GREEN CINE Already a member? login
 Your cart
Help
Advanced Search
- Genres
+ Action
+ Adult
+ Adventure
+ Animation
+ Anime
+ Classics
+ Comedies
+ Comic Books
+ Crime
  Criterion Collection
+ Cult
+ Documentary
+ Drama
+ Erotica
+ Espionage
  Experimental/Avant-Garde
+ Fantasy
+ Film Noir
+ Foreign
+ Gay & Lesbian
  HD (High Def)
+ Horror
+ Independent
+ Kids
+ Martial Arts
+ Music
+ Musicals
  Pre-Code
+ Quest
+ Science Fiction
  Serials
+ Silent
+ Sports
+ Suspense/Thriller
  Sword & Sandal
+ Television
+ War
+ Westerns


Public Discussions

topics
GreenCine General
Feedback
Have suggestions, criticism or praise for the GreenCine community? Post them here. Please maintain a sense of decorum here.
1062

Turnaround times getting unbearable
Topic by: gnohymmij
Posted: July 30, 2007 - 11:46 AM PDT
Last Reply: November 6, 2007 - 1:37 PM PST

page  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  >>      prev | next
author topic: Turnaround times getting unbearable
Catullus
post #121  on September 2, 2007 - 5:09 PM PDT  
oh and just let me add a disclaimer, that only accounts for their Revenue from the subscription based dvd service, I have no clue how to ascertain or even guess the profit they make or expenses associated with VOD or any other income sources that they have.
Catullus
post #122  on September 2, 2007 - 5:33 PM PDT  
"Disks rapidly turned around enhance the fluidity and effective size of the collection, and that grows the membership."

lol effective size of the collection... uhmmm im not sure how you are going to even use logic and come up with this stuff.

Logically im going to assume you aren't using logic.

If I actually assumed these two were related in any way (which im certain that I do not) I would have to say that

1) if it did somehow increase membership at a rate higher or the same rate as the increased return rate the "effective size of the collection" bs that it is, would stay the same or worse decrease the "effective size of the collection"
especially since if somehow GC was able to make the USPS deliver faster or even have static ship/pick up and processing times to locations they would have more breakage and less profit to replace and expand inventory.

2) I know this is hard to believe, but id guess most NF and GC subscribers dont have time to watch movies super fast and send them right back so you can get this super fast turnaround. I cant say for everyone but I have way way too much going on to watch 31 movies a month. So if I keep a movie for 4 or 5 days thats going to effect your "effective size of the collection" even more than slower turn arounds.

3) GC im sure isn't purposely delaying your discs, im not sure what plan you are on or how much it costs you, but 31 discs in July? LMFAO seriously... thats a ridiculous amount to expect since I believe (but dont really know) that you are on the 4 out plan and thats watching 1 movie a day everyday of the month. Even if you perfectly time it like im sure you do thats a 4 day turn around time on weekdays not including weekends so sub 2 days there and back.

You sir are being ridiculous. Seriously and people wonder why Americans get ripped on... you are wasting our time with some honestly retarded issue like its super important. Let me know if you have a real problem kk thx bai im out.

Can it no longer be RTARD tiem nao?

Catullus
post #123  on September 2, 2007 - 5:42 PM PDT  
Id also like to expand on point 2 a little bit of my last post

Obviously not everyone is watching the dvd the second the receive it and returning it the second its over. If I rented This im pretty sure it doesn't matter how fast GC ships it to me or how long I hold onto it because no one else is waiting to see it.

Obviously the rarer more popular titles are the ones that are hard to get ahold of. While if GC somehow some way could get the movie to us 1 day faster that would help but there will always be the people that hang onto something for a couple weeks. While if they were shipping out more discs like I was saying there would be less profit for replacing them and ordering more to expand the collection.

