Looks like the studios are betting heavily on BD-Live and Digital Copy to boost Blu-ray.

Ashwin Navin, former president of **********, stood before a packed crowd of people from the home entertainment industry June 23 at the Entertainment Supply Chain Academy Conference, and warned that Blu-ray Disc could be living on borrowed time.

His presentation showed how the CD business peaked in 2001, at the same time personal computer hard drives nearly doubled in capacity, becoming capable of holding music from 350 CDs. Then DVDs peaked in 2007, the same year an average computer could handle 350 movies, he said.

Using the same barometer, Navin said, in 2013 average computers will be able to hold 350 high-def films, potentially making disc obsolete.

Most of the other speakers at the conference were more upbeat about the format.

Tony Korkunis, SVP of retail development for 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment, said, “I don’t think the future [for Blu-ray] is gloomy at all.”

Paul Scott, EVP of Sony DADC shared stats that showed sales of Blu-ray Discs are up 212% this year. “By 2012, 500 million Blu-ray units will be sold. By 2013 we expect [hardware prices] to be $50.”

Research from Futuresource showed anticipated sold DVDs in 2009 to be down 11%, with the value of sold DVDs down 13% from 2008. “There’s a lot of downward pressure on retail pricing,” said Alison Casey, head of global content. “Blu-ray will be absolutely vital to keeping volume and value healthy.” Futuresource has 75 million Blu-rays being sold at retail this year, up from 24 million in 2008. By 2012, Blu-ray household penetration in America could be 50%, she said.

Dorinda Marticorena, SVP of worldwide marketing and high-definition for Warner Home Video, shared that of the 2 million The Dark Knight Blu-rays purchased, 22% of the owners, or 440,000, took advantage of the digital copy included. “In my marketing career I’ve never seen a redemption rate like this,” she said. “It says consumers are loving this.”

Kristopher Brown, VP of worldwide high-def market expansion for Warner Home Video, said more than 90% of Warner Blu-ray Disc owners access available BD Live features. He also said the upcoming Facebook application included with The Watchmen Blu-ray won’t be the last time Warner partners with a social network for Blu-ray.

And Tracey Garvin, SVP of Sony Pictures Home Entertainment, called the studio’s new MovieIQ BD Live feature, debuting in September, the “killer app” the industry has been waiting for.

Then by 2013 were going to have 18 TB Hard drives (350 BD's * 50GB/BD)?:eek:
Sweet. The bigger the better. So in other words I'll be able to rip 2150 dual layer DVD's to a single hard drive.
I'll be able to store every disc I have ever owned without adding compression.
I think I have maybe 2000 DVD's and 300 BD's & 200HD DVD's.
Watch out if one of these drives dies-its gonna suck to re-rip everything.

I wonder if the studio bosses are enthusiastically over-optimistic about Digital Copy preserving value?
Digital copy no, DVD copy maybe. At least thats my 2 cents.

The Studio heads gambled and lost- and they know it.

They didn't need to adopt Blu-ray simply to sell new releases- Blu-ray was a strategy for squeezing out more value from their catalogs. And as most of us are well aware, nobody is buying catalog on Blu-ray. Why else has Warner had to take the drastic step of premium packaging (and consequently msrp's) for evergreen titles like Wizard of Oz and Gone With The Wind? If money could be made on this format through volume sales, they would be offering these at price points to move in volume.

Do many people here really believe they are pushing Bd-live as 'the killer app' because customers like us want it? They realize this is their only hope of salvaging their investment in this format because it offers a future filled with direct marketing, and targeted upselling.

Some ardent HD DVD advocates are apparently hellbent on reenacting the format war.

Oh well - school's out, isn't it? ;)

Who brought HD DVD into this? Since there is only one high def optical format, and has been only one for a year and a half now, why should anyone have to generalize anymore so as not imply a format bias?
Let me rephrase my previous post- the studios gambled on the viability of a HD optical format to resell their catalog and they came up short.

but then I'm obviously just being one of the doom and gloom crowd. Any year now, catalog sales are really going to take off and prove all of us Negative Nancys wrong :rolleyes:

The Studio heads gambled and lost- and they know it.

They didn't need to adopt Blu-ray simply to sell new releases- Blu-ray was a strategy for squeezing out more value from their catalogs. And as most of us are well aware, nobody is buying catalog on Blu-ray. Why else has Warner had to take the drastic step of premium packaging (and consequently msrp's) for evergreen titles like Wizard of Oz and Gone With The Wind? If money could be made on this format through volume sales, they would be offering these at price points to move in volume.

Do many people here really believe they are pushing Bd-live as 'the killer app' because customers like us want it? They realize this is their only hope of salvaging their investment in this format because it offers a future filled with direct marketing, and targeted upselling.

When you say most of us you really mean "You"...

Who brought HD DVD into this? Since there is only one high def optical format, and has been only one for a year and a half now, why should anyone have to generalize anymore so as not imply a format bias?
Let me rephrase my previous post- the studios gambled on the viability of a HD optical format to resell their catalog and they came up short.

but then I'm obviously just being one of the doom and gloom crowd. Any year now, catalog sales are really going to take off and prove all of us Negative Nancys wrong :rolleyes:

Lets stick with facts. Blu-Ray sales continue to grow. We know this from the weekly Nielsen data. Sony is saying they are up 212% this year. In a major recession. With still somewhat pricy hardware.

I am not sure why you are so focused on catalog titles when clearly the biggest sellers, and biggest revenue generators week after week, are new releases.

Perhaps the studios had higher expectations for Blu-Ray, but at the end of the day Blu-Ray will be around a very long time. Especially when those $50 and under players arrive on scene and the majority of retailers simply either stop carrying DVD players, or only offer a couple of very cheap models vs a plethora of BD players. Not hard to see.

Even the CEO of Netflix (who has every reason to want digital streaming to take over and optical to die off) has gone on the record and stated that optical disc rentals has not peaked yet and will not for at least another 5-7 years. I think it will be even longer. I do think Blu-Ray could be the last optical disc format, but I believe it will be around for at least 12 more years. Probably 15.

Until something better comes along. And for now, it is the best we have, and I am very much enjoying it. I have tried download/streaming, and it came up way short for me vs Blu-Ray. Download/streaming has a long way to go.....

