RedBox and Capitalism
I was reading this ArsTechnica article, and came across this statement at the end:
“Having our [movies] rented at $1 in the rental window is grossly undervaluing our products,” News Corp COO Chase Carey said on a conference call yesterday. “We are actively determining how to deal with it.”
(copied directly from the article)
My bone of contention is with the first part:
Having our [movies] rented at $1 in the rental window is grossly undervaluing our products
Is not the basis of Capitalism that I pay for an item or service what I think said item or service is worth? And then you determine whether or not you wish to accept my offer? If I think a one-night rental of your film is worth $1, and you (or, in this case, Coinstar, the owner of RedBox) accept that offer, why should anyone stand in the way?
On a less propagandist note, RedBox would actually help sell movies, if the movies are actually any good. What they help prevent is dropping $20 on the latest film that turns out to be utter crap. However, multiple films I can think of (which I have seen originally through RedBox) and now own, I paid full retail for because I enjoyed them so much. Valkyrie is one example. Granted, not everyone will go out and buy them. But those who do make up for the loss. I don’t buy movies. Ever. I watch them in theatres or rent them. Only on the occasion of a truly spectacular film will I buy it.
Ah well, once corporate dicks get a lawsuit in their thick skulls there is no getting it out.