Topic: 3 Stooges Ultimate Collection DVD, June 5

[shemps#1]

I wish Rob was around because I'm sure he has more knowledge of economics than I do and can probably explain it more concisely.

[metaldams]

I wish Rob was around because I'm sure he has more knowledge of economics than I do and can probably explain it more concisely.

Then we should pay for our purchases in gold and silver.  But yeah, I agree it would be great if Rob were around, especially on this.

But in a sense, you are right, I got gouged.  I got gouged because I spent way more than $5 a pop on these volumes years ago, which is when the fleecing began.  If I knew a complete set along with the solo shorts as a bonus would have been around in 2012 for $45, I definitely would have waited.  I figured the complete set was coming, half thought the solo shorts may have been included  but wasn't sure, but there's no way I thought the set would've been this cheap.  That said, for years I've spent $30 on sets like the bonus disc, so it is what I'm accustomed to spending.  $45 is much cheaper than what I would normally expect and in the future, if a set of something I love comes along, I will proceed with more caution.

Under the circumstances, though, spending $30 on something I previously would've thought was a good price isn't that big a deal to me, but you better believe when a volume 1 of something i want comes out again, I will give it more thought.

[xraffle]

If we were hurting the economy, then why did Sony choose not to release the solo set separately? If releasing the set separately on its own was going to help Sony gain more profit thereby helping the economy, then it's Sony's fault for making a poor business decision.

[shemps#1]

If we were hurting the economy, then why did Sony choose not to release the solo set separately? If releasing the set separately on its own was going to help Sony gain more profit thereby helping the economy, then it's Sony's fault for making a poor business decision.

No...no...just no. You're misunderstanding me and that's why I wish Rob were here because he could most likely explain it better. Sony is making money with the box set, therefore it is not a poor business decision. In fact, you and others who accepted the price gouge are helping their cause and their total sales on the entire box set because a set had to purchased to break it up so you could be sold the one volume. Your purchase will not count as "Rare Treasures DVD Set" it will count as "Three Stooges Ultimate Collection". They are making more profit because they are selling more boxes, and another party is making a profit off you too. Also, let's face facts: the market for the rare treasures is smaller than the market for the shorts because there will be many fans who will be content on skipping out on the bonus stuff (I have the Star Wars Blu-Ray set and still haven't touched the bonus disc). If those who want to buy the volume separately are so full of piss and vinegar about it that they can't wait and are willing to accept mark-ups of 400-600% just so they don't have two copies of the shorts then you can't blame Sony for saying "you know, it's not worth putting out this niche product of bonus material en masse if a great portion of the people who would buy already spent more than we would charge for it in the first place". Also remember that also their is not a lot of Curly on that disc and the world of Three Stooges marketing Curly is cash and cash is king (less mass appeal). Therefore it isn't worth it for Sony to go through all of this trouble releasing it separately if you are going out of your way accepting a very high mark-up/price gouge just to get the thing by itself.

You can't go up to Sony HQ, open your wallet in front of CEO and then blame Sony when the CEO dips his hand in there. It's the consumer's fault because the consumer is saying "it's ok to price gouge me".

[shemps#1]

Then we should pay for our purchases in gold and silver.  But yeah, I agree it would be great if Rob were around, especially on this.

But in a sense, you are right, I got gouged.  I got gouged because I spent way more than $5 a pop on these volumes years ago, which is when the fleecing began.  If I knew a complete set along with the solo shorts as a bonus would have been around in 2012 for $45, I definitely would have waited.  I figured the complete set was coming, half thought the solo shorts may have been included  but wasn't sure, but there's no way I thought the set would've been this cheap.  That said, for years I've spent $30 on sets like the bonus disc, so it is what I'm accustomed to spending.  $45 is much cheaper than what I would normally expect and in the future, if a set of something I love comes along, I will proceed with more caution.

Under the circumstances, though, spending $30 on something I previously would've thought was a good price isn't that big a deal to me, but you better believe when a volume 1 of something i want comes out again, I will give it more thought.

That's all I really want out of this whole rant is for everybody to be wiser and more careful with their purchases and how such purchases effect the market as a whole.

[xraffle]

I didn't really think of it that way. The thing is, I spent a fortune on the 190 shorts. I spent $14 per video (at 3 shorts per video) during the VHS years, spent $20 per DVD buying the individual, themed releases, spent $65 on the bootleg set and then finally spent $20 per volume on the new sets. I spent thousands and thousands of dollars to buy and rebuy shorts that I've owned and seen hundreds of times. So, here I was faced with an opportunity to buy 1 Curly film and 28 solo shorts, all of which I haven't seen, for only $25. Sure, they're not as good as the 190 Stooges shorts, but at the time, it seemed worth it to spend the $25.