I am not sure why you are so focused on catalog titles when clearly the biggest sellers, and biggest revenue generators week after week, are new releases.

I think his point is that to the studios, new releases sell no matter what they deliver it on.

What they hoped for any new disc format was to resell the titles they already sold us once or twice before on DVD, LD, VHS etc etc.

They made good money on catalog titles on DVD. And is of course hoping they make good money on catalog titles on BD.

I think his point is that to the studios, new releases sell no matter what they deliver it on.

What they hoped for any new disc format was to resell the titles they already sold us once or twice before on DVD, LD, VHS etc etc.

They made good money on catalog titles on DVD. And is of course hoping they make good money on catalog titles on BD.

Well, I have yet to see any proof that catalog titles on Blu-Ray are not going to be profitable. I mean, they keep releasing more and more catalog titles. If the studios "gambled and lost" as claimed wouldn't they simply stop releasing catalog titles and focus 100% on day and date releases? And why are stores like Target, Walmart, and Best Buy lining their shelves with catalog releases if they are not selling?

Not buying it.

Well, I have yet to see any proof that catalog titles on Blu-Ray are not going to be profitable. I mean, they keep releasing more and more catalog titles. If the studios "gambled and lost" as claimed wouldn't they simply stop releasing catalog titles and focus 100% on day and date releases? And why are stores like Target, Walmart, and Best Buy lining their shelves with catalog releases if they are not selling?

Not buying it.

If catalog titles are selling so well - why are they including a DVD with them (some - recently)?

Some ardent HD DVD advocates are apparently hellbent on reenacting the format war.

Oh well - school's out, isn't it? ;)

The only format war out there would be BD and itelf unless you know something we don't.

Sooner or later BD needs to stand on it's own regardless of how much you need to still blame the HD DVD crowd on whatever ails it might have.

The only format war out there would be BD and itelf unless you know something we don't.

Sooner or later BD needs to stand on it's own regardless of how much you need to still blame the HD DVD crowd on whatever ails it might have.

I'm just noting that the ones who used to root for HDM when it came in a maroon case now consistently root against it because it currently comes in a baby blue case.

BD is doing more than okay.

If catalog titles are selling so well - why are they including a DVD with them (some - recently)?

How many catalog titles to date have DVD's included (not the digital copy, but a DVD of the movie itself)? My guess is that it is a very small number and most of the those titles are family/kid movies.


Why are studios doing this?
- Portability. For family/kids titles this makes alot of sense. Until portable BD players are out there and are cheap, including a DVD is a smart move.
- Cost. The studios can charge more since it is a premium product.

I'm just noting that the ones who used to root for HDM when it came in a maroon case now consistently root against it because it currently comes in a baby blue case.
If you are going to make a claim like that, which basically invalidates my posts as biased ranting-then prove it. Do a search and post the results that show me "rooting against" this format.
I just bought a second player not too long ago. I'm consistently buying catalog titles on the format ( my collection skews 90% catalog/10% new releases). I'm invested in this format enough to feel entitled to call out BS to empty marketing spin when I see it - whether it is by paid marketers or their hyper-sensitive acolytes on a forum.

BD is doing more than okay.

The proof is in the pudding.
Why are the only releases you can get for major catalog like Casablanca, Wizard Of Oz, and Gone With the Wind, only sold in boxes loaded with cheap junk and set at a 3x higher msrp than a regular single disc release?
Why, 1.5 years later, are Blu-ray ports of previously released catalog HD DVDs (even from dual format studios from the start like Warner) still nowhere on the schedule?
Why did a whole slew of big catalog titles that had been previously scheduled for this Q4 (that were intended as cross media and/or anniversary tie-ins) suddenly pushed back into 2010 and beyond?

Please.

If this format was doing "more than okay", we would be seeing catalog titles fast tracked, not pushed back and certainly not being removed when there is a major tie-in exploitation opportunity.

This format moves new releases. Great. Fantastic.
But are these sales not cannibalizing the sales they would have had on DVD?
The response then becomes- But they see a higher margin on the Blu-rays so they still come out way ahead by having both formats out there.
Not so fast.
They are losing money on many/most of their catalog releases on the format. Combined with the the higher production costs associated with Blu-ray, how much of the extra profits they get from 1 sale of a Dark Knight Bd over a Dark Knight DVD get siphoned off to subsidized the 11 months of catalog that didn't sell?

Like I said, the proof is in the pudding. They've realized this format will not generate revenue from catalog the way they had planned/hoped/expected it would. They are now moving into the fallback position with a concentrated hard sell of Bd-Live- which will exist -for them- as tool for up selling, direct marketing, and data gathering.

Why, as someone who values content (content, content!) with higher quality A/V, would I be cheerleading that change in strategy?

They are losing money on many/most of their catalog releases on the format. Combined with the the higher production costs associated with Blu-ray, how much of the extra profits they get from 1 sale of a Dark Knight Bd over a Dark Knight DVD get siphoned off to subsidized the 11 months of catalog that didn't sell?

Like I said, the proof is in the pudding. They've realized this format will not generate revenue from catalog the way they had planned/hoped/expected it would. They are now moving into the fallback position with a concentrated hard sell of Bd-Live- which will exist -for them- as tool for up selling, direct marketing, and data gathering.

Why, as someone who values content (content, content!) with higher quality A/V, would I be cheerleading that change in strategy?

Well you keep talking about proof. Back up what you are claiming above with actual proof. Please prove to us with real data that the studios are losing money on many/most of their catalog titles. And don't show me data from 2006/2007.

Because you talk like you are in the know, but I seriously doubt you can provide data from 2009 showing that you know what you are talking about. You would most likely have to have inside information from all the major studios to be able to make the claims that you are.

Why are the only releases you can get for major catalog like Casablanca, Wizard Of Oz, and Gone With the Wind, only sold in boxes loaded with cheap junk and set at a 3x higher msrp than a regular single disc release?

Why did a whole slew of big catalog titles that had been previously scheduled for this Q4 (that were intended as cross media and/or anniversary tie-ins) suddenly pushed back into 2010 and beyond?

If this format was doing "more than okay", we would be seeing catalog titles fast tracked, not pushed back and certainly not being removed when there is a major tie-in exploitation opportunity.

