Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

• 

  data64, 11 Nov 2004 @ 8:20am

  
  

  buying out a rival

  They are just interested in the customer base, and not the stores for the most part.

  [ link to this | view in chronology ]

• 

  incognito, 11 Nov 2004 @ 8:30am

  
  

  Hol and BB

  So I wonder what the chances are that the FTC will deny it this time.

  [ link to this | view in chronology ]

• 

  Mike(no, not that mike), 11 Nov 2004 @ 9:17am

  
  

  I suppose

  Well before hollywood video came along Blockbuster really kinda stuck it to their customers. I don't know if any of you remember the higher prices for less days and non-nogotiable late fees. When hollywood came along blockbuster actually had to start competing. I hope they stay seperate, not that I rent movies very often but I still don't like getting robbed when I do.

  [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • 

    Kevin, 17 Nov 2004 @ 11:33am

    
    

    Re: I suppose

    In utah Blockbuster stores have a sick way of entertaining themselves. If you are late on a video return, they imediatly send it to a collections agency, followed by a string of harrasing letters from that agency. Hollywood is people oriented and has no problem with you paying the late fee on your next visit.
    I figure it this way. If you rent a video, you go past the return date. You might as well keep it for another week, they are going to charge you for the week anyway. In the mean time I don't need my $4.50 late fee turned over to a collection agency. If Blockbuster buys Hollywood. I will find somewhere els to rent videow.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

• 

  RJD, 11 Nov 2004 @ 11:40am

  
  

  growth through elimination

  Buy the stores; collect the customers; sale the stores (assuming they aren't leased) there by making a profit on the buy out. Hollywood Movie stores aren't the competition anymore; it's Netflix and the vending machines that are starting to pop up. So you buy customers. Not an uncommon business practice particularly when the market is saturated and the opportunities for organic growth are little and none.

  [ link to this | view in chronology ]

• 

  Nate, 11 Nov 2004 @ 1:15pm

  
  

  Don't believe the synergy BS

  The point of buyouts is not to merge the two companies but to shut down competitors.
  Can this possibly make it through anti-trust? Blockbuster is practically a monopoly with Hollywood its only token competition.
  I am sure they will invoke NetFlix and pay-per-view to try to make the case that they are not a monopoly.

  [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • 

    Anonymous Coward, 12 Nov 2004 @ 7:20am

    
    

    Re: Don't believe the synergy BS

    Actually, the video rental industry is still fairly fragmented with lots of "mom and pop" stores.
    
    Blockbuster is definitely the largest corporate player, and there probably isn't a lot of mom and pops in large portions of suburbia so it is a defacto monopoly for a lot of people, but from a U.S.-wide industry standpoint they aren't even close to being a monopoly.
    
    There are two mom and pops as close to my house as there is a Blockbuster and a Hollywood, but I use Netflix, so I really don't care.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

• 

  Anonymous Coward, 15 Nov 2004 @ 7:20pm

  
  

  No Subject Given

  I think Blockbuster should try to buy Hollywood and take out all the competion.

  [ link to this | view in chronology ]