Of course it's not a huge factor but still it's amazing the major studios liquidated millions of their HD DVD stock for pennies on the dollar, only to have it reappear and compete against their full price BD titles. Sure, their latest releases aren't affected but hundreds of earlier titles are.

Maybe Warner, Paramount and Universal thought Red titles would be sold more inconspicuously but it must burn them a bit to see brand new Red copies selling for 1/5 the price of Blu right on the same Amazon page!

Anyway, I'm sure glad the bargain titles showed up, it is a great way to enlarge your HD disc library with classics. There's no way I could have justified 200 BDs in a year's time.

I've been buying a ton of HD dvds lately - even movies that I probably would have never given a chance before. That's the thing that I don't get with the initial pricing of HD DVD and the current pricing of Blu Ray. At $25, only fanatics and big fans of that particular movie are going to make a purchase. At $5-10, you're going to pull in people who probably wouldn't have given your movie a second look. Would 3 or more people buy it at $5-10 vs 1 person at $25? I'd have to say so....the current situation probably proves my point.

i'm sure it's taking a little bit away from the "catalog catch up" titles but not much...

warner titles the BDs have exactly the same encode
paramount it's usually the same encode (a few exceptions with small differences from the different encodes)
universal has different encodes but most of them have either no improvement or a minor improvement (with a couple titles DNRed for their bluray version)

I don't see cheap leftover HD DVD has any effect on BD sales since there's no new movie titles on HD DVD for a year now.

Universal has improved the audio track to DTS Master/HD on BD over the HD DVD. So, if you want the best audio quality, BD version is better than HD DVD. (This is where it was a good thing HD DVD failed the market since it doesn't have the disc capacity to include DTS Master/HD.)

Only the older Warner Bros BD titles have the same encoding as the HD DVD. All the newer BD titles released on BD only since the death of HD DVD generally have better encoding.

Cheap HD DVDs are having the same effect on Blu Ray sales as used LD sales. Statistically insignificant to the point of complete irrelevance.

I would think it does have an impact. I've spent over a $100 bucks at least in the last month on HD dvds. Maybe not all of it but definately some of the money would have been spent on buying BDs otherwise. I can't been the only one.

I would think it does have an impact. I've spent over a $100 bucks at least in the last month on HD dvds. Maybe not all of it but definately some of the money would have been spent on buying BDs otherwise. I can't been the only one.

I think there is some impact, but it is complex.

If HD-DVD did not exist, Bluray would have been established earlier and many HD-DVD owners would now own a bluray player. The amount of media bought would be a lot less, since the price and availability of great titles in HD-DVD is causing the buying spree.

The overall amount of money being spent may not be a huge amount more than if bluray were the only option: if I owned only a bluray player, I may have spent the same amount over the last year, but would only have 10 or 20 bluray disks as opposed to over a hundred HD-DVD's. I would be more discerning about titles, and may have missed some very good movies (black snake moan, lucky number slevin...) because of that.

I also think that ultimately it may help bluray, since the interest in HD disks is maintained in a sophisticated group of movie fans. Alternatives are out there, and some may be more prone to invest in a bluray player because of the good experience they've had with an HD-DVD player, instead of buyng an HD Tivo, going to Apple TV, etc....

In the short term, it keeps me from buying a lower quality bluray player until the OPPO is available, while I still have the best quality HD on great titles at prices that even in this economy are incredible. Superman at $1.95?

Cheap HD DVDs are having the same effect on Blu Ray sales as used LD sales. Statistically insignificant to the point of complete irrelevance. Exactly. Cheap HD-DVDs make it nice for people who have HD-DVD players and want to buy cheap discs. I've bought some movies I never would have considered owning, but at $5 each, I couldn't pass up. :)

larry

I quit buying Blu-Ray's. (I never buy new releases anyway--just older titles on sale.) I have too many HD DVD's to watch to bother buying Blu-Ray's. I just rent new release Blu-Ray's and move on unless it's a concert or music disc that I have to have.

I quit buying Blu-Ray's. (I never buy new releases anyway--just older titles on sale.) I have too many HD DVD's to watch to bother buying Blu-Ray's. I just rent new release Blu-Ray's and move on unless it's a concert or music disc that I have to have.

With your sizable collection its going to take you a few years just to see daylight. :D Seen your name floating around here a few times, good to see you around after the HD forum days.

What's zero over zero?

Sometimes it seem, the HD leftover market has as much effect on BD as the BD market has on SD. #'s may prove me wrong but it just seems that BD has had such little impact on the general market since the war ended that I don't even realize it is out there.

that could be due to the high box prices or marginal releases on BD but wasn't that suppose to all end last Christmas?

I have a LG BH200 dual format player I bought to ease me into BR last fall. Before the war ended I was on the prowl like every1 else for cheap HD & stocked up like mad.
Sicne the end of the war, I have bought exactly 2 items that were readily accessible on HD -TDK & HFRO.
Everything else is a non-event ie I have bought zippo else.
Where's all the content & cheap prices that were being promised?

I don't think the studios were expecting my kind of reception.

Cheap HD DVDs are having the same effect on Blu Ray sales as used LD sales. Statistically insignificant to the point of complete irrelevance.

I disagree. The number of dedicated high-def buyers is still relatively small compared to DVD buyers (especially outside the weekly Top 20 lists) but it's a dedicated bunch that has disposable income and the interest to buy high-def. Only AAA blockbusters like "The Dark Knight" approach DVD-size sales; the vast majority of BD releases don't generate anywhere the same level of interest or sales. So studios with loads of catalogue to re-sell on BD are counting on this still-small hardcore base to keep their wallets open. But even if a small percentage of these high-def buyers are both BD and HD-DVD owners (let's say 10 or 15%) the money being spent on discounted HD-DVD's (which have already been registered in the studios' books as losses) isn't generating new income. And those cheap HD-DVD's bought online or discount stores add-up to sums ($30, $75, $100+, etc.) that aren't being spent on their BD equivalents (like Warner's Kubrick movies or Paramount's Will Ferrell comedies) or the new catalogue titles being put out ("Amadeus," "How The West Was Won," etc.).

