This is fundamentally the problem. It redefines and limits what a piece of video is "worth" going forward. That is where the push back is coming from. Disney can pull a film made in the 70's out of the vault, dust it off, and re-show it a few times to pull in a few million$ to the bottom line. But they can't do that if the movie has been available that whole time on a video streaming service. Looking at the two scenarios.
a) You have a movie that has not been available to buy or watch of 10 years, but was popular at the time, you bring it out again and poof get a bit of a revenue kick.
b) You have a movie that has been available on streaming services for the last 10 years, you re-issue the buyable version and get no uptake at all. Certainly not enough to justify a couple hundred thousand on a advertising it.
The issue here is information economics, you can only 'add' value to a movie by making it unavailable.
a) You have a movie that has not been available to buy or watch of 10 years, but was popular at the time, you bring it out again and poof get a bit of a revenue kick.
b) You have a movie that has been available on streaming services for the last 10 years, you re-issue the buyable version and get no uptake at all. Certainly not enough to justify a couple hundred thousand on a advertising it.
The issue here is information economics, you can only 'add' value to a movie by making it unavailable.