Even so, Sam. The only thing that concerns is the entry legal in Profiler terms. Thisn happens frequently, but we have no provision for anything than pirates, made up UPCs, gammes, tapes, or in some otherv way ILLEGAL to Profiler. There is nothing in the Rules that requires that we check to make sure a release announcement was actually followed up on.

Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
True, but what is the point of having UPCs for releases that don't exist?

Beyond that, the rules say, "The main database should contain information about legal, professionally produced discs."  I guess it could be argued that, because this release was never professionally produced, it doesn't belong in the main database. 

The reason that MGM went the MOD route was that they were not going to press copies.  The demand is there, but not enough to justify a full blown release.  So, they went the MOD route via Amazon.  They are still professionally released, just via a one-at-a-time method.

Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
Quoting MrVideo:

Quote:
The reason that MGM went the MOD route was that they were not going to press copies.  The demand is therem but not enough to justify a full blown release.  So, they went the MOD route via Amazon.  They are still professionally released, just via a one-at-a-time method.

I was talking about the UPC, that is currently in the Main DB, for the non-existent Complete Season Two.  The MOD profiles, absolutely should be in the DB.

That is an assumption, as I have described, pal. We can't KNOW that for a certainty. The best that I am willing to say is that I believe it was never releases but I do not KNOW that for a fact, and can't prove that there is not a captive copy out there somewhere. What I do KNOW factually is that while the existing Profile may not have been released, it does not represent an illegal copy to Profiler in any way.

Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
What I do KNOW factually is that while the existing Profile may not have been released, it does not represent an illegal copy to Profiler in any way.

If you mean illegal copy as in a bootleg, or pirate version, I'm certainly not saying that.

I'm saying, and I think TheMadMartain is as well, that the current profile was based upon early information about the upcoming release and that the actual release is not based on that UPC.

I'm saying that over time, that UPC will be proven to be invalid and will ultimately be removed.

In the meantime, I'll be putting together an initial contribution containing initial profiles for each DVD case.  It won't be tomorrow, as other things are scheduled first.

Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
Typically, Mr. Video,, this game that Hollywood has started playing splitting Seasons into 2 Volumes, appears to allow them to make more money as opposed to the price they could command for a single season,

I do not buy those split season releases.  But this release, is not in that category.  It is a full season two release.  One price ($29.99) gets you the full season.  It was a packaging issue.  It is no different than any other multi-disc full season release.  In this case, there isn't a slipcase to hold the two DVD cases.  This release was done on the cheap.  Since it takes eight single layer DVD-R discs to encompass the release, it had to be split into two DVD cases, as I don't know of a cheap off-the-shelf 8 disc DVD case.  But 4 disc DVD cases are.

If this was a split release, where I would have had to pay for each set of four discs separately, I wouldn't have started this thread.  Instead it is a single release, containing two DVD cases with 4 DVDs each.  Each case getting its own UPC number.

I just thought of something and that is what to enter for the price.  I think the list is $39.99, but that is for both DVD cases.  Do I split the cost down the middle?

Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
Hmmm interesting question, it comes in TWO separate cases not bound together in any way?

Yep.  The only difference in the artwork is that it notes "Discs 1 - 4" and "Discs 5 - 8".  No cheap slip case.

Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
I think I would probably split the price between the two.

Thanks, that is what I was thinking of doing.