I just bought "The Untouchables" and "Planet Earth" HD-DVD's brand-new for $10 and $25 even though the BD version were readily available for $15 and $50, respectively. I'm partial to HD-DVD (it's the format I supported during 'the war') but that doesn't mean there aren't loads of catalogue titles on BD not available on HD-DVD that don't interest me ("South Pacific," "Two Evil Eyes," "The Robe," various Criterion titles, etc.). I'm just tight with my money and want to stretch a buck, which is what HD-DVD (with its virtually-indistinguishable picture/sound) is for. New BD owners coming into the market will eventually minimize the effect of multi-format owners into total insignificance. I'm not saying the continued sale of discounted HD-DVD's will sink Blu-ray. But, at least while BD is still small-enough to be dwarfed by DVD when looking at the totality of the market (not just the Top 20), every HD-DVD sold with a BD counterpart or purchased with dough set apart by the buyer as 'high-def expense' is a lost sale for BD.

... (This is where it was a good thing HD DVD failed the market since it doesn't have the disc capacity to include DTS Master/HD.)

...

That's strange since I have numerous HD DVDs with DTS Master or TrueHD, and one HD DVD with both DTS Master and TrueHD. Go figure. :rolleyes:

That's strange since I have numerous HD DVDs with DTS Master or TrueHD, and one HD DVD with both DTS Master and TrueHD. Go figure. :rolleyes:

Which one has DTS Master and TrueHD?

...I never buy new releases anyway--just older titles on sale.) I have too many HD DVD's to watch to bother buying Blu-Ray's...


... The number of dedicated high-def buyers is still relatively small compared to DVD buyers (especially outside the weekly Top 20 lists) but it's a dedicated bunch that has disposable income and the interest to buy high-def. Only AAA blockbusters like "The Dark Knight" approach DVD-size sales; the vast majority of BD releases don't generate anywhere the same level of interest or sales. So studios with loads of catalogue to re-sell on BD are counting on this still-small hardcore base to keep their wallets open. But even if a small percentage of these high-def buyers are both BD and HD-DVD owners (let's say 10 or 15%) the money being spent on discounted HD-DVD's (which have already been registered in the studios' books as losses) isn't generating new income. And those cheap HD-DVD's bought online or discount stores add-up to sums ($30, $75, $100+, etc.) that aren't being spent on their BD equivalents (like Warner's Kubrick movies or Paramount's Will Ferrell comedies) or the new catalogue titles being put out ("Amadeus," "How The West Was Won," etc.).

... I'm just tight with my money and want to stretch a buck, which is what HD-DVD (with its virtually-indistinguishable picture/sound) is for. New BD owners coming into the market will eventually minimize the effect of multi-format owners into total insignificance. I'm not saying the continued sale of discounted HD-DVD's will sink Blu-ray. But, at least while BD is still small-enough to be dwarfed by DVD when looking at the totality of the market (not just the Top 20), every HD-DVD sold with a BD counterpart or purchased with dough set apart by the buyer as 'high-def expense' is a lost sale for BD.


I have to agree. I finally bought a large 1080p DLP last year so needed to get a HiDef player and some quality discs. I was leaning toward Blu-ray but could not ignore the fire sales on HD DVD, players and discs. If I had gone Blu I would have struggled to justify a $400 player and 20 discs. Instead with HD DVD, I have a large library of discs so feel no immediate need to make the plunge into BD. Without HD DVD I would have.

dawn of the dead, eastern promises, the departed, batman begins, the lady in the water (on the BD the true hd track is missing), the kubrick titles, battlestar galactica season one, next, pan`s labyrinth, feast, pulse, the world`s fastest indian, etc...

let`s not forget the first warner BDs had mpeg2 encoding...

dawn of the dead, eastern promises, the departed, batman begins, the lady in the water (on the BD the true hd track is missing), the kubrick titles, battlestar galactica season one, next, pan`s labyrinth, feast, pulse, the world`s fastest indian, etc...

let`s not forget the first warner BDs had mpeg2 encoding...


dawn of the dead is truehd only
eastern promises is truehd only
the departed is truehd only
batman begins is truehd only
lady in the water is truehd only
the kubrick titles are all truehd only
battlestar galactica is truehd only
next is truehd only
pan's labyrinth is DTS-HD only
feast is truehd only
pulse is truehd only
world's fastest indian is truehd only

not seeing any with both truehd and dts-hd

I disagree. The number of dedicated high-def buyers is still relatively small compared to DVD buyers (especially outside the weekly Top 20 lists) but it's a dedicated bunch that has disposable income and the interest to buy high-def. Only AAA blockbusters like "The Dark Knight" approach DVD-size sales; the vast majority of BD releases don't generate anywhere the same level of interest or sales. So studios with loads of catalogue to re-sell on BD are counting on this still-small hardcore base to keep their wallets open. But even if a small percentage of these high-def buyers are both BD and HD-DVD owners (let's say 10 or 15%) the money being spent on discounted HD-DVD's (which have already been registered in the studios' books as losses) isn't generating new income. And those cheap HD-DVD's bought online or discount stores add-up to sums ($30, $75, $100+, etc.) that aren't being spent on their BD equivalents (like Warner's Kubrick movies or Paramount's Will Ferrell comedies) or the new catalogue titles being put out ("Amadeus," "How The West Was Won," etc.).

