In 1997 Blockbuster decided that DVD would never replace VHS. With that decision he began to dig his grave

In 1997, Warner Bros. proposed blockbuster an exclusivity agreement to rent DVDs. The deal replicated the model that was already practiced with the VHS format, which gave 60% of income to the video store chain. Blockbuster declined because they were confident that magnetic tape would maintain its dominance for years. Warner responded by drastically cutting the wholesale prices of its records and Walmart was quick to take advantage of the opening: In less than a decade, it overtook Blockbuster as Hollywood’s biggest moneymaker. The DVD arrives. In 1997, this format arrived promising better imaging, more durability, and interactive features (we were so young). But it had a giant before it: in 1988, after defeating Sony’s Betamax format, VHS already controlled 95% of the home video market. And a decade later, in 1997, it was an empire: VHS rentals generated $10 billion annually for movie studios, with Blockbuster pocketing about half of that revenue. VHS had reasons not to be afraid: DVD players were very expensive, between $300 and $500, and VHS devices were very accessible. And they were not wrong: DVD sales would not surpass those of VHS until 2003, six years after its commercial release. Warner’s proposal. Warren Lieberfarb, head of Warner Bros.’s home video division and one of the key figures in the development of the DVD format proposed to Blockbuster a deal that replicated the VHS model: exclusive rights to rent the company’s new DVD releases before they hit stores for sale to the public. Warner would receive 40% of the rental income from those records. John Antioco, CEO of Blockbuster, had just arrived at the company after passing through Taco Bell, and his decision could be key to the company’s future. The rejection. Blockbuster decided to reject the proposal because it believed that VHS would maintain its dominance for years. As we said above, a not unreasonable assumption. Furthermore, creating an inventory of DVD movies was an unnecessary expense under the profitable and peaceful reign of VHS. Some later format releases, before the advent of DVD, possibly made Blockbuster think it had done well: JVC’s D-VHS digital tape, which allowed high-definition recording, was a flop. But Blockbuster didn’t have two things: Hollywood support for DVD and the inevitable drop in player prices. The answer. Warner Bros. responded with a strategy that would transform home cinema: it drastically reduced wholesale prices for its DVDs, in order to compete directly with the rental industry. This allowed businesses to sell records at prices that made purchasing more attractive than renting. The North American giant Walmart detected the opportunity very quickly and began to sell DVDs below the cost price, and in this way, for example, they sold their discs for 15 or 20 dollars when renting a VHS cost between 3 and 5 dollars per day. The power of Walmart. Walmart’s network of stores had power in distribution, covering the entire country, that Blockbuster could not match. In addition, it had privileged deals with suppliers and, in general, a fund and resources that allowed it to absorb the losses from the DVDs. In this way, Walmart replaced Blockbuster as the studios’ main source of income in less than a decade. This led to redefining the balance of power in the industry: the most valuable distribution channel was no longer the video store, but became large commercial stores, where consumers no longer only bought movies. Blockbuster, free fall. As is well known, It was not Blockbuster’s last catastrophic decision: in 2000, when Reed Hastings and Marc Randolph, co-founders of Netflix, approached John Antioco about selling their DVD-by-mail rental service for 50 million dollarsthe executive declined the offer. A decade later Blockbuster declared bankruptcy in 2010 while Netflix reached a valuation of billions. They are not the last. The case has parallels with recent technological transitions where dominant companies have underestimated the speed of the public’s adoption of new formats: the physical media industry believed that Blu-ray would maintain its relevance against streaming. And it is also easy to draw lines that link current technology companies with the adoption of AI: who will be the next giant to fall? Header | Stu pendousmat In Xataka | VCR Virus: the anti-copy system of the VHS era that looked like something out of a B horror movie

A British MP did not have permission to build a house in the countryside so he was left with only one option: dig it up

Housing is one of the main problemsnot only because of the scarcity that makes its price skyrocketsbut because, even if you already have a plot on which to build the house of your dreams, urban planning and environmental legislation will not always allow you to build it. That is precisely what happened to British MP Bob Marshall-Andrews in the late 90s, when he wanted to build a house with sea views in Wales, but faced a huge dilemma. Environmental regulations did not allow him to erect any buildings since it was a natural space. There was only one way out so that your home was legal: dig it out. A house in a hole with sea views As and how did he count Wales Onlinelawyer and Labor Party MP Bob Marshall-Andrews and his wife Gill wanted to escape the bustle of the city and enjoy the leisurely pace of the waves crashing into St. Bride’s Bay on the Pembrokeshire cliffs in the far west of Wales. For years, he and his family had been spending vacations in an old military barracks. on Druidston Cliffuntil the structure began to deteriorate and the need to build something new became apparent. That’s where his problems began. The land of the MP and his wife Gill is located about 150 meters from the sea, in the heart of the Pembrokeshire Coast National Park, a protected area since 1949 that covers more than 300 kilometers of coastline with cliffs, open beaches, sheltered bays, marshes and dunes. In this environment, the authorities have been traditionally very strict: the neighbors considered practically impossible to obtain permission even for small glazed extensions in existing houses. To comply with the regulations and still stay in that place, the only way was to literally hide the new house underground, excavating the land and taking advantage of the natural ridge of the cliff as part of the construction. The idea came from his son Tom, who thought it would be a good idea to integrate the house into the landscape by excavating it between two hills. The result was Malatora semi-buried house, almost invisible from afar, which today has become one of the most striking examples of architecture integrated into the landscape of the Welsh coast. So much so that it even has your own reference on Wikipedia. A crazy idea that ended in genius The British parliamentarian left the commission to the architects Jan Kaplicky and Amanda Levetefounders of the Future Systems studio, had a central premise: to obtain legalized housing that would not give arguments to those responsible for the park. to deny license. To avoid any feeling of privilege towards a parliamentarian, the project was planned from the beginning as a construction that would not compete with the landscape, but would hide in it and reduce its visible impact to a minimum, just as Tom, the son of the owners, had proposed. Thus, the architects chose build downexcavating the hill instead of raising a traditional construction, so that the house will be buried under a cover of earth and grass that continues the shape of the hill. This strategy is reminiscent of ancient techniques from northern Scandinavia, where layers of earth and grass were accumulated to form thick walls with good thermal inertia and great camouflage capacity in the terrain. The designers were inspired by the wing section of an airplane for its visible part. The façade facing the sea is resolved with a large glass plane and portholes, while the upper part and sides are buried and covered with grass and vegetation, so that from the park path the house is perceived as a simple mound covered with grass. This extreme integration with the landscape It was decisive for the local authorities to give their approval, since the construction does not break the undulating line of meadows and bushes nor does it introduce visible plot limits, fences or gardens separated from the rest of the park. Furthermore, technically, no construction had been “raised”. Inside, the curved floor plan is organized around a central fireplace, inspired by the great medieval halls. A large semicircular sofa and prefabricated walls that separate the rooms of the house without touching the ceiling, reinforcing the feeling of continuous space. Respect for the environment was taken to the extreme even during its construction, as many of the internal elements, including the bathrooms, were manufactured in workshops and brought in small pieces to the plot. A decision designed to reduce heavy truck traffic to a minimum on a narrow road adapted to the orography of the cliff. The house soon became popular in the area and, given its peculiar design, the locals have baptized it as “the Teletubbies house” due to its resemblance to the half-buried house from the children’s series, a nickname that its owner receives with humor. In Xataka | Of all the places there were to build a $400,000 house, this millionaire chose the most unusual: in a tree Image | Geograph.org (Cered, Deborah Tilley, Simon Mortimer, Michael Graham, Dave Challender)

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.