They are losing money on many/most of their catalog releases on the format.

Like I said, the proof is in the pudding. They've realized this format will not generate revenue from catalog the way they had planned/hoped/expected it would.

While it is true that studios do generate more revenue from new releases, that we might have expected; I mean, the same thing happens among DVDs, and we're in our thirteenth year of DVDs. New movies are in widescreen picture and 5.1 sound; many older films are not. As a relatively new medium, Blu-ray still has a user base that appreciates the best picture and sound, which not all older films offer. So, yes, studios rely on newer movies for revenue in both the Blu-ray and DVD mediums.

However, in the coming few months alone we will see the BD releases of Gladiator, Braveheart, Deep Impact, 12 Monkeys, Last House on the Left, Wizard of Oz, Forrest Gump, The Deep, Wrong Turn, Ghost Ship, Duplicity, Escape from L.A., Midnight Express, 300, Hero, 48 Hours, Street Fighter, Do the Right Thing, This is Spinal Tap, Requiem for a Dream, Child's Play, Big Trouble in Little China, Repulsion, Blue Thunder, The Ninth Gate, Creepshow, Grumpy Old Men, The Firm, A River Runs Through It, Freddy Vs. Jason, The Towering Inferno, Pierrot Le Fou, Natural Born Killers, My Cousin Vinny, Playtime, The Last Starfighter, Children of the Corn, Misery, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, The Waterboy, Dead Calm, Sling Blade, Replicant, How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days, Monster, Cat Woman, Snakes on a Plane, Iron Monkey, The Legend of Drunken Master, Contact, and a lot of other catalog titles.

No catalog titles? Blu-ray is going away? I don't think so.

John

If you are going to make a claim like that, which basically invalidates my posts as biased ranting-then prove it. Do a search and post the results that show me "rooting against" this format.

I don't need to do a search - it's right here on this very thread. You've said that "the Studio heads gambled and lost- and they know it." You claimed that "nobody is buying catalog on Blu-ray", and you concluded that "[BD-live] is their only hope of salvaging their investment in this format".

I've been here long enough to know doom-and-gloom FUD talk when I see it.


Why are the only releases you can get for major catalog like Casablanca, Wizard Of Oz, and Gone With the Wind, only sold in boxes loaded with cheap junk and set at a 3x higher msrp than a regular single disc release?


They may be major, but they are also mega-old (65-70 years old). Sales of those titles are going to be limited, so Warner is looking for ways to maximize the profits (call it price skimming, targeted upselling or gouging the customers). Digibooks follow the same rationale, only with digibooks you're only paying $5 more.

My collection leans heavily on the catalog side as well and I can tell you, average catalog pricing is miles better than it was in 2006-2007. Yeah, we get overcharged for some titles, but on the other hand, just staying within Warner titles, you can get How the West Was Won, Dirty Harry or Amadeus for $14.99 at amazon. Or Being There for $11.99. I just bought Hellraiser, American History X and Jailhouse Rock for just over $40.

Well you keep talking about proof. Back up what you are claiming above with actual proof. Please prove to us with real data that the studios are losing money on many/most of their catalog titles. And don't show me data from 2006/2007.

Because you talk like you are in the know, but I seriously doubt you can provide data from 2009 showing that you know what you are talking about. You would most likely have to have inside information from all the major studios to be able to make the claims that you are.

You're right.
I'm guilty of stating opinion as fact. I have no #'s to back up my comments, and they are merely my opinion. And yes, there are catalog titles on the schedule. Whether I personally value something like Catwoman, Freddy Vs Jason, or Snakes on a Plane is irrelevant, they are coming.

Some ardent HD DVD advocates are apparently hellbent on reenacting the format war.

Oh well - school's out, isn't it? ;)

It's a shame that whenever there is a discussion about Blu-ray that a few people here don't approve of, they bring up the "format war" and the format that lost...very sad.

As for the topic...
Of course the studios are betting on Blu-ray. They make more money on those discs. As long as BDs cost more than DVDs, the studios will push them.

As for managed copies, the studios are a little freaked out by Apple and Netflix. They see how Apple has come to dominate/control music sales and they do not want to see that happen for video.

And for the record. Blu-ray isn't going anywhere. As many (including me) have stated sales continue to increase at a steady pace and will continue to do so. It's overall disc sales we have to worry about.

It's a shame that whenever there is a discussion about Blu-ray that a few people here don't approve of, they bring up the "format war" and the format that lost...very sad.


What is sad is seeng the same people who defended HDM in 2007 now attack HDM in 2009, when it's undisputedly in better shape now than then.

You're right.
I'm guilty of stating opinion as fact. I have no #'s to back up my comments, and they are merely my opinion. And yes, there are catalog titles on the schedule. Whether I personally value something like Catwoman, Freddy Vs Jason, or Snakes on a Plane is irrelevant, they are coming.

I am looking at the release schedule and there are certainly some catalog titles that I will be renting and buying over the next couple of months. And I am not talking about Catwoman, Freddy vs Jason, or Snakes On A Plane.

Contrary to your opinion, my opinion is that there are many more new and catalog releases coming in 2009 vs the years prior for Blu-Ray. Just glancing, it looks like 2009 is on track to more than double the releases that we saw in 2008.

I know I have become much more selective in what titles I buy on Blu-Ray this year vs prior years because there is more selection. I certainly do not feel content starved.

I don't need to do a search - it's right here on this very thread. You've said that "the Studio heads gambled and lost- and they know it." You claimed that "nobody is buying catalog on Blu-ray", and you concluded that "[BD-live] is their only hope of salvaging their investment in this format".

I've been here long enough to know doom-and-gloom FUD talk when I see it.



I think the studio heads gambled and lost is certainly a debatable fact either way. It may not mean they will not be successful. It may only mean they thought BD would be the kind of success in the kind of timeframe DVD was. Instead, what I think is clear is that BD will not be that (at least in the timeframe, but it may be ultimately over a number of years).