... so the best thing for me and the rest of us, (not for GC) is if you whiners all cancel your memberships and the effective size of the collection grows!
woozy
post #124  on September 2, 2007 - 11:18 PM PDT  
> On September 2, 2007 - 5:42 PM PDT Catullus wrote:
> ---------------------------------
> Obviously not everyone is watching the dvd the second the receive it and returning it the second its over. If I rented This im pretty sure it doesn't matter how fast GC ships it to me or how long I hold onto it because no one else is waiting to see it.
>
>

OMIGOD! Rat Pfink & Boo-boo is available on DVD finally!! That's a classic! Obscure movie enthusiasts have been waiting years for that one.

What you are missing is to what extent a DVD company can keep folks happy for what number of disks.

Let's suppose there are 64 members.

Let's suppose there are the following movies:
4 popular movies (six copies each), 4 arty movies (eight copies each), and a 19 obscure movies one copy each.




There are sixteen types of members:
The 1's only want one movie a time period. The 2's two, the 3's three. And the 4's four.

The A's have lousy tastes and only want the 4 popular movies ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR.

So here are what the As rent and when:

A1i: ONE (copy 1)
A1ii: TWO (copy 1)
A1iii: THREE (copy 1)
A1iv: FOUR (copy 1)
A2i: ONE (copy 2) TWO (copy 2)
A2ii: TWO (copy 2) THREE(copy 2)
A2iii: THREE (copy 2) FOUR (copy 2)
A2iv: FOUR (copy 2) ONE (copy 2)
A3i: ONE (copy3) TWO (copy3) THREE (copy3)
A3ii: TWO (copy3) THREE(copy3) FOUR (copy3)
A3iii: THREE(copy3) FOUR(copy3) ONE (copy3)
A3iV: FOUR (copy3) ONE(copy3) TWO (copy3)
A4i: ONE (copy4) TWO (copy4) THREE (copy 4) FOUR (copy 4)
A4ii: TWO (copy4) THREE (copy 4) FOUR (copy 4) ONE (copy4)
A4iii: THREE (copy 4) FOUR (copy 4) ONE (copy4) TWO (copy4)
A4iv: FOUR (copy 4) ONE (copy4) TWO (copy4) THREE (copy 4)


The C's are all pseudo-intellectuals and all want to watch the art-house movies:


C1i: ARTONE (copy 1)
C1ii: ARTTWO (copy 1)
C1iii: ARTTHREE (copy 1)
C1iv: ARTFOUR (copy 1)
C2i: ARTONE (copy 2) ARTTWO (copy 2)
C2ii: ARTTWO (copy 2) ARTTHREE(copy 2)
C2iii: ARTTHREE (copy 2) ARTFOUR (copy 2)
C2iv: ARTFOUR (copy 2) ARTONE (copy 2)
C3i: ARTONE (copy3) ARTTWO (copy3) ARTTHREE (copy3)
C3ii: ARTTWO (copy3) ARTTHREE(copy3) ARTFOUR (copy3)
C3iii: ARTTHREE(copy3) ARTFOUR(copy3) ARTONE (copy3)
C3iV: ARTFOUR (copy3) ARTONE(copy3) ARTTWO (copy3)
C4i: ARTONE (copy4) ARTTWO (copy4) ARTTHREE (copy 4) ARTFOUR (copy 4)
C4ii: ARTTWO (copy4) ARTTHREE (copy 4) ARTFOUR (copy 4) ARTONE (copy4)
C4iii: ARTTHREE (copy 4) ARTFOUR (copy 4) ARTONE (copy4) ARTTWO (copy4)
C4iv: ARTFOUR (copy 4) ARTONE (copy4) ARTTWO (copy4) ARTTHREE (copy 4)


The Bs like half popular and half arty.


