Redbox Rolls Out Blu-ray Rentals Nationwide For $1.50 A Night

After wavering between charging $1.50 and $2 a night for Blu-ray rentals during its test program, Redbox has decided to go with the cheaper price as it makes the high-definition discs available nationwide at 13,300 kiosks, with plans to nearly double that number by the fall.

To see which kiosks near you are stocked with Blu-ray, check this link before you head out.

Redbox users, is it worth the extra 50 cents a night (DVDs are $1 a night) to watch movies in HD?

Previously: Blu-Ray Redbox Spotted In The Wild, Rental Costs $2 For First Day

Comments

Edit Your Comment

  1. Rocket says:

    How many people don’t own blu-ray players? I don’t.

    • jo3lr0ck5 says:

      I don’t but I think the people who do will be renting the discs, once everyone adopts the tech then perhaps we will see a split between the Redbox stock in regular DVDs and blu-rays.

    • pb5000 says:

      I don’t because I don’t have an HDTV yet. My current tv is about 9-10 years old and it’s not been behaving well lately. Little things it does give me the impression that it’s going to go fairly soon. Once it goes I’ll buy a nice HDTV and a blue ray player and then gladly pay $1.50 for a redbox blue ray rental.

    • winnabago says:

      Seems like some of the hardware makers would be interested in getting blu-ray discs in redbox machines, as many of the commenters here are holding back until this happens to buy a player.

    • MaytagRepairman says:

      I own one but I stopped using it. The particular one I have is a little clunky to use and doesn’t really improve my little 720P 19″ tv that much.

    • gparlett says:

      I bought a nice BD player from Sony for $150 after I got my high def TV. The difference between BD and DVD really is night and day.

      Note that I am in no way an early adopter. I just got a high def television this spring.

    • mbz32190 says:

      I’m waiting till they get down to the ~$30 range. I have an HDTV, but don’t really care about Blu-Ray, but will definitely upgrade in the future. (They are dropping hugely in price..there is one on sale at Target next week for $45.

    • TPA says:

      No Bluray here yet. I’m sure I’ll end up with one at some point…but not yet. I just finally got an HDTV, but only because the computer monitors I just purchased happen to have that built in as well.

      Most of what I watch (foreign/indie films) aren’t available on Bluray so I’ve not bothered with it. I’m quite an audio nut, but haven’t bothered with high-end video in some time.

  2. leprechaunshawn says:

    According to the link, there aren’t any Redbox kiosks with Blu-ray movies near me. Guess I can’t cancel my Netflix account just yet.

  3. tgrwillki says:

    Heck yes, I’ll take this.

    Is it wrong that I want to rip every rental now?

  4. gnubian says:

    Both of the kiosks I use have BD now. The signs were in place when I rented a couple days ago, they weren’t there the last time I rented (12 days prior). Only thing, I don’t own a BD player and I kind of like watching movies on my computer as well which also is with BD.

  5. jo3lr0ck5 says:

    Redbox lines are going to start getting longer now…I hope they start adding multiple boxes at locations, maybe just 1 more box or putting them closer to each other sometimes the movie I want is not at the location and I seriously will not be reserving a movie…

    • Jnetty says:

      How many Redbox location do you have in your town? Not to brag but we have four in our town.

      • jo3lr0ck5 says:

        I live in Miami, there is one Redbox in every Publix supermarket and there are a lot of those here…I have probably rented from 6 machines.

    • TornadoRex says:

      I’ve started to see 2 boxes side-by-side at most of our busy locations around here. Not sure if any of it has to do with Blu-Ray or not, just an observation.

  6. UCLAri: Allergy Sufferer says:

    I would definitely pay 50 cents for HD. It’s a small price to pay for a huge leap in fidelity on my stereo and getting 1080p.

    I know someone will say I’m crazy and that it’s cognitive dissonance, but I experience a huge difference now when I pop in my old DVDs. It’s not quite as stark as going to DVD from VHS, but it’s definitely noticeable.

  7. georgi55 says:

    Wow, time to cancel Netflix for me. I watch 4 movies per month tops (Sunday nights) and don’t use streaming, and only care for new releases.

    • pecan 3.14159265 says:

      I don’t use Redbox (lines are long, I don’t want to have to drive back out just to return a disc) but I also don’t rent blu-ray discs through Netflix, either. And we watch a lot of blu-ray stuff, too. I don’t know, maybe we just haven’t noticed nearly as much how much the quality degrades. Or rather, the stuff we usually watch through Netflix (vs. buying on blu-ray) isn’t the type of stuff you need blu-ray for in order to get a superior experience.

      • georgi55 says:

        So where do you get your blurays from?

