<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: +(Blockbuster+MovieLink) -Netflix</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.parchayi.com/2007/08/09/blockbustermovielink-netflix/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.parchayi.com/2007/08/09/blockbustermovielink-netflix/</link>
	<description>Introduction to Investment, Credit and Personal Finance for Us Regular Joes</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 May 2010 12:50:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan Salem Baskin</title>
		<link>http://www.parchayi.com/2007/08/09/blockbustermovielink-netflix/comment-page-1/#comment-1321</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan Salem Baskin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Aug 2007 13:03:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.parchayi.com/2007/08/09/blockbustermovielink-netflix/#comment-1321</guid>
		<description>It seems to me that Blockbuster waited about 10 years too late to realize that its business model isn&#039;t distribution, necessarily, but consumer knowledge and experience re entertainment content.  There&#039;s no reason to believe that people will &#039;shop&#039; via Movielink-rebranded-Blockbuster than they would have before the purchase.  The challenge is -- and always has been -- to help consumers find entertainment...and this is something that Blockbuster could have &#039;owned&#039; because of its rental data history.  Putting the name on another interim (or just various) distribution channel is a waste of money, I fear.  I&#039;ve written more about this at DIM BULB, http://dimbulb.typepad.com/ , if you&#039;d like to check it out.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It seems to me that Blockbuster waited about 10 years too late to realize that its business model isn&#8217;t distribution, necessarily, but consumer knowledge and experience re entertainment content.  There&#8217;s no reason to believe that people will &#8217;shop&#8217; via Movielink-rebranded-Blockbuster than they would have before the purchase.  The challenge is &#8212; and always has been &#8212; to help consumers find entertainment&#8230;and this is something that Blockbuster could have &#8216;owned&#8217; because of its rental data history.  Putting the name on another interim (or just various) distribution channel is a waste of money, I fear.  I&#8217;ve written more about this at DIM BULB, <a href="http://dimbulb.typepad.com/" rel="nofollow">http://dimbulb.typepad.com/</a> , if you&#8217;d like to check it out.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