B1i: ARTONE (copy 5)
B1ii: ARTTWO (copy 5)
B1iii: ONE (copy 5)
B1iv: TWO (copy 5)
B2i: ARTTHREE (copy 5) THREE (copy 5)
B2ii: ARTFOUR (copy 5) FOUR (copy 5)
B2iii: THREE (copy 5) ARTTHREE (copy 5)
B2iv: FOUR (copy 5) ARTFOUR (copy 5)
B3i: ARTONE (copy6) ONE (copy6) ARTTWO (copy6)
B3ii: ARTTWO (copy6) TWO (copy6) ARTTHREE (copy6)
B3iii: ARTTHREE(copy6) THREE(copy6) ARTFOUR (copy6)
B3iV: ARTFOUR (copy6) FOUR(copy6) ARTONE (copy6)
B4i: ONE (copy6) ARTTWO (copy7) ARTTHREE (copy 7) TWO (copy 6)
B4ii: TWO (copy6) ARTTHREE (copy 7) ARTFOUR (copy 7) ONE (copy 6)
B4iii: THREE(copy 6) ARTFOUR (copy 7) ARTONE (copy7) FOUR(copy6)
B4iv: FOUR (copy 6) ARTONE (copy7) ARTTWO (copy7) THREE (copy 6)


It's the D's who are the pains in the asses. They like half arty and half obscure ones which they are the only ones to ever rent:


D1i: e)
D1ii: f)
D1iii: g)
D1iV: h)
D2i: ARTONE (copy 8) j)
D2ii: k) ARTONE (copy 8)
D2iii: ARTTWO (copy 8) l)
D2iV: m) ARTTWO (copy 8)
D3i: n) ARTFOUR (copy 6) ARTTHREE (copy 8)
D3ii: ARTTHREE (copy 8) ARTTWO (copy 6) o)
D3iii: p) ARTTHREE (copy 6) ARTFOUR (copy 8)
D3iv: ARTFOUR (copy 8) ARTONE (copy 6) q)
D4i: ARTTWO (copy 7) r) s) ARTTHREE (copy 7)
D4ii: ARTTHREE (copy 7) t) u) ARTFOUR (copy 7)
D4iii: ARTONE (copy 7) v) w) ARTTWO (copy 7)


Okay, so how do we evaluate which members are "good" members and which are "bad"?

Well, consider how often each disk was rented:

ONE - FOUR: copy 1: rented just once. cost/rental 1.
copy 2: rented twice. cost/rental 1/2.
copy 3: rented three. cost/rental 1/3.
copy 4: rented four. cost/rental 1/4.
ONE - TWO copy 5: rented once cost/rental 1.
THREE-FOUR copy 5: rented twice cost/rental 1/2
copy 6: rented three cost/rental 1/3
ARTONE-FOUR: copy 1: once cost/rental 1
copy 2: cost/rental 1/2
copy 3: cost/rental 1/3
copy 4: cost/rental 1/4
AONE-ATWO copy 5: once cost/rental 1
ATHREE-AFOUR copy 5: cost/rental 1/2
AONE-FOUR copy 6: cost/rental 1/3
copy 7: cost/rental 1/3
copy 8: cost/rental 1/2


Members costing 1 unit:
All who rent just one disk. All the A's. All the Cs.
All the B2's .....


Hmmm, I guess what I've shown is that a user who keeps a disk forever is more or less the same cost as one who turns it over in terms of cost of keeping a fluid supply.

Anyway, I think NLEE might have the right idea that maybe members should pay for how many disks they watch regardless as to how many they have out at a time or how long they have a disk for.
Catullus
post #125  on September 2, 2007 - 11:34 PM PDT  
yes I would be down for a service where I was charged a small flat fee per month (say 5.95) and then X amount of dollars per disk sent to me up to a maximum of say 6 discs out at one time or something like that. As long as that included an option to change quickly how many discs you want out and an option to easily lock your queue if you dont want any more movies sent to you that month.

however we have what we have at this time and to explain my long somewhat mean posts is due to the fact I do work in customer service for my job (at a bank call center). So im dealing with a lot of nice people (but usually not too bright people that im glad to help but there are those idiots who dont understand how a business or service works and then ask for something unreasonable after I explain it to them or they ask for something just plain ridiculous and get angry and abusive when their demands are not met. Im amused but the same time annoyed that such stupid people exist.

**** those people.
Catullus
post #126  on September 2, 2007 - 11:44 PM PDT  
"What you are missing is to what extent a DVD company can keep folks happy for what number of disks."

well obviously if NF was so perfect and GC so bad GC would not have any customers and we would not be having this discussion because FG would be a NF customer and no longer posting here am i rite?