I just bought "The Untouchables" and "Planet Earth" HD-DVD's brand-new for $10 and $25 even though the BD version were readily available for $15 and $50, respectively. I'm partial to HD-DVD (it's the format I supported during 'the war') but that doesn't mean there aren't loads of catalogue titles on BD not available on HD-DVD that don't interest me ("South Pacific," "Two Evil Eyes," "The Robe," various Criterion titles, etc.). I'm just tight with my money and want to stretch a buck, which is what HD-DVD (with its virtually-indistinguishable picture/sound) is for. New BD owners coming into the market will eventually minimize the effect of multi-format owners into total insignificance. I'm not saying the continued sale of discounted HD-DVD's will sink Blu-ray. But, at least while BD is still small-enough to be dwarfed by DVD when looking at the totality of the market (not just the Top 20), every HD-DVD sold with a BD counterpart or purchased with dough set apart by he buyer as 'high-def expense' is a lost sale for BD.


And, I think you overestimate the number of people who are like you. Contrary to what this sub-forum would like to believe, the number of people who still actively own both formats is dwindling. There were fewer than 1,000,000 owners of HD DVD players (that's being generous considering the number of multiple player owners). Sure, there are people who are buying HD DVDs on the cheap instead of buying BD. But, if it were more than 2,000 people, I'd be surprised. And, the number buying more than a few discs here and there at this point probably number in the 10s.

The notion that people buying HD DVDs instead of titles only available on BD is, again---statistically insignificant to the point of irrelevance. Someone who would buy any of the few titles available on HD DVD instead of something like Amadeus says that they are simply collecting cheap titles. If someone is buying The Fast and the Furious or The 40 Year Old Virgin simply because they are $5 and that means they aren't going to spend $20 on a BD of Amadeus tells me that they probably weren't going to buy Amadeus, anyway.


Yes, there are people who are not buying into Blu-Ray because they are too invested in HD DVD. But, it's not having an effect on Blu-Ray. The people who are doing that are limited to this forum and a few like it. There simply aren't many of you out there. You're as likely to find someone looking for used Laser Discs, or old CED discs.

dawn of the dead is truehd only
eastern promises is truehd only
the departed is truehd only
batman begins is truehd only
lady in the water is truehd only
the kubrick titles are all truehd only
battlestar galactica is truehd only
next is truehd only
pan's labyrinth is DTS-HD only
feast is truehd only
pulse is truehd only
world's fastest indian is truehd only

not seeing any with both truehd and dts-hd


I replied to a poster who said there was no space for a losssles as I thought he meant there was no place for one or the other, not both true hd or dts ma. what would be the need to have them both? other than give fodder to experiment for people like us on this forum.

you replied to someone who asked

Which one has DTS Master and TrueHD?

in response to

That's strange since I have numerous HD DVDs with DTS Master or TrueHD, and one HD DVD with both DTS Master and TrueHD. Go figure. :rolleyes:


gotta pay careful attention to who you are quoting...


and i only know of two discs with both truehd and dts-hd ... both of them are on blu-ray

close encounters of the third kind... not sure why they did both here... i assume Spielberg had something to do with the DTS-HD track being there but why they also had truehd i don't know
top gun... the truehd is 5.1ch the DTS-HD is 6.1ch not sure why they didn't ditch the truehd track or why they didn't make the truehd track 6.1ch and leave off the DTS-HD

and of course the reissue of fifth element has truehd and pcm (and i think the bluray version of 300 also has truehd and pcm.. there may be others too)

And, I think you overestimate the number of people who are like you. Contrary to what this sub-forum would like to believe, the number of people who still actively own both formats is dwindling.


Could you explain further on this comment? Are you saying those who have purchased HD players are dumping them onto someone else or simply trashing them after buying blu players?

... Are you saying those who have purchased HD players are dumping them onto someone else or simply trashing them after buying blu players?


I wonder about that too. My HDTV has a free HDMI port earmarked for a BD player down the road. I see no reason not to use both HD and BD players, it's a piece of cake to hit the Source/Input key to choose. I know some people cut down on components to simplify but I intend to use what I've got.

The studio's will just get you again later when your HDDVD player dies...and by then, the like HD title will probably be relatively cheap on BD too.

Then again with the reliability i'm seeing from Toshiba's players....could be sooner than later.

I don't know what impact cheap HD-DVDs have on Blu-ray, but I like them! I bought 20 HD-DVDs last week averaging around $5 each. I got the Ocean's Trilogy for less than $18 when the Blu-ray retails for $80. :D

The impact of BD on BD is about as much as HD on BD.
What a yawner of a format.
Where are all the spectacular sales after the war was over?

For every1 who counters that it's the economy that has as much to do with BR's tepid #'s well that makes every HD sales that is still going on 1 less dollar to count for BD.

HD is BD's Afghanistan. LOL

gotta pay careful attention to who you are quoting...






geez man you are right :eek:

my apologies to hernanu , I did not want to use that quote but somehow I did, guess it was late and I was tired so I did it by accident. I meant to quote Vortex3D .

geez man you are right :eek:

my apologies to hernanu , I did want to use that quote but somehow I did, guess it was late and I was tired so I did it by accident. I meant to quote Vortex3D .

S'alright - I slip up pretty often - just ask my wife and kids.

Actually, I believe there is a short-term impact. There are many "purple" people out there who will simply buy the better bargain.

Frankly, I'm surprised that studios did not destroy their existing HD DVD stock in order to prevent what is happening.

That being said, I believe that when these sales subside -- as I think they will eventually -- it will help blu-ray sales, since a whole lot of individuals who have become addicted to collecting shiny discs will continue the habit with blu-ray.

Could you explain further on this comment? Are you saying those who have purchased HD players are dumping them onto someone else or simply trashing them after buying blu players?

No, I'm just saying that the people who own both HD DVD and BD are basically limited to people on forums like this. They aren't a large portion of the BD owning population. They aren't even a small portion of the BD owning population. And, the number of people who will continue to purchase movies on an obsolete format (by that I mean easily replaceable machine that they can go to the store and buy) is an even smaller portion of that already smaller subset.

I never said that they don't exist, it's just that they aren't important to the sales of Blu-Ray discs. I can almost guarantee that they aren't discussed when meetings are held about what movies to release next on the format. And, I doubt they are blamed if a catalog disc does poorly upon release.


