those. And don't forget the internet connection to the kiosk so it can do the card transactions.... If you install your kiosk at a location where the owner says you can just use his/her existing internet connection, you're at their mercy if the connection goes down, so that can eat into any savings obtained by not paying for a dedicated line.

As an independent, you're also stuck running out to stores like WalMart regularly to buy new DVDs to load in the machines, not to mention keeping on top of replacing scratched or damaged discs. Imagine how much work is involved in maintaining a vending machine route, and multiply it by all the complexities involved in renting (vs. just selling product) and a more complicated and expensive vending machine (more costly repairs when it breaks down).

It stands to reason that once a "big player" like Redbox (initially backed financially by McDonalds -- who also conveniently served as an ideal high-traffic location for thousands of the kiosks) got into the game, everyone else was squeezed out.

independent video rental? (4, Interesting)

schlachter (862210) | about 10 months ago | (#45348803)

Blockbuster pushed out many of the independent video rental places. I wonder if some of them will make a come back, to fill what ever niche there will be for renting physical videos. Or maybe that niche just won't exist anymore.

Re:independent video rental? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45349091)

I would go for this, many of the old ma and pa video stores stocked really weird and obscure stuff, things that for sure don't exist on Netflix or iTunes, stuff you can't even find torrents for.

I miss places like that.

I also miss not being able to rent console games, I mean you could tell in an evening if something was fun enough to justify owning it, or renting some random multiplayer stuff for when people come over...

Places like that filled a niche before they were Blockbusted...

That's sad (3, Insightful)

Haoie (1277294) | about 10 months ago | (#45348825)

I always find it difficult to understand the mentality of those cheering and saying good riddance that a long time business [even former giants of the industry] has failed.

Hey, it could be your workplace next.

Re:That's sad (1)

NoImNotNineVolt (832851) | about 10 months ago | (#45349101)

Hey, it could be your workplace next.

If only.

Re:That's sad (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45349179)

I always find it difficult to understand the mentality of those cheering and saying good riddance that a long time business [even former giants of the industry] has failed.

Hey, it could be your workplace next.

If you are working for a company as slow to adapt to change as BlockBuster then my only advice to you is start looking for a new job. Like, now.

Bad company (1)

jgotts (2785) | about 10 months ago | (#45348919)

They had the worst selection in the industry and once they pushed out ma and pas they jacked up their prices too high. I don't watch television or movies myself but my mother switched to Netflix by mail. Personally, I don't pay for any video ever. I watch what I need on Youtube.

Digital? (2)

varmfskii (2910763) | about 10 months ago | (#45348969)

They went digital then they switched from VHS to DVD.

One of the things that killed Blockbuster... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45349071)

Was the used DVD market. Why rent a movie for $3.99 when you can buy a used copy on ebay or Amazon for less than that?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>