I think the bigger issue that the studios are dealing with is whether BD will be the last great consumer media ever. At 1080 progressive lines, uncompressed audio and BDLive which has endless feature possibilies, what are they going to ever replace it with? 4K? Who could ever use that unless home sizes evolve to accomodate actual movie theater sized screens for the masses. I think this is the biggest problem that studios have, there is no identified upgrade path (with DVD, HDTV was already launching). We may be looking at another format that lasts 30 years- like LP did. This is a great reason to buy BD, it may be the last format you'll ever need to pay for.

And for the record. Blu-ray isn't going anywhere. As many (including me) have stated sales continue to increase at a steady pace and will continue to do so. It's overall disc sales we have to worry about.
What is sad is seeng the same people who defended HDM in 2007 now attack HDM in 2009, when it's undisputedly in better shape now than then.

Yep, that was a vicious attack.:rolleyes:

All it takes is one guy to post Blu-ray catalog sales are poor or to say the overall disc sales are dropping, to bring the defenders of the format out of the woodwork. Oh well.

Maybe we can now drop the whole war stuff on get back to the topic...as I said the ESCA makes more and has better control of BD than competing tech. They are going to push it as much as they can. Its a sound business decision for them.

All it takes is one guy to post Blu-ray catalog sales are poor or to say the overall disc sales are dropping, to bring the defenders of the format out of the woodwork. Oh well.And yet the same posters who swallowed--without a single moment of hesitation--the Harris Poll hook, line, and sinker (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=16724365#post16724365) are now trying to prove that their gut feeling and unsupported opinion bears more weight than market data, and getting called out on it, and that's somehow the fault of "Blu-ray defenders"? Give me a break.

What the Harris poll showed is that there are mostly 2 types of consumers. One does not know what is HD and the other does not care about Blu Ray. That is the sad truth. The consumer transition has been slow to say the least.

That is the sad truth. The consumer transition has been slow to say the least.No, the real sad truth is the Dow is 8529 and we have people like you posting this kind of BS. IMO, most corps would kill to have the growth rate that BD is having during this period.

No, the real sad truth is the Dow is 8529 and we have people like you posting this kind of BS. IMO, most corps would kill to have the growth rate that BD is having during this period.

Perhaps you should peruse studio earnings while investigating the market...

The Studio heads gambled and lost- and they know it.

They didn't need to adopt Blu-ray simply to sell new releases- Blu-ray was a strategy for squeezing out more value from their catalogs. And as most of us are well aware, nobody is buying catalog on Blu-ray. Why else has Warner had to take the drastic step of premium packaging (and consequently msrp's) for evergreen titles like Wizard of Oz and Gone With The Wind? If money could be made on this format through volume sales, they would be offering these at price points to move in volume.

Do many people here really believe they are pushing Bd-live as 'the killer app' because customers like us want it? They realize this is their only hope of salvaging their investment in this format because it offers a future filled with direct marketing, and targeted upselling.
Then why did Blu-ray just do over $20 M in sales last week relaying mostly on a lot of catalog title sales?

Catalog sales are rising as new owners get into the mix and as more titles are displayed at retail at cheaper prices.

I've been here long enough to know doom-and-gloom FUD talk when I see it.


I've been long enough around people that make responses like you to notice that by you everyone who has some criticism about Blu-ray is automatically sorted into HD DVD zealot category and just wants Blu-ray to fail.

You are not alone, it seems that people are no longer entitled to actually criticize the crap Blu-ray is still dealing with without being called someone with a grudge because HD DVD lost.

It's really fantastic.

What you don't get is that many of us actually have genuine issues with what we are being sold both through PR, fudgy research and analysts and justifications, especially since we actually bought into promises and shelled out dollars where we own 2 or more Blu-ray players and 100s of Blu-ray movies.

Only with Blu nobody is allowed to criticize anything, cause we SHOULD be paying high prices, we should be repurchasing equipment every year and totally put up with the amount of half-assed encodes on many Blu-ray releases on account of that it's on Blu-ray and we simply should just accept the way things are. But hey, I guess I'm just an HD DVD whiner.

I'm sure that indeed something happens where in a year or two Blu-ray doesn't grow as expected, those who criticized it will be to blame. It will be all of our fault.

I can put money on it.

And yet the same posters who swallowed--without a single moment of hesitation--the Harris Poll hook, line, and sinker (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=16724365#post16724365) are now trying to prove that their gut feeling and unsupported opinion bears more weight than market data, and getting called out on it, and that's somehow the fault of "Blu-ray defenders"? Give me a break.

Not at all. Most people do not have your "all or nothing", "you are either with us or against us" feelings.

While Blu-ray sales are increasing at a nice steady pace, it is nowhere near what the studios and Sony wanted or predicted. The PS3 which is mentioned in your link is doing far worse than its expectations.

A quick search on google finds lots of good quotes on what Sony and others thought BDs performance would be.

Blu-ray to outsell DVD by 2011, says Sony Pictures...
Citing the latest market reports available, Sony Pictures Home Entertainment Asia Pacific vice president Tim Meade has confided that the company believes sales of Blu-ray Discs will beat out that of standard definition DVDs by the year 2011...


(2007) Blu-ray is aiming to replace the DVD format within three years...


Now again, Blu-ray sales are not bad, Blu-ray is not going away, and it will be the only HD disc based format for a very long time. Are sales what the BDA and others predicted? No. Should studios be concerned with over all discs sales? Yes.

My point is Blu-ray sales are not doom and gloom and they are not spectacular. There are somewhere in the middle.

IMO, most corps would kill to have the growth rate that BD is having during this period.


In 1982, laser disc player sales were up 1,100% over 1981. Six million units of laser disc movies were sold in 1982. Both from an article in 1983 Chain Store Age Magazine. Growth rate when dealing with such low numbers is largely meaningless.

Not at all. Most people do not have your "all or nothing", "you are either with us or against us" feelings.

While Blu-ray sales are increasing at a nice steady pace, it is nowhere near what the studios and Sony wanted or predicted. The PS3 which is mentioned in your link is doing far worse than its expectations.

A quick search on google finds lots of good quotes on what Sony and others thought BDs performance would be.





Now again, Blu-ray sales are not bad, Blu-ray is not going away, and it will be the only HD disc based format for a very long time. Are sales what the BDA and others predicted? No. Should studios be concerned with over all discs sales? Yes.

My point is Blu-ray sales are not doom and gloom and they are not spectacular. There are somewhere in the middle.