Just like people who will only buy music on vinyl aren't considered to be affecting the sales of CDs. Sure, they exist. They just don't matter in the larger scheme of things.

No, I'm just saying that the people who own both HD DVD and BD are basically limited to people on forums like this. They aren't a large portion of the BD owning population. They aren't even a small portion of the BD owning population. And, the number of people who will continue to purchase movies on an obsolete format (by that I mean easily replaceable machine that they can go to the store and buy) is an even smaller portion of that already smaller subset.

I never said that they don't exist, it's just that they aren't important to the sales of Blu-Ray discs. I can almost guarantee that they aren't discussed when meetings are held about what movies to release next on the format. And, I doubt they are blamed if a catalog disc does poorly upon release.


Just like people who will only buy music on vinyl aren't considered to be affecting the sales of CDs. Sure, they exist. They just don't matter in the larger scheme of things.

People who participate in forums like this are a small minority of the HDM buying public. HD DVD is no exception. Nearly one million HD DVD players were sold by the time Toshiba threw in the towel, and perhaps up to another million were sold after that. So 1.5-2.0 HD DVD players is a lot to have out there, and a decent percentage of those will be in use for some time to come.

People who participate in forums like this are a small minority of the HDM buying public. HD DVD is no exception. Nearly one million HD DVD players were sold by the time Toshiba threw in the towel, and perhaps up to another million were sold after that. So 1.5-2.0 HD DVD players is a lot to have out there, and a decent percentage of those will be in use for some time to come.

And, I still doubt cheap HD DVDs are having much of an effect on Blu-Ray.

And, I still doubt cheap HD DVDs are having much of an effect on Blu-Ray.

My guess is that they affect the BD sales by about 10% on those titles they have in common, and of course less over time. Certainly nothing to worry about.

And, I still doubt cheap HD DVDs are having much of an effect on Blu-Ray.

I don't think anyone is trying to claim HD is having this great impact, rather we do believe it does have some impact. No, BDs problem is the $29 dollar prices in the Wal-Marts, K-Marts, Sears and Targets of the world. A lot of movie buying is on impulse and seeing that display. When you read how the cheap HDs are disappearing quickly in the cut out bins at the local grocery stores no matter how you cut it this is movie money being spent on Hi Def material and the color is not blue.

On a side note about obsolete. I always use my HD player rather than blu when upconverting dvds because it does a better job. As long as the players play and the movies spin there is nothing obsolete until they no longer serve a purpose.

May answer too is "no impact." My impression is that BD sales are overwhelmingly new titles, with catalog releases accounting for relatively few purchases (other than elaborate re-masterings of A-list titles).

Meanwhile, what we're buying on HD-DVD are mostly discs that would be in the bargain bin no matter what format they were, that almost nobody would buy unless they were dirt cheap. Even the BD releases of these titles, as they trickle out, are mostly cheap to begin with and will soon be under $10 if they're not already.

And of course this cheap HD-DVD market will dwindle to nothing presently if, like me, everyone with an HD-DVD player eventually realizes that even at $3 movies like "Nacho Libre" or "Norbit" are not really collectibles. :)

Meanwhile, what we're buying on HD-DVD are mostly discs that would be in the bargain bin no matter what format they were, that almost nobody would buy unless they were dirt cheap. Even the BD releases of these titles, as they trickle out, are mostly cheap to begin with and will soon be under $10 if they're not already.


Lead me to this brick and mortar bargain bin. :)

Great signature by the way. Guilty as charged way too often.

I'd say no effect at all. I think most of us are simply picking up cheap movies we wouldn't have bought on either format for full price.

I'd say no effect at all. I think most of us are simply picking up cheap movies we wouldn't have bought on either format for full price.

Well, I don't know if I'd go that far. The disks I've bought I may not have bought if they were DVD's because:

1. They are too expensive and I like them, but not enough to drop $17 on them - ex: Accepted (my kids love this), Breakfast Club (wife loves this).

2. I didn't know about them, they are not in my wheelhouse, but turned out to be excellent : Lucky Number Slevin, Mercury Rising, The Prestige, Galapagos, Planet Earth, Smoking Aces, Black Snake Moan.

3. They are guilty pleasures and I normally couldn't convince myself to get'em: TMNT, The Corpse Bride.

Now, the rest of the disks I bought I wanted and would have bought them for full price, given the finances. Just a small sample:

Blade Runner, The Harry Potter films, King Kong, The Chronicles of Riddick, MI:1,2,3, Troy, The Kingdom, Happy Feet, Shooter, all three Bournes, Casablanca, Robin Hood, all three Matrix (ces?), Serenity, We were Soldiers...

I could go on, because my metric for buying anything is that I like it well enough to spend a couple of hours watching it. It's a waste otherwise. My main problem is finding time to watch the movies I have, since I do like to re-watch them also.

So I don't think most of my purchases have been mediocre movies I wouldn't have bought otherwise. Most have been really good to excellent movies that I may not have bought strictly due to finances: 100 movies @ average $5-6 or 20 movies at an average of $20-25. The 80 remaining are still desirable, there is just a money limit for entertainment.

I still don't have and won't have Norbit, et.al.

I do agree that the effect on Bluray is small, as someone mentioned, about 10% or so if someone were to press me for a number.

The last time that Home Media Magazine did a Blu-ray/HD DVD sales percentage from Nielsen, which was for the week ending April 27, 2008 (http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/questex/hom262891WCV/index.php), the ratio was 93% Blu-ray and 7% HD DVD. I think that HD DVD sales have decreased since than and that at this point in time HD DVD sales have very little effect on Blu-ray sales.

Personally, I haven't been buying many BDs since I've been buying up a lot of clearance priced HD DVDs. I still buy new stuff on BD, but not really any catalog films.

I don't see cheap leftover HD DVD has any effect on BD sales since there's no new movie titles on HD DVD for a year now.