So I can partially infer that GC is not as bad as some would have us believe or that NF is not as great as some would have us believe.

In any case there is a number that a dvd rental company can keep folks happy and that number varies upon each individual.
As I am not insane I do not demand 31 rentals per month for a 4 out plan.

That said if GC could somehow do that for a 4 out plan they have to maintain a certain profit margin to stay in business (they are not a NPO) and they would probably have to raise fees in that situation. That is the true Catch 22 and some people out to take a business class or two. Common sense would help as well. Although I do get the feeling that someone just wants GC to lose money on them because they can make that up from those customers who dont try to watch movies the same day they get them and rush them to the PO to send them back the same day.
Catullus
post #127  on September 2, 2007 - 11:46 PM PDT  
out = ought.

While this is a complaining thread Id like to add that an edit feature would be sooooooo very very nice and would allow double and triple posts to be condensed into one post when I have more to add :P

Ok tired going to bed nao.
artifex
post #128  on September 3, 2007 - 8:03 AM PDT  
The concept that it benefits the company for more people to come in who ultimately cost the company more often leads to Ponzi schemes. More people coming in who are new support the excesses of the people who have been there longer. Not only can it not last, but it doesn't change the fact we were pointing out, that those members with excessive expectations cost more than they're worth to begin with.

The fact that you can change your subscription every month is quite the red herring. If you decide to get 6 out next month instead of 3, you're going to expect 60 discs instead of 30, right? The cost to mail each disk out will not change. Now you're just saying 2P = 2I - 2E, instead of P = I - E. That's why I said you can treat it as a constant. (Actually, as a matter of fact, there are levels where they may be charging less per disc than at 3 out, which means in fact that their I actually goes down on a per disc basis. Which means their P necessarily goes down. Anyway, the concept is the same.)

2 times a negative profit is an even larger loss, not a positive profit. Surely you've heard the statement, "we lose a little on each sale, but we make it up in volume." Think about that. It's a joke. Nobody makes up per unit loss in volume. More units = more loss.

If you still think otherwise, I'd love to see you explain why NetFlix was throttling.
artifex
post #129  on September 3, 2007 - 8:08 AM PDT  
> On September 1, 2007 - 9:45 PM PDT woozy wrote:
> ---------------------------------
> > On September 1, 2007 - 2:40 PM PDT artifex wrote:
> > ---------------------------------
> > profit = income - expenses.
> >
> > Income is a constant for this exercise; the plans are each flat fee.
>
> But number of plans and membership vary month by month. Member A, who keeps disk "Mootey and the WhoBlish" for weeks and has low expenses, causes Member B who also want to watch "Mootey and the WhoBlish" to not be able to. Either Member B's expenses go up in that GC must buy more copies, or Member B's income goes down when he quits after a couple of weeks of not getting to watch the disk he wants.
>
>
> Just sayin'...
> ---------------------------------

If Member B only has the one disc he wants to see in his queue, he has no reason to stay a member once he's seen it, does he? No.

Underdog and the rest have said for years to keep many many titles in your queue. Hopefully now it becomes obvious why.
woozy
post #130  on September 3, 2007 - 10:00 AM PDT  
> On September 2, 2007 - 11:44 PM PDT Catullus wrote:
> ---------------------------------
> "What you are missing is to what extent a DVD company can keep folks happy for what number of disks."
>
> well obviously if NF was so perfect and GC so bad GC would not have any customers and we would not be having this discussion because FG would be a NF customer and no longer posting here am i rite?
>

Actually, I wasn't talking about either GC or NF. I was merely pointing out that whereas a customer who keeps a disk for weeks may seem, from the business owner's view point, to be a "cheap date" he carries a hidden cost in requiring a larger inventory.