Until the economy shakes out, Sony is joined by Warner, GM, Toyota, BB and every other company in the world that bet heavily on continued expansion and sales growth only to be knocked on their backside.

The 2008 sales data and the latest 2009 projections from Adams Media Research are as follows:

As of December 31, 2008, 2.7% of US TV homes had a Blu-ray Disc set top player, and by the end of 2009 that number will have grown to 6.2% of US TV homes (6.1% and 11.0%, respectively, of HDTV homes)
As of December 31, 2008, 5.6% of US TV homes had a PS3, and by the end of 2009 that number will have grown to 10.0% of US homes (12.5% and 17.6%, respectively, of HDTV homes).
As of December 31, 2008 7.8% of US TV homes had either a Blu-ray Disc set top player, a PS3 or both, and by the end of 2009 that number will have grown to 14.8% of US TV homes (17.5% and 26%, respectively, of HDTV homes).


As I said most corps would love this growth rate during this period with the Dow at 8545.

Just a reminder:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2161/3537335628_e27400e1d5_b.jpg

So it took 9 years for Color TV to start selling after they came out... I guess they are a failure too...

So it took 9 years for Color TV to start selling after they came out... I guess they are a failure too...Yep, big failure :D. And here we are in the eleventh year of HDTV and have ≈ 50% penetration. Looks like HDTV is going to be another failure because of its slow success rate ;)

Now post the sales and growth rates for the market that was being replaced at the time.

How was the overall content consumption rate growing at the time of those product releases?

Blu-ray by itself is growing, but it is not a "success" since it has not provided overall market growth for the content providers. It really is that simple.

That is not to say it is going to wither and die. Just that right now it has not delivered overall growth.

... Looks like HDTV is going to be another failure ...
... I guess they are a failure too...

See, some here either think of things as a complete failure or total success. They can not understand that there are things in between.

It is pretty funny to go back and read things like...
(03/2007)The consortium behind the Blu-ray Disc format, expects the 25GB-per-layer optical medium to actually replace the current DVD technology within three years. "Within three years it will just be Blu-ray,"
Because BD is not going to reach that goal does not make it a failure though.

Yep, big failure :D. And here we are in the eleventh year of HDTV and have ≈ 50% penetration. Looks like HDTV is going to be another failure because of its slow success rate ;)

:rolleyes:

We are way past the early adopter stage of HDTV. Now we are at the point that people aren't going to buy an HDTV until their TV breaks or is required for another room in the house.

So what is the driving force to upgrade from DVD to BD? Better PQ and AQ? Since when have these been of any importance to the masses?

In 1982, laser disc player sales were up 1,100% over 1981. Six million units of laser disc movies were sold in 1982. Both from an article in 1983 Chain Store Age Magazine. Growth rate when dealing with such low numbers is largely meaningless.

Okay, let's look at absolute figures then, shall we?

From your example:

Laserdisc launched in 1978. So four years after launch they managed six million units in a whole year.

In the meantime, Blu-ray has sold eight million movies between February 8 and June 7 2009:

http://i44.tinypic.com/9i6b6g.jpg

In other words, three years after launch, in four of the slowest months of the year, Blu-ray has already sold more than Laserdisc in a whole year four years after launch.

:rolleyes:

waht, waht, waht . . .

So what is the driving force to upgrade from DVD to BD? Better PQ and AQ? Since when have these been of any importance to the masses?

I don't know. Tell us. Why did you dive into HD DVD? Better PQ and AQ? Liked the shade of maroon the covers were? It was cheap and had free movies attached? Liked the look of the player?



:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

I don't know. Tell us. Why did you dive into HD DVD? Better PQ and AQ? Liked the shade of maroon the covers were? It was cheap and had free movies attached? Liked the look of the player?


I am not part of the masses. Surprised you missed that.

So what is the driving force to upgrade from DVD to BD? Better PQ and AQ? Since when have these been of any importance to the masses?

I am not part of the masses. Surprised you missed that.

Umm, yeah, you are. Really. But for pure entertainment purposes, please, please, define the term "masses" for us.

Umm, yeah, you are. Really. But for pure entertainment purposes, please, please, define the term "masses" for us.

No I am not - we are discussing CE products and new formats. Surprised you ignored that also. :rolleyes:

Masses - the majority of the people in the USA. Income wise.

We all know that the CE market looks like a pyramid with the early adopter at the top and the masses at the bottom.

No I am not - we are discussing CE products and new formats. Surprised you ignored that also. :rolleyes:

Masses - the majority of the people in the USA. Income wise.

We all know that the CE market looks like a pyramid with the early adopter at the top and the masses at the bottom.

So now BD is a new format that the "masses" know nothing about (and strangely, only delegated to citizens of the US of A). :rolleyes: Odd that whenever the argument fits your agenda, BD is either new (for whatever cause you are arguing that day) or well past the new stage (again, for whatever cause you are arguing that day or particular hour). Please decide which it is.

And you still didn't answer my question. Why did YOU buy into HD DVD? What was the driving force that made you upgrade from DVD to HD DVD?

Blu-ray by itself is growing, but it is not a "success" since it has not provided overall market growth for the content providers. It really is that simple.

That is not to say it is going to wither and die. Just that right now it has not delivered overall growth.

DJIA last 24 months
http://i39.tinypic.com/2u5c044.jpg
:cool:

By way of comparison, the DJIA increased 34% during the first two years of DVD's product life (Mar '97-Mar'99)

Well how about real world experiences.

If the studios are so behind BR then why is it that every week at Blockbuster your lucky to see half of the new releases actually appear on Blu-Ray at the same time?

This week of the 6 releases featured on their billboard placard only two are also out on Blu-Ray. Last week 3 of 6 were available on Blu-Ray and and the week before it was again only 2-3 of the 6 (I didn't double-check the shelf on one of them cause since your not even hitting over 50% anyway, whats the difference.

It's stuff like this that has me primarily renting my BR media. I bought a lot of HD DVD stuff and got burned (or at some point in the future when I can no longer play them I may get burned if I cannot find a replacement player) and I don't plan on letting the powers that be fool me twice in the same HD media market.

I now buy only the movies I KNOW I will watch again and again to the best of my ability and they are also only the ones that would benefit from the HD presentation (Some epic failures still slip through unfortunately).