Universal has improved the audio track to DTS Master/HD on BD over the HD DVD. So, if you want the best audio quality, BD version is better than HD DVD. (This is where it was a good thing HD DVD failed the market since it doesn't have the disc capacity to include DTS Master/HD.)

Only the older Warner Bros BD titles have the same encoding as the HD DVD. All the newer BD titles released on BD only since the death of HD DVD generally have better encoding.
Your post suggests DTS HD-Master is superior to other lossless formats, this is untrue! Lossless is lossless be it a DTS format or a Dolby format. True, some BD have higher bitrate soundtracks, but that doesn't mean the video encoding is superior, or even as good! There's no reason to presume the BD to be superior, sometimes it may be, but other times it may not be.

The studio's will just get you again later when your HDDVD player dies...and by then, the like HD title will probably be relatively cheap on BD too.

Then again with the reliability i'm seeing from Toshiba's players....could be sooner than later.
Hey, mon -- my RCA HDV-5000 still does fine :)!

Frankly, I'm surprised that studios did not destroy their existing HD DVD stock in order to prevent what is happening.

it would cost more than what they are losing on BD sales of the same titles... considering they would have to buy all that stock back

Where are you guys buying your hd-dvds from? In my neck of the woods, I haven't seen a hd-dvd display since the format war ended. Hell I can't even remember my local Targets and Best Buy putting them on a firesale.

Where are you guys buying your hd-dvds from? In my neck of the woods, I haven't seen a hd-dvd display since the format war ended. Hell I can't even remember my local Targets and Best Buy putting them on a firesale.
Check the deals sticky thread at the top of this forum.

larry

BD is selling an average of nearly 700K units per week.

In July 2008, HD DVD was selling under 5K per week. Current sales will be even lower.

So no, no impact really.

I can't speak for the total market, but for me the final HD-DVD buying frenzy I had when the format died has made me think twice about purchasing any BD title for $30. That sounds like a lot of money for a disc to me now.

Many catalog BD titles are down to $15 or less. I doubt cheap HD-DVD titles have anything to do with that but at least I'm starting to buy a BD or two once in a while now.

Where are you guys buying your hd-dvds from? In my neck of the woods, I haven't seen a hd-dvd display since the format war ended. Hell I can't even remember my local Targets and Best Buy putting them on a firesale.

They didn't. They shipped them back for credit, and then those were sold to liquidators who seem to have sold the combo disks to grocery chains.

Where are you guys buying your hd-dvds from? In my neck of the woods, I haven't seen a hd-dvd display since the format war ended. Hell I can't even remember my local Targets and Best Buy putting them on a firesale.You can currently find a pretty good selection at some Fry's stores, if you have one closeby. E.g. the one in Palo Alto in the SF Bay Area has an entire aisle full of them. Otherwise it's pretty much online only now, AFAIK.

I can't speak for the total market, but for me the final HD-DVD buying frenzy I had when the format died has made me think twice about purchasing any BD title for $30. That sounds like a lot of money for a disc to me now.

Many catalog BD titles are down to $15 or less. I doubt cheap HD-DVD titles have anything to do with that but at least I'm starting to buy a BD or two once in a while now.

I think Scowl has an important point, it certainly was a driving factor for me. I got a big 1080p DLP a year ago so of course wanted HD media in the worst way. I expected to go Blu as it had just emerged from the format wars but $28 discs took my breath away. I could justify a PS3 but not discs at that price. So I balked and instead started looking for a good upconverter for my large library of SD DVDs since my Sony NS77H wasn't doing a good enough job. Oppos were the way to go but I couldn't justify the price at the time when a little more would buy the PS3 which could upscale too.

So I was leaning to the PS3 again but really wanted a nice looking player that looked more like my other HT components. And I wanted true HD, there was no way I'd continue buying SD DVDs. That's when I went with an HD DVD player since it looked great as a component and was an excellent upscaler. Also the $10 prices on true HD media at the time enticed me to get a few favorites so I bought a few. Amazing! So I bought more. And prices kept dropping so I bought more. And more. HD DVD gave me everything I wanted at amazing prices - except new titles and I can live with that.

I'll go Blu-ray sometime but won't spend a fortune on discs, red discs taught me that. No doubt titles that I have will show up for $5 on BD but it'll be quite a while so I feel good about my HD library.

I'm sure a tiny percentage of the market is buying red but HD DVD and SD DVD have forced the price of Blu-ray to become more attractive and that's a good thing for all of us.

Don't know, but my perspective is that if a film is available on HD DVD, why should I concern myself with a BD version? I guess what colors the issue is that I was originally an HD DVD enthusiast, but still -- Today I have more BD than HD DVD. Not meaning it's a better choice, but that's where further releases are! Fundamentally, I'm an HD DVD loyalist, but since BD is the only active option (outside of SD DVD), I really don't see much choice. If it's available on HD DVD, that's my preferance. Otherwise, it's either BD or SD DVD.

I was happy to buy over 150 HD DVDs and I now have about 20 Blu-rays.

I have a spare player tucked away in case of damage or fault.
So, I have ended up with a nice little HD movie collection (many genuine classics) that will see me for many years.

All my subsequent Blu-ray buys have largely been music videos (the new Police & Jeff Beck are superb) with the occasional 'big' or hyped movie being too hard to resist.

I've become very very choosey about what I buy and I never go for a title unless it's in the sub $20 range.

I don't see cheap leftover HD DVD has any effect on BD sales since there's no new movie titles on HD DVD for a year now.

Universal has improved the audio track to DTS Master/HD on BD over the HD DVD. So, if you want the best audio quality, BD version is better than HD DVD. (This is where it was a good thing HD DVD failed the market since it doesn't have the disc capacity to include DTS Master/HD.)

Only the older Warner Bros BD titles have the same encoding as the HD DVD. All the newer BD titles released on BD only since the death of HD DVD generally have better encoding.