I must say, I probably would've passed on this third party sale if so many people here hadn't double dipped. I was so sure Sony was going to release it separately since I didn't think anyone here would want to double dip, not after we spent $20 per volume! But it seems like 90% of the members here did just that. So, I was like, "Is Sony going to bother releasing this separately now just to satisfy the measly 10% of fans that don't own this?" So, then I realized that we were screwed for sure. So, when I saw that $25 deal, I grabbed it as I figured it would be my only opportunity to see these shorts.

[xraffle]

OK, they sell it for $45 so $5 per volume. That is currently the price Amazon has set for the complete box. Anything is only worth what people are willing to pay for it, and by paying $30 you are saying "this bonus set is worth more than the Columbia shorts put together" and is definitely incentive for price gouging third parties to bust open the boxes.

...

 if you are paying $30 for something that costs $5 you are getting gouged.

Well, if you put it that way, then that means we all got gouged when we paid $20 for Volumes 1-8 when they first came out.

[xraffle]

I finished watching the Besser and DeRita shorts. The first 6 Besser shorts weren't too bad. "Fraidy Cat" and "Aim, Fire, Scoot" were remakes of "Dizzy Detectives" and "Boobs In Arms," respectively. The last 4 Besser shorts are remakes with reused footage taken from the previous 6. How disappointing! The DeRita shorts were surprisingly good. The only one I didn't care for was "Jitter Bughouse." DeRita gives a much performance here than he did in the stooges films. I think the Shemp solos were much better.

I have to say, I enjoyed watching these solo shorts, but of course, they're not as good as the Stooges shorts. Even though they made me laugh here and there, the stooges bring about more comedy as a team. Like what ProfessorStooge said in the other thread, comedy does indeed come in three. That's the main reason why I like the stooges better than Abbott & Costello.

[shemps#1]

Well, if you put it that way, then that means we all got gouged when we paid $20 for Volumes 1-8 when they first came out.

No you didn't. When you got those volumes for $20 no one was selling them for $5 a copy.

[xraffle]

I see what you mean. And I understand why you didn't want people to double dip or buy the set at a premium. It's not so much the cost, but it's really the principle of the thing. Double dipping or buying the set from a third party is only encouraging Sony to keep on continuing with this practice. Sony obviously did this on purpose. Like you said, the Rare Treasures set is geared towards hardcore fans only. Obviously, casual fans will not be interested in it. And it's even more obvious that all the hardcore fans already bought Volumes 1-8. So, Sony decided to give the fans the middle finger by making them buy Volumes 1-8 again because they know we want the solo shorts and we want it now. And you're right, I'm afraid we might've helped Sony accomplish their goal. Like Doug, I will definitely think things through more carefully before making future purchases. It's all a matter of principle and I admit, I wasn't thinking that way when I was planning to buy the Rare Treasures DVD. I was just looking to see where I can buy it separately at a comfortable price. I finally found it via Amazon Third Party and I made a very hasty, poor decision on my part.

I really hope everyone else here has learned a lot from this discussion. If we ever come to a situation like this again (which I hope not), then I really hope everyone here will stick together and do the right thing. Just saying!

[archiezappa]

The whole thing is caused by a guy wearing a suit, sitting in an office.

The lettering on the door reads like this:

Sony Pictures Corporation
I. Fleecum, President

[xraffle]

I should also note that the "Rare Treasures" DVD cover has a barcode in the back. Usually, when an exclusive DVD is included, they either don't put a barcode or put in "Not for individual sale." So, it looks like Sony is planning to sell this separately later on.

[archiezappa]

I should also note that the "Rare Treasures" DVD cover has a barcode in the back. Usually, when an exclusive DVD is included, they either don't put a barcode or put in "Not for individual sale." So, it looks like Sony is planning to sell this separately later on.

Yep.  I'm still holding out on this one.  I'm not double-dipping.  I want to buy the set that's available on Amazon, but I can't buy right now.  I will, very soon, though.  And I'm still holding out for a lower price, if possible.

[stooged and confused]

Call it getting older, but my days of re buying the same stuff are far behind me. I work too hard for my money to allow myself to fall for these business ploys. I did not and will not support this. I do agree that if the public keeps falling for this ploy ( and I was guilty of this in my younger days), then this kind of marketing trickery will not disappear any time soon. As for the content, I am curious to see some of this material that I have not yet viewed before, but not enough to get bitten by the corporate snake. I no longer re watch things over and over like I used to. Firstly, I don't have that much time anymore to do so. Secondly, as I got older, after so many viewings, it all becomes stale. That is the true curse of the home video market. It used to be a treat to see your favorite movies and TV episodes. Now, with everything so readily available, the sparkle tarnishes. Blazing Saddles is a very funny movie, but I can't watch it much anymore. I've hit my ceiling. Same goes for the Stooges. I've seen the shorts so many times on TV, film festivals, VHS, laser, and DVD, that by the time the restored sets came out, after a viewing or two, I had it. I will go back years from now, but regular exposure is a thing of the past for me.