Now I don't pretend to represent all BR buyers, HD DVD converts or DVD to Blu-Ray converts or prospective converts, but if I'm not even seeing the new releases come out on BR, then if doesn't exactly scream BR IS REPLACING DVD anytime soon. Even if I wanted to buy the BR version of some movies I couldn't now could I without waiting for it?

So you can write these comments off as format war BS, but I can assure you that having already supported a discontinued format, and now supporting my second, I have absolutely no interest in seeing it fail also.

That doesn't change the fact that it doesn't appear to be doing as well as I hoped and most likely the studios hoped either. I bet you the CE's other than perhaps the folks over at the Sony gaming division aren't too happy about it either.

Until I'm convinced that BR will replace DVD or at least be supported and grow for 5+ years I will continue to rent and selectively buy.

I would bet that a lot of others are in the same boat and that is partly why we see some of these ridiculous 50% by 20xx claims. Where their isn't confidence try and create it any way you can. If they tell the masses often enough and convincingly enough that it is so, then eventually they may actually believe it.

Cheers

If the studios are so behind BR then why is it that every week at Blockbuster your lucky to see half of the new releases actually appear on Blu-Ray at the same time?



Might have something to do with Blockbuster being strapped for cash? :confused:

I wouldn't base how successful something is or isn't based on Blockbuster's ability to have it in stock, unless of course you are talking about candy, soda pop, microwave popcorn, and other odd items that they seem to have all over the store.

Okay, let's look at absolute figures then, shall we?

From your example:

Laserdisc launched in 1978. So four years after launch they managed six million units in a whole year.

In the meantime, Blu-ray has sold eight million movies between February 8 and June 7 2009:

http://i44.tinypic.com/9i6b6g.jpg

In other words, three years after launch, in four of the slowest months of the year, Blu-ray has already sold more than Laserdisc in a whole year four years after launch.

I'm not sure that we should be using Laser Disk as a leverage point to convince others of BR's success. Maybe it's just me.

Heck even comparing it to DVD seems kinda meaningless to me. Lets say BR sales were 50% or 200% of DVD sales to date in their time-lines, that doesn't mean that you can really accurately make any future claims about it will or won't do X.

I think all we can do is look at sales and decide whether or not we feel they are what the studios and CE's are looking for. Heck maybe they weren't happy with the DVD adoption numbers and wanted more.

Studios are only interested in supporting HD media if they can resell catalogue titles or up-sell new releases at a price point and volume to offset the added cost of production + X (whatever they deem profit X to be)

CE's are only interested in HD hardware as far as it can sell new units at a profit.

If you take out the BR/HD DVD titles and just use HD then we are still having the same discussions we were having over a year ago. Other than ending this recession with is obviously also having an impact the best way to increase adoption is to reduce the price of media and hardware. The one thing that is almost directly opposite to the motivation behind the producers of the media and the hardware.

I wonder if you offered them all a mulligan on this whole HDM thing and they could go back in time if they would take it.

Cheers

I have not had any problem finding new releases on Blu-Ray here in the states, or using Netflix. The only gripe I have with my local Blockbuster is that they do not carry enough Blu-Ray stock for new releases. They may have 10-15+ copies on DVD and only 2-5 on Blu-Ray and the BD's will sometimes be hard to come by for a couple of weeks.

I have had zero issues getting new releases in a timely manner from Netflix.

As for expectations of Blu-Ray, I would guess that studios back in 2006 and 2007 were underestimating the impact of the format war, along with hardware and software prices, and of course nobody saw the massive recession coming.

With the format war over and prices dropping on hardware and many movies, I feel the biggest issue to overcome will continue to be the economy. Getting cheaper hardware out there will help, but consumer confidence is still low and I suspect many people are waiting for the economy to improve before buying items such as cars, televisions, BD players, etc.

I'm not sure that we should be using Laser Disk as a leverage point to convince others of BR's success. Maybe it's just me.

Heck even comparing it to DVD seems kinda meaningless to me. Lets say BR sales were 50% or 200% of DVD sales to date in their time-lines, that doesn't mean that you can really accurately make any future claims about it will or won't do X.

I think all we can do is look at sales and decide whether or not we feel they are what the studios and CE's are looking for. Heck maybe they weren't happy with the DVD adoption numbers and wanted more.

Studios are only interested in supporting HD media if they can resell catalogue titles or up-sell new releases at a price point and volume to offset the added cost of production + X (whatever they deem profit X to be)

CE's are only interested in HD hardware as far as it can sell new units at a profit.

If you take out the BR/HD DVD titles and just use HD then we are still having the same discussions we were having over a year ago. Other than ending this recession with is obviously also having an impact the best way to increase adoption is to reduce the price of media and hardware. The one thing that is almost directly opposite to the motivation behind the producers of the media and the hardware.

I wonder if you offered them all a mulligan on this whole HDM thing and they could go back in time if they would take it.

Cheers

Explain to me how releases are way up in 2009 vs previous years if Blu-Ray is just not getting it done. Explain to me why revenue is way up as well?

Might have something to do with Blockbuster being strapped for cash? :confused:

I wouldn't base how successful something is or isn't based on Blockbuster's ability to have it in stock, unless of course you are talking about candy, soda pop, microwave popcorn, and other odd items that they seem to have all over the store.

Blockbuster stock isn't the issue. I think it's the availability of the title itself in the BR format.

BB here in Canada seems to be allocating BR a generous amount of shelf space. This may be partly due to the fact that in Canada they charge a $1 premium for the rentals, but that's OK with me as long as they have lots in stock. At the one closest to me they have over half a wall of new release space and another whole center rack or two of older releases.

So it's not that they can't afford to bring them in.

Cheers

Explain to me how releases are way up in 2009 vs previous years if Blu-Ray is just not getting it done. Explain to me why revenue is way up as well?

Well I don't have to now do I? I also have no interest in doing so.

From a consumers perspective, any numbers they can toss our way are well and good, but when I go to buy/rent a movie on BR, if it's not there then what do I care? Every time I pick up the DVD version it just reinforces DVD habits and not BR habits.