> As I am not insane I do not demand 31 rentals per month for a 4 out plan.
>
FGaipa was not the person who claimed he expected 31 rentals per month on a 4 out plan. Actually, so far as I can tell, GC never claimed and never seemed to have a problem with people turning over disks quickly. GC still doesn't seem to mind if we *could* continue to turn disks over quickly. It's just that now such folk can't. During the "good ol' days" GC *never* said "Hey, you Bay Area folks and your two day turnarounds, Stop it! You're killin' us."


> That said if GC could somehow do that for a 4 out plan they have to maintain a certain profit margin to stay in business (they are not a NPO) and they would probably have to raise fees in that situation.

It's not the profit margin that ever was the issue. Appearantly 31 a month on a 4-out plan was always feasable. (Beats the heck out of me how.) It's now the physical impossibility of such.

woozy
post #131  on September 3, 2007 - 10:08 AM PDT  
> On September 3, 2007 - 8:08 AM PDT artifex wrote:
> ---------------------------------

> If Member B only has the one disc he wants to see in his queue, he has no reason to stay a member once he's seen it, does he? No.
>
Well, one assumes that for efficiency sake one sakes a service in general rather than to shop for titles one by one.

> Underdog and the rest have said for years to keep many many titles in your queue. Hopefully now it becomes obvious why.
> ---------------------------------

Yes, but if you put a title at number one in your queue you expect to get it in a reasonably timely fashion. If not immediately (which it would be reasonable to expect at least 50% of the time) then within two or three weeks.

All I am saying is a customer that holds onto a disk for a long time, carries the hidden cost of fluidity and inventory size.

FGaipa
post #132  on September 3, 2007 - 10:36 AM PDT  
> On September 3, 2007 - 8:03 AM PDT artifex wrote:
> ---------------------------------
> The concept that it benefits the company for more people to come in who ultimately cost the company more often leads to Ponzi schemes. More people coming in who are new support the excesses of the people who have been there longer. Not only can it not last, but it doesn't change the fact we were pointing out, that those members with excessive expectations cost more than they're worth to begin with.
>

Not sure I follow.

Ponzi schemes are perpetual motion machines, so of course they're bogus. You seem to be suggesting that growth is bad for a business. Sometimes growth can be bad for longtime customers affected by service or other changes, but adding customers is seldom or never bad for the bottom line.

The relevant truism is a business must expand to survive.

GC's goal in moving South very clearly was growth. They said as much in the earliest posts explaining the move. They wanted more and happier East Coast subscribers. And maybe I should stop talking business over my head, but one can speculate that the size of GC's cumulative monthly subsciber impounds and its earning potential recently passed a threshold that allowed them to make the move.

fg
FGaipa
post #133  on September 3, 2007 - 11:04 AM PDT  
> On September 3, 2007 - 10:00 AM PDT woozy wrote:
> ---------------------------------
> > On September 2, 2007 - 11:44 PM PDT Catullus wrote:

> > As I am not insane I do not demand 31 rentals per month for a 4 out plan.
> >


I wasn't demanding 31 rentals in 31 days. I was simply reporting a service loss. For nearly two years, much of that on the three, not the four, out plan I received roughly a disk per day. The much advertised promise is unlimited rentals, and no late fees meaning unlimited hold times.

Thirteen disks in a month, very probably the maximum four-out possible under current conditions, represents a gross decline in service and a failure deliver on the promise. I could have done 13 or very close to that on a one-out pre-Van Nuys. If I recall even the original NF throttling scandal knocked the guy down to something greater than thirteen. Thirteen means eighteen days with nothing to watch while paying more that you'd pay at the competition for many more disks in the same period.

I want GC to survive. Failing so grossly against the compeitition works against that.

No one wishes better for GC than I do. DLee's small-case flame startled me. I hope the sum of my posts, at least those made while I was half awake, has been constuctive.

fg
Catullus
post #134  on September 3, 2007 - 11:32 AM PDT  
"FGaipa was not the person who claimed he expected 31 rentals per month on a 4 out plan."

well excuse me then, I honestly have gotten to the point I stopped reading names and its just been one giant complainer.

I mean it doesn't help that so many people are using the same icons whether its the batman or the hippy.