For the record. HD-DVD was the first one to include lossless audio. Blu players didn't have any support for lossless audio. They included PCM mix later.

If you check out:

http://hddvdstats.com/index.php?OrderBy=Audio

you will find out 114 HD-DVD titles with lossless audio DTS-HD or Dolby TrueHD. Three Harry Potter movies were not included but I know for sure that all 5 movies from this series are issued with Dolby TrueHD so that adds up to 117 movies. Almost all import HD-DVDs have lossless audio DTS-HD. It could be another hundred or so but I know for sure for following:

1. Jackal
2. Silent Hill
3. Resident Evil
4. Resident Evil 2
5. Resident Evil 3
6. Fantastic Four
7. Silver surfer
8. Terminator 2
9. Underworld
10. Underworld Evolution Polish edition
11. Flyboys
12. Lord of War
13. Basic Instinct
14. Renaissance
15. Mulholland Drive
16. Cradle of Life
17. 1408
18. 3 Days of the Condor
19. ABBA the Movie
20. Afro Samuarai
21. Alone in the Dark
22. Total Recall

For the rest of imports listing check out Xploited Cinema:

http://xploitedcinema.com/catalog/hd-dvds-c-35.html?osCsid=7c584d3f6ef124365f3a3b3bc94a6b9f

Which one has DTS Master and TrueHD?

Not DTS Master Audio, but my French HD DVD "La Mome" has DTS-HD High Resolution and TrueHD audio options.


As for the thread topic, I would say the cheap HD DVDs have a minor impact overall - of the million HD DVD sold, probably less than half the owners are still buying HD DVD titles. But, it has a major impact for me - I still own 10 times the number of HD DVDs than I do blu-ray (150 vs 15), and I was purple for a year before Toshiba threw in the towel. I rent the vast majority of blu-rays, only buying the 'blockbuster' releases with high repeat viewing value (TDK, Iron Man, The Mummy 3), and import blu-rays which I obviously can't rent (Zulu, Downfall, Red Cliff 1&2). My attitude is that the blu-ray releases aren't going anywhere but down in price the longer the release is in circulation, but I need to buy the HD DVDs I want while they're still available.

I think Scowl has an important point, it certainly was a driving factor for me. I got a big 1080p DLP a year ago so of course wanted HD media in the worst way. I expected to go Blu as it had just emerged from the format wars but $28 discs took my breath away. I could justify a PS3 but not discs at that price. So I balked and instead started looking for a good upconverter for my large library of SD DVDs since my Sony NS77H wasn't doing a good enough job. Oppos were the way to go but I couldn't justify the price at the time when a little more would buy the PS3 which could upscale too.

So I was leaning to the PS3 again but really wanted a nice looking player that looked more like my other HT components. And I wanted true HD, there was no way I'd continue buying SD DVDs. That's when I went with an HD DVD player since it looked great as a component and was an excellent upscaler. Also the $10 prices on true HD media at the time enticed me to get a few favorites so I bought a few. Amazing! So I bought more. And prices kept dropping so I bought more. And more. HD DVD gave me everything I wanted at amazing prices - except new titles and I can live with that.

I'll go Blu-ray sometime but won't spend a fortune on discs, red discs taught me that. No doubt titles that I have will show up for $5 on BD but it'll be quite a while so I feel good about my HD library.

I'm sure a tiny percentage of the market is buying red but HD DVD and SD DVD have forced the price of Blu-ray to become more attractive and that's a good thing for all of us.

So then I assume you never bought a HD DVD before the format died right? Because HD DVDs and blurays cost THE SAME before HD DVD died.

Therefore, unless you never bought a HD DVD before the format died, I am sure you paid $20-25+ for at least some of your 204 HD DVDs.

Kind of disingenuous to make claims that HD DVDs were cheaper, when in fact they were priced the same or even more (for combos). Of course...this pricing was while the format was still viable. And of course, all bets are off once the format became non-viable, and is now relegated to discount racks at Five Below, etc.

No problem with buying up cheap HD DVDs. Just don't make it sound like they were always cheap. They became so cheap for a reason....it is a non-supported format.

bt12483, please reread what you quoted from me. I bought in to HD DVD well after the format wars, so the titles were much cheaper than BD. I know red titles were much more expensive before the spring of 2008 than now. And you have to admit a pristine HD title should play just as well whether you pay $5 or $28.

Indeed.

Especially if you have no desire to see any new movies in HD. If you are OK living with P.S. I Love You as the last HD DVD day and date title (albeit with WB's 3 week delay). May 27th 2009 will mark 1 full year without a new day and date release on HD DVD.

Enjoy your deals.

Most people see HD DVD as a supplement to Blu-ray, not a substitute. Purple owners get the best of everything, whether it's cheap HD DVD titles, exclusive HD DVD titles (over 150 in the US alone), or Blu-ray day and date titles and exclusive BD catalogs. It's a great HDM world to live in. ;)

Most people see HD DVD as a supplement to Blu-ray, not a substitute. Purple owners get the best of everything, whether it's cheap HD DVD titles, exclusive HD DVD titles (over 150 in the US alone), or Blu-ray day and date titles and exclusive BD catalogs. It's a great HDM world to live in. ;)

I agree. And many people went from blue to purple after the demise of HD DVD. The deals were too good to resist. I think that BD and HD DVD and SD (for titles not likely to appear in HD) can get along quite nicely on the shelf. It's nice to have variety and options. :)

Indeed.

Especially if you have no desire to see any new movies in HD. If you are OK living with P.S. I Love You as the last HD DVD day and date title (albeit with WB's 3 week delay). May 27th 2009 will mark 1 full year without a new day and date release on HD DVD.

Enjoy your deals.



...I'll go Blu-ray sometime but won't spend a fortune on discs, red discs taught me that. No doubt titles that I have will show up for $5 on BD but it'll be quite a while so I feel good about my HD library.

I'm sure a tiny percentage of the market is buying red but HD DVD and SD DVD have forced the price of Blu-ray to become more attractive and that's a good thing for all of us...