In any case, I don't doubt for a second that ALL the numbers are up. New releases and their sales as well as catalogue titles and their sales. I'm just saying that if they can't get the 6 premium release out each week then they definitely have some work to do.

(of course premium is relative also, but if someone is paying BB to market them on their weekly release boards, then you would think they would be worth a BR copy as well).

Cheers

IMHO...
In the minds of the studios and most of the BDA, the original goals of Blu-ray were to:
1) Replace DVD.
2) Raise the price point for movies closer to what studios think they should sell for.
3) Get people to double and triple dip on movies they already own.

I do not think any of this has changed, but they have realized it will take a lot longer.

They also now have download formats to worry about too, so they now have 2 more goals:
1) Not to let some company like Apple control distribution.
2) Stop or slow down the erosion of disc sales.

So now BD is a new format that the "masses" know nothing about (and strangely, only delegated to citizens of the US of A). :rolleyes: Odd that whenever the argument fits your agenda, BD is either new (for whatever cause you are arguing that day) or well past the new stage (again, for whatever cause you are arguing that day or particular hour). Please decide which it is.

And you still didn't answer my question. Why did YOU buy into HD DVD? What was the driving force that made you upgrade from DVD to HD DVD?

I for one believe you are smart enough to know exactly what he is saying and you are trying to argue against it for the sake of simply trying to cloud his statements.

I bought into HD because I wanted better picture and sound. I have a 20k plus setup. No one else I know come close to this. A few have gone BR with the purchase of a PS3. None of them jumped up one day and screamed, "O my god. I need better PQ and AQ. They bought a gaming machine and got it by default".

Heck my in-laws have a really nice 42" Samsung HDTV with HD cable and still watch the non-HD versions of the same channels they could be watching if HD is they just ventured about the 500 mark on the converter.

I consider the masses these types of folks and those that may or may not have their first HDTV and an up-converting DVD player which they think is the cats pajamas already.

The vast majority of these people will be buying their first BR player as a gaming machine primarily or when their primary DVD player needs replacing and the BR player is virtually the same price.

So of course I'm just bashing the format or whatever, but I can assure you with hand over heart, one hand on the bible and the other on my mothers grave that I would like nothing for than for every person in the world to go out tomorrow and buy a BR player and 10 disks a month for the next 10 years.

On a purely selfish basis this would lead to a vast library of media to choose from at reasonable prices and the inexpensive mass produced CE gear to go with it.

None of this changes my ability to objectively look at things. I sure hope HDM is progressing better than I fear it is, but I'm not yet convinced.

Cheers

I would add that they would like to slow the erosion of disc prices.

There are a multitude of DVDs available at incredibly low prices. I am sure that it scares them that revenue continues to drop significantly despite the tremendous value offering that DVD currently represents. There is a big question there as to why DVD sales have dropped so much despite the price erosion.

Well I don't have to now do I? I also have no interest in doing so.

From a consumers perspective, any numbers they can toss our way are well and good, but when I go to buy/rent a movie on BR, if it's not there then what do I care? Every time I pick up the DVD version it just reinforces DVD habits and not BR habits.

In any case, I don't doubt for a second that ALL the numbers are up. New releases and their sales as well as catalogue titles and their sales. I'm just saying that if they can't get the 6 premium release out each week then they definitely have some work to do.

(of course premium is relative also, but if someone is paying BB to market them on their weekly release boards, then you would think they would be worth a BR copy as well).

Cheers

Do they have Netflix or something similar in Canada?

IMHO...
In the minds of the studios and most of the BDA, the original goals of Blu-ray were to:
1) Replace DVD.
2) Raise the price point for movies closer to what studios think they should sell for.
3) Get people to double and triple dip on movies they already own.

I do not think any of this has changed, but they have realized it will take a lot longer.

They also now have download formats to worry about too, so they now have 2 more goals:
1) Not to let some company like Apple control distribution.
2) Stop or slow down the erosion of disc sales.

I don't think the studios are that worried about downloads. I think they are encouraging it to some degree. I suspect they get more revenue and profit from someone renting from Apple, Vudu, etc than from say a Redbox machine or people borrowing a DVD from their family members or friends. With DRM they have much more control over distribution of a title.

IMHO...
In the minds of the studios and most of the BDA, the original goals of Blu-ray were to:
1) Replace DVD.
2) Raise the price point for movies closer to what studios think they should sell for.
3) Get people to double and triple dip on movies they already own.

I do not think any of this has changed, but they have realized it will take a lot longer.

They also now have download formats to worry about too, so they now have 2 more goals:
1) Not to let some company like Apple control distribution.
2) Stop or slow down the erosion of disc sales.

That's a good point.

It may very well be that the studios can still realize their plans to resell their old catalogue titles. If they can be patient, then as BR players become more and more common as the primary player in the house and the media becomes more and more available then it only makes sense that more people will start picking up some of their favorite old titles. New special features etc will also help drive that especially if their are really interesting ones.

As prices come down on components and volumes increase CE's will also hopefully be able to find a profitable marketplace.

I would personally like to see at a minimum all new releases of any kind of significance (Played in a theater for any kind of minimum run) come out in BR as well as DVD. Heck I would be more than happy to have the BR come out a week before the DVD. Give free BR's away with big DVD releases to "temp" people into buying a player and checking it out.

Anything to get it mass market mainstream so that I can get whatever I want, whenever I want at a reasonable price hahaa.

Cheers

Blockbuster stock isn't the issue. I think it's the availability of the title itself in the BR format.

BB here in Canada seems to be allocating BR a generous amount of shelf space. This may be partly due to the fact that in Canada they charge a $1 premium for the rentals, but that's OK with me as long as they have lots in stock. At the one closest to me they have over half a wall of new release space and another whole center rack or two of older releases.

So it's not that they can't afford to bring them in.

Cheers

If you can't find a title at BB then the fault lies with BB. They are responsible for maintaining their inventory. The studios or distributor have not much to say. They can't force BB to buy what they don't want. If you can't find it there go somewhere else.

Those big surface rental place tend to stock the most mainstream of titles. If you are into some more refined genre then maybe an online rental service like ZIP.ca of canflix or cinemail would satisfy you more. You can even suggest titles to buy with some of those.