I mean I look at it like this, GC just completely got up and moved locations and now they have the HUGE task of redoing all the tweaks and stuff (I honestly have no idea what they do to get disks their faster through the USPS) for their shipping through the USPS to get the disks to their customers. To me these complaints are ridiculous A) because they are acting like GC is either not doing w/e they can to get disks there faster. B) that they could do better when shipping speed is constrained by cost (obv FEDEX overnight is not an option) and USPS performance.

If I was hampered by USPS performance in anything that would be frustrating to say the least.

GC is a smaller by mail dvd rental company. If you expect shipping centers all across the country so you can get it delivered in 30 minutes or less then you probably need to get corrective surgery done upon your expectations.
As far as being upset that they moved their shipping location from Bay Area to So Cal, well sucks to be you but im sure it made loads of sense or they wouldn't have done it.

If I unfairly lumped FG in with the other complainers I do apologize however at this point I have no sympathy for any of them and if they dont want to face public criticism then they can email GC CS like they were supposed to for their problems to get addressed in the first place.
woozy
post #135  on September 3, 2007 - 12:22 PM PDT  
> On September 3, 2007 - 11:32 AM PDT Catullus wrote:
> ---------------------------------
>
> I mean it doesn't help that so many people are using the same icons whether its the batman or the hippy.
>

Of course if the icons were the batman *and* the hippy it'd be RAT-PFINK!

> I mean I look at it like this,

Well, look at it like this. Just how much is it reasonable to expect people to be willing to pay for not being NetFlix?

Let's say you settle down and figure out how you like to watch movies. Maybe you want to see four movies a month and keep each for two weeks or maybe you want to see 31 movies a month and keep each for exactly one night. Neither is unreasonable except in the eyes of the other.

Okay, lets work with the four movies a month, each movie a week at a time. Let's assume the guy is, like you, a bay area resident. Let's compare three plans: NF, GC-old, GC-new. On NF the guy could chose the 1-out ($8.99) and see the movies and keep each 4 or 5 days or the 2-out ($13.99) and keep each 9 days. On GC-old he has the same choses but they are ($9.95) and ($14.95) and as they work on Saturday it is really a choice of keeping them 5 days or 11 days each. GC-new slows down two days in the mail to seven days in the mail (I'm sorry but it really does) so now it is a choice of 1-out ($9.95) and returning the movies the very next day (not an option) or 2-out ($14.95) and keeping for 5 days.

The guy *loves* GC and hates netflix so he chooses GC-new 2-out ($14.95) and figures he is seeing 4 movies ($3.75 each) for five days each. He knows he is paying more than NetFlix. He figures he is either paying $6 more ($1.75 more a disk) or $1 more ($.25 more a disk) and forgoing the option to keep them for nine-days. He figures its worth it to not belong to NF.

Now lets consider another guy who watches 20 movies a month and watches and returns them right away. He has the choice of NF 3-out for $16.99 ($.85 a movie), GC-old 3-out for $21.95 ($1.05 a movie), or GC-new 8-out for $49.95 ($2.50 a movie). Okay, this guy was willing to pay $.20 (25%) more per movie to *not* belong to NF but is he willing to pay 1.65 (200%) more? Probably not.

Okay, you have no sympathy because you willing chose to slow down and willing pay $3.75 a disk. But by the same reasoning the whiner might have no sympathy for *you* because you are purposely wasting your money. Both companies were created with the impression you would watch disks quickly for about $1.25 on average. The way GC is now the price has gone from $1.25 on average to $2.75 on average. Is it worth paying twice as much not to be a member of Netflix? Maybe... Maybe not.
Catullus
post #136  on September 3, 2007 - 12:43 PM PDT  
here is where you completely and totally fail woozy.

Person B CAN choose netflix if they think its so much better.
Why they have not done so and STFU and stopped ****ing baffles and confuses me.

if NF is so much faster than they should take that option and be done with it. I can only come to the conclusion that NF is greatly exaggerated or that GC is better in enough ways that people are having trouble leaving.