BTW, I don't see how I was disingenuous...

Frankly, what may eventually affect new blu sales (however slightly) will be sales of used discs. Most people are not collectors and will dump their discs after a few viewings. The used sales market will be huge partly due to the discs' scratch-resistant coating. In fact, I saw a number of blu-ray discs at the flea market yesterday (didn't buy them however). DVD's tend to get roughed up and scratched more, and that diminishes their value. In any event, whether used blu-ray or new cheap HD DVD, many people will look for a way to acquire and enjoy HD on a tight budget.

The BD discs I'm getting from NetFlix look as scratched up as the DVDs I'm getting from them. The amazing thing is that they still play perfectly, even one BD that had three half-inch long gashes. I think most people who spend the money to get into HD have some idea of how to take care of HD media, although those of us who grew up with vinyl LPs might be extra-cautious. :)

For the record. HD-DVD was the first one to include lossless audio. Blu players didn't have any support for lossless audio.
Hate to say this, but you're wrong! The Samsung BDP-1000 (very first BD player) supported PCM surround from day one! However, they didn't support compressed lossless formats :)! Of course, neither did the HD-A1 until September 2006 when a firmware update enabled 5.1 channel True HD (FW ver 2.0).

So then I assume you never bought a HD DVD before the format died right? Because HD DVDs and blurays cost THE SAME before HD DVD died.

Therefore, unless you never bought a HD DVD before the format died, I am sure you paid $20-25+ for at least some of your 204 HD DVDs.

Kind of disingenuous to make claims that HD DVDs were cheaper, when in fact they were priced the same or even more (for combos). Of course...this pricing was while the format was still viable. And of course, all bets are off once the format became non-viable, and is now relegated to discount racks at Five Below, etc.

No problem with buying up cheap HD DVDs. Just don't make it sound like they were always cheap. They became so cheap for a reason....it is a non-supported format.

Actually, my experience as an HD DVD buyer was that BD tended to cost less between late August and the very end of 2007 when the battle between the formats became really intense. That was the period during which I bought most of my BDs since the pricing was just too attractive for titles that interested me :)!

My own experience of HD DVD (I went purple much later, after the plug was pulled) was one of cheap movies - especially with the £ @ $2+.
I did quite a bit of buying at Amazon USA.

All in all it means that my 150+ HD DVD collection, relatively speaking, cost me pennies, I reckon when averaged out about $15 - $20 each.
Including some amazing boxset bargains (Star Trek for £12 delivered = $17).

I reckon those who missed out realy missed out.

Actually, my experience as an HD DVD buyer was that BD tended to cost less between late August and the very end of 2007 when the battle between the formats became really intense. That was the period during which I bought most of my BDs since the pricing was just too attractive for titles that interested me :)!

Competition was good for the consumer, but not so good for the studios.

When HD DVD died, the scavengers (like myself) took over. They know a cheap meal when they see one.

Some people buy what they want, when they want it, at full retail or close to full retail. Other people learn to appreciate whatever they chance upon for practically nothing.

HD DVD buyers of cheap discs fall somewhere between these two types of humans, as do buyers of used media of every kind.

If a disc costs more than two tickets at the cinema (we don't buy snacks), we won't buy it.

I should add that the second-run theater we go to sells tickets for $2.99.

I now have over 130 HD-DVD's and 12 Blu Ray. Average price paid for all my HD-DVD's is just under $6.50. This includes box sets broken down to individual titles, free titles from the early days, and firesale titles.

I have no need to buy Blu-Ray titles as I haven't watched most of the HD titles I have. So in my house, the low price of HD-DVD's has impacted my purchasing of Blu titles.

Hate to say this, but you're wrong! The Samsung BDP-1000 (very first BD player) supported PCM surround from day one! However, they didn't support compressed lossless formats :)! Of course, neither did the HD-A1 until September 2006 when a firmware update enabled 5.1 channel True HD (FW ver 2.0).

Your last sentence is wrong. The A1s and XA1s supported 2 channel TrueHD decoding from day 1.

Your last sentence is wrong. The A1s and XA1s supported 2 channel TrueHD decoding from day 1.
Try reading again :)! I specifically said 5.1 surround, though it's certainly true the A1 supported two channel True HD from the beginning.

My own experience of HD DVD (I went purple much later, after the plug was pulled) was one of cheap movies - especially with the £ @ $2+.
I did quite a bit of buying at Amazon USA.

All in all it means that my 150+ HD DVD collection, relatively speaking, cost me pennies, I reckon when averaged out about $15 - $20 each.
Including some amazing boxset bargains (Star Trek for £12 delivered = $17).

I reckon those who missed out realy missed out.
I got my first player mid summer '06 and wanted to buy titles, but the cost made me move VERY slowly. I picked up a few titles from Amazon Sellers at discount and looked for the very occassional special deal plus used my Amazon discount. Even a year later, I had very few titles. I had no plans to buy a BD player, but when Amazon started those 3 for 2 sales the BD prices for good titles demanded purchase :)! HD DVD titles were on sale as well, but nowhere near as many as the BD. Then the BD sales just kept hitting (and with BOGOs) and I was throwing in an occassional more expensive HD DVD or two just to assuage my sense of guilt towards my preferred format :(.

By the time November rolled in I simply had too many BD to not start thinking seriously about a player. Fortunately, HD DVD started getting more seriously into the sales towards the end and so the prices became similar -- think it dried up in the second half of January. Then the prices returned to list with relatively small discounts here and there. I got quite a few titles from the Warner Store on their sale coupons -- poorer prices than the "hey-day", but cheaper than pretty much anything else. However, as I said, it wasn't until around the end of 2008 that my BD count finally caught up with the HD DVD. But boy, those sales sure were nice :)!

PS. Just bought another used HD DVD yesterday from an Amazon Seller :)!