        • pecan 3.14159265 says:

          All of the movies we buy, we buy in blu-ray. We don’t buy a lot of movies, though. Anything we watch through Netflix is just standard def because we just never opted to rent blu-rays. A lot of the movies we rent are dramas, comedies, and independent or foreign films (i.e. things that don’t really need blu-ray quality because it’s mostly just talking and not so much special effects). We tend to see a lot of the action movies in theaters, or we have friends who buy the blu-ray and want to watch it with us.

  8. aaron8301 says:

    Now to get me a surround system that supports DTS. My el-cheapo “Home Theater” (if you can call it that) in a box plays Dolby Digital just fine, but down-mixes DTS tracks to 2-channel. ARG.

  9. Jnetty says:

    No Redbox in Long Island have Blu-Ray yet.

  10. drburk says:

    I’m not happy about this. You just slashed the number of DVD rentals in your box and no doubt grew your line. I really like red box but would like to see the ability to return to one side of the machine while renting from another side to help move things along.

  11. c!tizen says:

    I hate the fact that they rent for more than a standard DVD. I get that the tech is new and that the Blu-rays are more expensive than the DVDs, but once they have been rented 20 or so times the Blu-ray is paid for. If you keep it and get charged for it then I can understand having to pay the value of the disk, but come on, renting it should be the same price. I already had to fork over an ungodly amount of cash for the freaking BR player and the HDTV.

    • frank64 says:

      The disks cost more, they should rent for more. You should be looking at the studios for why they do. Redbox isn’t thinking about how much you spent on your hardware. They just know they paid more for the disk.

      I don’t think BR is worth it either, but I don’t blame the middleman who pay more for it. In some ways blame isn’t the issue, to me it is value. As to them recouping. I don’t think you understands how business work, they would want to do more than just recoup the additional cost. In your example after normal DVD’ costs are recouped they should reduce the price?

      • c!tizen says:

        Did I say I didn’t understand it, no, I said I hate it. I appreciate your elementary school rendition of “this is business”, but before you want to go ahead and try to talk down to people maybe you should actually read what they said instead of making insinuations.

        Yes, they want to do more than recoup loss, which they’ll do after the Blu-ray is rented around 20 or 30 times, everything after that goes towards their OPEX and then profit. It doesn’t cost them more money to have the Blu-ray shipped to the location of the box, it doesn’t cost more to have the tech load the Blu-ray into the machine, nor does it cost them more money to have the machine dispense the Blu-ray. If it’s not returned then yes, charge more for it as the media cost you more, but if it’s rented and returned there is no additional cost over the DVD cost model other than the initial purchase (which is heavily discounted for them due to bulk purchasing),and again quickly recouped. I could even see charging a $.50 premium for new releases (to help offset the initial cost barrier) but having them stay more expensive just because you have a more advanced playback device is sad.

        I get it, I know why they do it, yo comprende, but that doesn’t change the fact that they don’t need to do it and that I hate the fact that they do. I may still rent one if there’s something I want to see that they happen to have, but that doesn’t discount my feelings towards having to put more money towards it.

        • c!tizen says:

          I think I came off a little harsh with that opener, my apologies. It’s just that

          “I don’t think you understands how business work, they would want to do more than just recoup the additional cost. In your example after normal DVD’ costs are recouped they should reduce the price?”

          rubbed me the wrong way, especially since that wasn’t’ what I meant. No offese intended, again, my apologies.

          • frank64 says:

            OK, I realize it is difficutl to get the tone out of what we type, and I like to post when I disagree, not to be a jerk, but cause its more interesting! I try to be respectful, but you can’t tell by reading.

            When I read sentiments such as how I took your comments, I think of the people who where OUTRAGED that Netflix would want to charge anything extra for blu-ray. They said things like Netflix should just eat it, or it should be spread out to the general membership. I am a DVD renter and didn’t not want my prices going up to pay extra for something I wasn’t buying. What I don’t understand is when they spent extra for higher technology hardware, and when the software is more expensive, many think it unfair that rental costs are higher? It DOES seem that many don’t understand how business’s work. As far as Netflix is concerned there were also some that complained about the value of the service(they didn’t feel they got enough BR), that had some merit.

            I think BR is going to have extra inventory costs and may need to add more machines. Adding another product line is more expensive beyond the cost of product, with software and inventory management costs. All places mark up things based on a percentage of product, and often have higher margins on higher prices good. There is also some risk, maybe it won’t take? Probably a small risk, but something to consider. Also lowering the price would probably further upset the studios, maybe spurring them to be more aggressive.

            But I really wanted to focus on why the studios and Sony seem to get a pass. I have see some early complaints with Redbox and certainly the Netflix issue. What about the real cost of blu-ray at the initial source? To me the value isn’t there, but I will try a few BR’s just to see, no matter how much better though, my enjoyment is fine on the DVD’s or streaming. A fix to a problems I don’t have.