Any other thing that takes place does not make sense and makes me think the person is just a complete idiot and tbqh should do us all a favor and not reproduce. GC is not netflix and instead of trying to ***** until GC turns into NF, let GC be GC instead. If their business model is that bad they will sink or swim on their own merits.

"Okay, you have no sympathy because you willing chose to slow down and willing pay $3.75 a disk. But by the same reasoning the whiner might have no sympathy for *you* because you are purposely wasting your money."

I am not asking for sympathy, Im asking for RTARDS to use what little intelligence god gave them and use the email feature to get the Customer Support they so desperately crave.

Netflix is not an option for me because Id rather have no service than their service, Same goes for BB and Walmart. I dont care what others whom I dont even know think of me. I am not planning on running for political office and am not currently in any popularity contests. Its not even fanboyism because I like GC, its because I just completely detest the other companies. I respect your right to support BB and NF and WM, but at the same time I dont really want to hear about how great someone thinks those companies are.

This topic has now been beaten into the ground. Take it to CS please.
woozy
post #137  on September 3, 2007 - 1:24 PM PDT  
> On September 3, 2007 - 12:43 PM PDT Catullus wrote:
> ---------------------------------
> here is where you completely and totally fail woozy.
>
> Person B CAN choose netflix if they think its so much better.

Nobody thinks NF is "so much better". We all prefer GC or we never would have come here. It's just that for a very large number of bay area folk GC's quality suddenly dropped to one-third it's previous effiency.

> Why they have not done so and STFU and stopped ****ing baffles and confuses me.
>
Well, I agree for the most part and about most of the bitchers (*koff* pluplat, *koff* jnissel) and I've pleaded "Quit your bitchin'" many times.

I don't think FGaipa is a bitcher though and he's been very helpful in the past about the postal service (and he's a library student and all librarians are super-cool by definition). FGaipa, a poster from far back, obviously loves GC and is very loathe to join the evil red empire and I sense someone who is honestly upset that what used to be a good service and a very reasonable alternative to the evil red empire has suddenly become a very poor service. I feel when suddenly faced with a service failure, he prefers to believe it is a temporary glitch or a result of an intrusive existential change. He'd rather do everything he can to help them get over this than to lift his skirts and say "oooooh, wal-mart, er, netflix" I think all his posts are of a struggling GC fan trying to work something out and somehow unravel so GC can return to the reasonable service he used to expect rather than the rather poor service it has become.

> I can only come to the conclusion that NF is greatly exaggerated or that GC is better in enough ways that people are having trouble leaving.
>
The only thing being discussed is delivery and return time to the bay area. Before the move, NetFlix and GC were exactly the same in that they were both consistantly over-night. GC was slightly better in that they shipped on Saturday so a movie returned (at home) on Fri. would be replaced (at home) on Mon. as opposed to Tues. with NF. That is not an exageration. Since the move delivery and return time to the bay area has dropped drastically. (7 days vs. 2 seems to be the very best I've ever experienced for both.)

> Any other thing that takes place does not make sense and makes me think the person is just a complete idiot and tbqh should do us all a favor and not reproduce. GC is not netflix and instead of trying to ***** until GC turns into NF, let GC be GC instead. If their business model is that bad they will sink or swim on their own merits.
>
Well, I think that's what FGaipa is afraid of. They'll sink. And he doesn't want them to because he loves them.


> I am not asking for sympathy, Im asking for RTARDS to use what little intelligence god gave them and use the email feature to get the Customer Support they so desperately crave.
>
Well, I agree with you about the gazillions of bitchers how just chime "me too" and "Fuck you guys... I used to rip DVDs and sell them at a profit and now it's slowed down and I *know* you are doing it just to screw with me you capitalistic *PIGS*" and the reprehensible "Mr. Middle Finger" Pluplat. However, I believe in listening to everyone on their own merit and FGaipa has some legitimate thoughts. He might be wrong but it is, for now, worth talking with.


> Its not even fanboyism because I like GC, its because I just completely detest the other companies.