If it wasn't affecting BR - then why this promo:

http://red2blu.com/

^^^ Yep, HD-DVD sales (minimal as they are) and owners of that format are having no impact whatsoever on BD sales. Then why is Warner trying to bribe us if we hold nothing of value? :D

If it wasn't affecting BR - then why this promo:

http://red2blu.com/

Crickey -- upgrade? Yeeesh! Well, if anyone knows of any Warner BD that are genuinely an upgrade over the HD DVD, I'll consider it. Anybody?

Now what would really be funny is folks who are/have been pure blu buying up the left over HD movies so they can use them to upgrade to the BDs. Oh what a wicked world we live in. :D

Now what would really be funny is folks who are/have been pure blu buying up the left over HD movies so they can use them to upgrade to the BDs. Oh what a wicked world we live in. :D

Actually that is quite possible, although you would have to recruit relatives and friends to get past the twenty-five disc limit.

And wouldn't it be ironic if Warner would specially stamp these discs as promotional only with no resale permitted?

Actually that is quite possible, although you would have to recruit relatives and friends to get past the twenty-five disc limit.

And wouldn't it be ironic if Warner would specially stamp these discs as promotional only with no resale permitted?


I suspect like what happened with the free offers before during the wars the blu cases and rear cover art will probably have some type of gash in it.

Crickey -- upgrade? Yeeesh! Well, if anyone knows of any Warner BD that are genuinely an upgrade over the HD DVD, I'll consider it. Anybody?

The thing is, with each disc you add to your cart, you have to click an "upgrade" button. Maybe there is some sort of operant conditioning going on here to make people think that a pricey swap is an upgrade.

Having said this, I think a number of people will send in their cover art and dollars and believe that they are getting a bargain.

Most people who do this will probably discard their HD DVD eventually, since selling it without the cover art will not be too profitable.

But Warner gets to reduce its unsold inventory of older titles and make a little profit (these discs don't cost more than $2 to make) without dumping them through third-party resellers.

I've come to realize other than maybe my Matrix set I'll probably pass.

Most people who do this will probably discard their HD DVD eventually, since selling it without the cover art will not be too profitable.



Not to mention that ppl are dumping all @ the same time.
Who would buy it?

the market will be saturated & the former HD-er will have ended up increasing their costs marginally to own hi-def movies.

bright ppl these HD-ers.

the market will be saturated & the former HD-er will have ended up increasing their costs marginally to own hi-def movies.

bright ppl these HD-ers.

But you know if I didn't have some backup players then this deal would be harder to put down. If I only had one player and a few movies I would probably do it.

Not to mention that ppl are dumping all @ the same time.
Who would buy it?

the market will be saturated & the former HD-er will have ended up increasing their costs marginally to own hi-def movies.

bright ppl these HD-ers.

Actually, we're getting there already. How can you sell your common used HD DVD discs, when new ones go for $3 to $5?

Flooding the used market with cover-art-less HD DVD's will only make things worse.

Warner has this all figured out, and the hook is baited for the gullible consumer.

I haven't been too pleased with that outfit in quite some time.

I meant to add: Remember how long it took to get HD DVD's from Warner's online store in the past? What makes anyone think these will be shipped out in a timely fashion?

But you know if I didn't have some backup players then this deal would be harder to put down. If I only had one player and a few movies I would probably do it.

$130+ with shipping for 25 trade-ins will buy you one or two backup HD DVD players nowadays. Maybe even a cheap blu-ray player. :)

But I agree. The only problem I'm having is that my main player won't quit, and the backups may never be used -- at least not for a long, long time.

But I agree. The only problem I'm having is that my main player won't quit, and the backups may never be used -- at least not for a long, long time.

Except for the odd rant about a Tosh box not functioning on AVS, like a SD player, does a HD player ever break?

I still have my SD from 8 years ago working near full time status with the kids.

And even if they finally do break, either BD prices & boxes come down to affordable levels (ie SD levels) thru more adoption or else some new tech takes it s place.

Either way I don't feel the need to replace what isn't broken or double dip for something that isn't an improvement :)

And, I think you overestimate the number of people who are like you. Contrary to what this sub-forum would like to believe, the number of people who still actively own both formats is dwindling. There were fewer than 1,000,000 owners of HD DVD players (that's being generous considering the number of multiple player owners). LG is still making combo drives. Not sure how many of them are sold, and whether they're still produced.

^^^ Yep, HD-DVD sales (minimal as they are) and owners of that format are having no impact whatsoever on BD sales. Then why is Warner trying to bribe us if we hold nothing of value? :D They want to gather up all the current HD-DVDs and then later when they have somebody make and sell a new HD-DVD player they will be able to sell them again. :) That makes as much sense as HD-DVD sales impacting BD sales....

larry

They want to gather up all the current HD-DVDs and then later when they have somebody make and sell a new HD-DVD player they will be able to sell them again. :) That makes as much sense as HD-DVD sales impacting BD sales....

larry

But wouldn't you have to agree that this offer kind of came out of left field? I mean why not let everyone who owns standard dvds do the same. Now that would generate a buzz. :D

But wouldn't you have to agree that this offer kind of came out of left field? I mean why not let everyone who owns standard dvds do the same. Now that would generate a buzz. :DI'm somewhat at a loss to explain it.

larry

Try reading again :)! I specifically said 5.1 surround, though it's certainly true the A1 supported two channel True HD from the beginning.

Should I quote you again?


Hate to say this, but you're wrong! The Samsung BDP-1000 (very first BD player) supported PCM surround from day one! However, they didn't support compressed lossless formats :)! Of course, neither did the HD-A1 until September 2006 when a firmware update enabled 5.1 channel True HD (FW ver 2.0).

You mentioned "PCM surround" and then say, "they (BD players) didn't support compressed lossless formats. Of course neither did the HD-A1 until September 2006 when a firmware update enabled 5.1 channel TrueHD."

Not to be rude, but you should try reading exactly what you wrote. You may have meant to say one thing, but you said something else.