    • proliance says:

      I get more when I rent a Blu-Ray, so I have no problem with paying more. $1.50 is a still a good bargain.

  12. Southern says:

    I don’t really “care” about Blu-Ray, DVD is plenty good enough for me (Guess I’m just an old fogie that grey up in the VHS/BetaMax/Laserdisc world), although I do have a BD player (PS/3) and a 62″ HDTV (only 1080i though).. And although I can tell the different between Blu-Ray and DVD, I just don’t care enough about the difference in quality to jump on the BD fan-boi wagon.

    I don’t can about it on cable, either. Even though I get HD for free through Comcast, I’d just as soon watch the non-HD version of the channel as the HD version of the channel.

    Still, with that said, if I’m at a redbox and I want to watch a movie and the only version they have is the BD version, I’ll rent the BD version. If they have both versions, I’d probably be just as likely to rent just the DVD version.

    Is it worth an extra 50¢ for the BD version? I’d say yes, simply due to the (retail) price difference between DVD and BD.

  13. myCatCracksMeUp says:

    If we got movies from Redbox, I’d pay the extra 50 cents for Blu-ray. But there are none directly on my route between home and work, so we get our movies from Netflix; blue-ray is our default choice for movies there.

  14. BrianneG says:

    My husband would definitely pay. He also only wants to stream the HD stuff from netflix. Personally, I don’t care and I’m cheap.

  15. Starfury says:

    They’re charging $2 for the first night on Blu-Ray at the kiosks that I rent from in the SF Bay Area. I’ve also noticed there are 2 machines in the same locations now; I’m guessing with the addition of blu-ray they need more.

  16. TPA says:

    Let’s see.. Redbox = $1.50/night, Netflix = $11/mo (figuring cheapest plan + bluray add-on). 7 movies a month is what that comes out to… NOT including gas and my time.

    So assuming Redbox is 1 mile away @ $0.50/mi (the IRS rate for mileage), it’s an additional $1 per movie rented. So $2.50 per movie or 4 movies/mo.

    Then there’s the issue of my time. Figuring it’s probably a half hour affair to get in the car, go to the Redbox kiosk, wait in line, then drive home, then repeat this sequence to return the movie, now we’re up to $22.50/movie.

    No thanks, I’ll suffer the loss of instant gratification and wait a whole day so that I’m not spending $22.50 to rent a single movie for a single night.

    /soapbox on/ It never ceases to amaze me how many people are willing to pay less at the register yet pay far more with their own time. Self-checkout, waiting in line at Wal-Mart, etc. It’s only yourself that you’re fooling. /soapbox off/

    • Jeff_Number_3 says:

      If you’re constantly being given 22.50 an hour, and would lose all that by driving over to a store to rent a movie, how much are you losing a month to bowel movements?

    • JennyCupcakes misses her grandson says:

      Agreed. I am far too lazy to drive to get a movie from Redbox. I’d rather walk to my mailbox, get my movie, and drop it in the mail bin at work, ad nauseum.

  17. ARPRINCE says:

    No BDs in my zip (Norther NJ)…WTF???

  18. Serenefengshui says:

    These arrived in Seattle. Just rented one the other day. $1.50 and easy-peasy RedBox as usual. A nice Blu-Ray sticker on the box identified it.

    We’re new to Blu-Ray. Wouldn’t have bothered to upgrade except our DVD player died and that seemed a good time to upgrade.

  19. wild homes loves you but chooses darkness! says:

    This is great news. We’ve got a Netflix account with Blu-ray support but sometimes you just don’t have anything to watch, and Blockbuster is just nuts in terms of pricing. If you intended to keep the movie out for five days it might not be highway robbery to pay what Blockbuster is asking… but who keeps a movie out for five days anymore? I never rent anything unless I intend to watch it pretty much immediately. And if something comes up and I can’t watch it immediately, it’s nice to know another day is only $1.50.

  20. MSUHitman says:

    It’s worth it simply because it’s MUCH harder to scratch a Blu-Ray than it is on a DVD. Of the about 5 times I’ve rented Redbox, all 5 disks were scratched to some degree, with one of them unwatchable.

  21. MyNameIsNigh says:

    I’ve really never cared how “crisp” and “vibrant” a movie I’m watching is so blu-ray honestly hasn’t been much of a concern of mine, but I won’t stomp all over somebody who thinks it’s the best thing since Betamax or whatever.
    I’m only guessing but I figure Blu-ray’s will be $1.50 for a certain amount of time, then they’ll either raise it (if it’s popular) or lower it (if it’s not popular). Not much different than cassettes into CD’s, VHS into DVD’s, etc. New technology has too much of both a hgh expectancy and growth for any format to last very long which just opens the market for the newest while tossing the older into a crate next to the Ark of the Covenant or something along those lines. Minus the Nazi garbage, mind you.