Well, thought experiment time. What if GC started charging twice as much, four times as much, one hundred times as much. What's your "price" to leave.


> I respect your right to support BB and NF and WM, but at the same time I dont really want to hear about how great someone thinks those companies are.
>
No-one's saying they are great. (Well, okay, Mr. Middle-Finger kept going on about how great they were and how GC sucked and that warranted a huge "Put up or shut up and for fuck's sake, just *GO* to NetFlix and LEAVE US ALONE" from me.) I don't think NF is as evil as the other two but there's no way I'm going to say NF is "good". I think all anyone is saying is that NF is more economical (which, alas, it is).

Yes, I agree this subject has been beaten to the ground, but, no, please don't tell people to write customer service. Customer service has done everything it can.
Battie
post #138  on September 3, 2007 - 1:43 PM PDT  
...You guys do know that civility is still in fashion, right?

Or did it go out last year? *wonders when capri pants will finally go out of fashion*
Catullus
post #139  on September 3, 2007 - 1:52 PM PDT  
"Well, thought experiment time. What if GC started charging twice as much, four times as much, one hundred times as much. What's your "price" to leave."

Im on a 2 out plan seeing as how my freetime is extremely limited as far as my hobbies are concerned movies/anime is just a part.

I like to go out, jog, hang out with friends, play video games, eff around on the internet and with everything I have going on I dont have time to obsess about these kinds of things like cost per rental and how many movies can I force myself to watch in a month.

I guess im not really stressed out about the rate at which I watch stuff. Right now im just watching Claymore (fansubs) and Nadia: Secret of Blue Water. My queue is comprised of anime and nightwatch and only because of how awesome everyone here keeps saying nightwatch is.

As the two out plan is 14.95 a month and I can't rent Urusei Yatsura in my local video store and definitely not without due dates Id say that to answer your question the cost per rental would have to be close enough to the cost per purchase of the disk itself to which Id rather just buy the DVD.

So basically cost per rental would have to be 5$+ per disk before Id really care that much. Seeing how as on a 2 out plan that would be less than 3 discs per month im not caring at all about cost per disk because its rather low. 14.95$ is not something Im concerned about.

If I get 6 discs in a month thats only $2.50/disc that really does not bother me at all.

Now let me ask you a question... how much is reasonable to expect to pay per disc renting from Greencine?



Catullus
post #140  on September 3, 2007 - 2:05 PM PDT  
"You seem to be suggesting that growth is bad for a business."

no what he is suggesting and that you are not getting is that if the business grows and its losing money, its just going to lose money at a faster rate.

Growth in that case is bad for the business.

And at a disc per day is completely unreasonable, no way GC wasn't losing money on that. Yes its true unlimited rentals and they certainly held up their bargain, but because they changed shipping sites they are not obligated to keep up that rate that you previously had, you still have unlimited rentals and you have no evidence that they are not still providing you unlimited rentals.

Here are a few facts that im certain of
1) GC was almost certainly losing money on your business FG if you were receiving one disc per day on a 3 out or 4 out plan.
2) GC had unhappy Customers in the other parts of the country due to shipping speeds
3) GC moved shipping locations to increase distro to the rest of the USA
4) Obviously discs wont get to the bay area as fast as before since its not shipping from the bay area so TOUGH TITTY BATMAN
5) Obviously there are going to be kinks to worked out of a system after such a huge change
6) You are still getting unlimited rentals thus nothing in what GC is obligated to provide you has changed
7) You are not pleased because you are not getting a disc per day even though no one is obligated to send you 1 disc per day, you are getting unlimited rentals as you were before.
8) You claim to like GC and not want them to fail but all im hearing is selfishness and wanting to be the fat guy at the buffet that the restaurant loses money on.
page  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  >>      prev | next

about greencine · donations · refer a friend · support · help · genres
contact us · press room · privacy policy · terms · sitemap · affiliates · advertise

Copyright © 2005 GreenCine LLC. All rights reserved.
© 2006 All Media Guide, LLC. Portions of content provided by All Movie Guide®, a trademark of All Media Guide, LLC.