[dammitcoetzee]

Are they being greedy or is this just inflation? $7.99 was the original DVD rental fee in 1997 → which is $12.51 in 2019 dollars. I wish I had a better mental tool for working with inflation in my "get-mad-o-meter", haha.

[titusjohnson]

Wasn't $7.99 for the one-at-a-time plan? I also recall it being more like $10 or $12, but I wasn't paying for it at the time so I'm not an authority.

I felt like my family was lucky to get through 7 DVDs a month with one-at-a-time. We had a pretty good 3-4 day turnaround, but no matter how hard you tried to watch every movie the day you received it, we always managed to end up holding onto a disc for a few days. We eventually switched to 2-at-a-time so we could have one in-flight and one at home, that helped smooth out the gaps.

But even counting 2 or 3 at a time subscriptions, with unlimited streaming I am able to consume more content in a week and a half then I could in an entire month with DVDs, so in terms of content viewed per dollar I still think I'm getting a good deal. Streaming is especially a boon to anyone binging on a TV show. DVDs would have 3, maybe 4 episodes per DVD, so going through a show could monopolize your subscription for weeks at a time. Today I pop the show I want on and it just goes and goes.

[oflannabhra]

The big advantage of the DVD plan is selection. That is inherent in the media, and the license structure of it.

Another big change is BluRay, which I've found has far and away higher quality than streaming of any type.

[dragonwriter]

> Another big change is BluRay, which I've found has far and away higher quality than streaming of any type.

Standard Blu-ray (As opposed to UHD Blu-ray) doesn't have, to me, subjectively better (or even as good) quality than either 4K and/or HDR content available from YouTube, with the particular data connection I have at home, and with the screen I use. (I'm not currently paying for the 4K service from Netflix.)

I haven't actually compared UHD BluRay to 4K/HDR streaming. But a lot of this is going to vary by streaming provider, codec, data connection, and display hardware.

[cheeze]

> far and away higher quality than streaming of any type

Absolutely. Blu-Ray usually have ~18-25GB of raw video for a standard 2 hour 1080p film.

It's usually actually more because of the container format but the actual video itself is usually about that size.

[eappleby]

Why does it have to be one or the other? I don't think a company is greedy if they raise the price on a luxury item more than the rate of inflation. Consumers speak with their dollars. If a company prices out their consumers, consumers will stop spending and they'll either be forced to reduce their prices or go out of business.

[SketchySeaBeast]

And what's the cost of distributing data as opposed to distributing DVDs?

[cheeze]

Was anyone actually paying $7.99 though?