[locoboymakesgood]

I really hope everyone else here has learned a lot from this discussion. If we ever come to a situation like this again (which I hope not), then I really hope everyone here will stick together and do the right thing. Just saying!

That won't happen. Most of us are wired to be impulsive when something like this is released.

Getting in to a silly argument over how dumb we all are and how right Sony was shouldn't deter you from enjoying what you bought, regardless of how you got it. You obviously weren't thinking that when you bought it and if Jim hadn't brought it up, you probably never would have.

Just enjoy the set and stop thinking so much in to it. You could've spent that money on something else a lot worse.

[xraffle]

That won't happen. Most of us are wired to be impulsive when something like this is released.

Well Jim and a few others on this site have done so. So, I don't think it's asking too much for other people to do the same thing. It's certainly not an impossible task. If there are other people that can patiently wait, then everyone else certainly can.

And we've already made it clear that it's not so much a money issue, but the fact that we bought into this whether it be through double-dipping or buying it via third party, it only encourages Sony to continue doing this again in the future. So, we need to be careful about that. Whether you obtained the Rare Treasures set for $45 or $5, we're telling Sony, "Good job! Your scheme worked!"

[archiezappa]

Just when I was about ready to order it (yep, I got paid today), they jacked the price up to $39.99, for the individual "Rare Treasures" set.  Well, I'm still gonna pass on it until the price is reasonable and $39.99 is NOT reasonable.

[shemps#1]

That won't happen. Most of us are wired to be impulsive when something like this is released.

Getting in to a silly argument over how dumb we all are and how right Sony was shouldn't deter you from enjoying what you bought, regardless of how you got it. You obviously weren't thinking that when you bought it and if Jim hadn't brought it up, you probably never would have.

Just enjoy the set and stop thinking so much in to it. You could've spent that money on something else a lot worse.

That's just it; I brought it up hoping that at least some people wouldn't be as impulsive and would think about their purchases before making them. If people did start using their brains then these third party retailers wouldn't even attempt to sell the bonus set for $40 by itself.

You are right, xraffle could have spent that money on something else and that "something else" could be worse, but it could also have been better. In no way do I know shit from Shinola about X's personal finances, but I'm sure there are other things he could have spent the money on, or he could have saved it. Telling people to not put any thought into what they spend money on is rather reckless, don't you think?

[xraffle]

I wouldn't call this a "silly argument." It's interesting hearing another person's point of view, even if it's not in agreement with yours. I'm always willing to debate in a mature manner. In this case, I think the discussion that took place was rather interesting and it was something that I learned from.

[moglia]

FWIW: I purchased the box on Amazon for $44.95. 2.5 weeks later I then sold the new sealed vol 1-8 collections from the box bundled together for $50 [with shipping included] after the price on the on Amazon went up. After all was said and done I did not make any profit - nor was i looking to - but I ended up with the "Rare Treasures" DVD's at no cost along with the physical box itself. Was the effort worth it, to me it was...

[shemps#1]

I wouldn't call this a "silly argument." It's interesting hearing another person's point of view, even if it's not in agreement with yours. I'm always willing to debate in a mature manner. In this case, I think the discussion that took place was rather interesting and it was something that I learned from.

Exactly, I didn't think it was an argument at all and it confused me when he said that but I neglected to address it.

[shemps#1]

FWIW: I purchased the box on Amazon for $44.95. 2.5 weeks later I then sold the new sealed vol 1-8 collections from the box bundled together for $50 [with shipping included] after the price on the on Amazon went up. After all was said and done I did not make any profit - nor was i looking to - but I ended up with the "Rare Treasures" DVD's at no cost along with the physical box itself. When the effort worth it...to me it was, YMMV.

Color me old, stupid or both but I had to look up both of those abbreviations. Can we try to refrain from using too much Internet slang?

[Curly4444]

Yes, no more internet slang. We have some old folks on here.  I'm older than you Shemps#1 and i understood what it meant.


FWIW= "For what Its Worth".

[moglia]

Yes, no more internet slang. We have some old folks on here.  I'm older than you Shemps#1 and i understood what it meant.


FWIW= "For what Its Worth".

Not every acronym is internet slang, FWIW goes back to the late 1960's when radio stations abbreviated the Buffalo Springfield song in internal memo's.   For better or worse language  can't be stopped from evolving (or devolving?).  When you get right down to it the slang the Stooges' used in their work has been part of that since the 1930's                                                     

BTW [ ] this is an internet forum is it not?

[archiezappa]

Sounds like we should put this argument up on the Master Debates.  Well, there's two arguments here. 

#1.  Buying the new set for the Rare Treasures box vs. Holding out for the individual release

#2.  Using acronyms on this board vs. Using correct English

Anybody game for this?