So now BD is a new format that the "masses" know nothing about (and strangely, only delegated to citizens of the US of A). :rolleyes: Odd that whenever the argument fits your agenda, BD is either new (for whatever cause you are arguing that day) or well past the new stage (again, for whatever cause you are arguing that day or particular hour). Please decide which it is.

And you still didn't answer my question. Why did YOU buy into HD DVD? What was the driving force that made you upgrade from DVD to HD DVD?

Something else you have ignored:

DO NOT attack each other over formats.

Do they have Netflix or something similar in Canada?

Yeah we have Zip.ca. Works the same way and is affiliated with Rogers although their is no commingling of the rentals or returns (at least their wasn't a year ago).

I used to be a member, but they started doing a lot of goofy stuff like huge promotions that were also available to the public without the infrastructure to actually handle the traffic.

At the same time, I moved to a place with a BB literally 100meters from my front door.

Why do you ask?

Yeah we have Zip.ca. Works the same way and is affiliated with Rogers although their is no commingling of the rentals or returns (at least their wasn't a year ago).

I used to be a member, but they started doing a lot of goofy stuff like huge promotions that were also available to the public without the infrastructure to actually handle the traffic.

At the same time, I moved to a place with a BB literally 100meters from my front door.

Why do you ask?

Well, if you are having problems getting new releases from your local Blockbuster, why not give you business to somebody else?

I have found renting from Netlix (I get 4-6 movies per month) to be much cheaper than renting from my local Blockbuster (although I still do from time to time). Especially if you rent frequently.

I have not had any problem finding new releases on Blu-Ray here in the states, or using Netflix. The only gripe I have with my local Blockbuster is that they do not carry enough Blu-Ray stock for new releases. They may have 10-15+ copies on DVD and only 2-5 on Blu-Ray and the BD's will sometimes be hard to come by for a couple of weeks.

I have had zero issues getting new releases in a timely manner from Netflix.

As for expectations of Blu-Ray, I would guess that studios back in 2006 and 2007 were underestimating the impact of the format war, along with hardware and software prices, and of course nobody saw the massive recession coming.

With the format war over and prices dropping on hardware and many movies, I feel the biggest issue to overcome will continue to be the economy. Getting cheaper hardware out there will help, but consumer confidence is still low and I suspect many people are waiting for the economy to improve before buying items such as cars, televisions, BD players, etc.

Well to be fair, I have not researched each title to confirm their availability of BR or not, just that they are not being stocked at BB along with their DVD new release brethren.

OK, out of curiosity I checked a couple (not that I was planning on renting them all).

Princess Protection Program (Disney) - Not at BB & Not available at Amazon
The Code - (FIRST LOOK PICTURES) - Available at BB
12 Rounds - (FOX) - Available at BB
The Stone Of Destiny - (Alliance Atlantis) - Not at BB & Not available at Amazon
Street Fighter - (FOX) - Available at BB
Columbus Day - (Alliance) - Not at BB & Not available at Amazon

Of those I rented The Code BR and The Stone Of Destiny DVD.

I also made a mistake in that I think I said that only 2 of the 6 were in stock. I'm pretty sure I saw Street Fighter there on BR. That still leaves 3 of 6 with the 3 not present also not being available at Amazon.

The fact that what is available at BB and Amazon align leads me to believe that it is more likely than not that this is also the case for previous weeks.

We can argue whether or not these are significant release, but they were all being promoted at BB.

All things aside, I would just prefer to be able to rent the BR copy and I would think that it couldn't hurt perception to always have one releases with a DVD version.

Cheers

Well, if you are having problems getting new releases from your local Blockbuster, why not give you business to somebody else?

I have found renting from Netlix (I get 4-6 movies per month) to be much cheaper than renting from my local Blockbuster (although I still do from time to time). Especially if you rent frequently.

I live in a rural area and with Zip.ca 3 movies at a time I get 3 to 6 disc per week. I mostly rent anime and documentary/TV disk from them. I use Cinemail.ca (not for BR) with the same deal and result for foreign movies and Canflix for the mainstream/blockbuster titles. I average watching 2 to 3 movies per days. I do slack off in summer (some of those service offer a vacation mode).

In other words, three years after launch, in four of the slowest months of the year, Blu-ray has already sold more than Laserdisc in a whole year four years after launch.

Are you really comparing 1981 absolute numbers to 2009 numbers? Surely you're not trying to spin that as somehow equivalent (and as showing some positive to Blu-ray)? Population numbers, revenue numbers, home video buying population were far fewer in 1981 than today. Another meaningless comparison.

Let me address some of the comments above with the perspective of someone who has been following the week to week sales trends for a few years now. Its like baseball stats or fantasy football to me now to see the Blu-ray growth trends over time. Sure they are less than some previous projections and format war PR spin , but they are robust nonetheless.

The total revenues of Blu-ray and DVD are not that far down from last year. Blu-ray revenues obviously are way up but DVD is not that far down considering that there is a lot of year and heavy sales period left to go.

Top 20 DVD units and revenues, top Blu-ray units and revenues and combined DVD+Blu-ray top 20 units and revenues are all up for 2009 compared to 2008.

Since the top 20 units and revenues and Blu-ray revenues are down, its logical to deduce that the DVD revenue attrition is mostly due to the erosion of catalog DVD price points and a slowing of purchases there and thats a result of format maturity for DVD.

There also is some substitution of DVD sales with Blu-ray which obviously explains part of the DVD attrition as consumers are transitioning to the high definition Blu-ray format from standard definition DVD.

Blu-ray will create more of those catalog sales at a higher price point as Blu-ray household penetration increases and has a much better chance of reviving packaged home media revenues for catalog titles and older releases from the studio libraries than some sort of DVD sales promotions ever would.

After 8 weeks of release and certainly for older catalog DVD titles, Blu-ray is now routinely over 30-50% of units sold and even a greater percentage of revenues generated per title.

Blu-ray is already covering for DVD day and date sales as there is a growth in top 20 units this year.
Given time for hardware ownership growth this fall its very possible that the non top 20 and back catalog older release and studio library title sales will kick in as well. It may not be happening as soon as it was projected but its certainly going to accelerate as more Blu-ray owners start buying Blu-ray versions of some of their favorite movies. They don't have to re buy their entire DVD libraries to make a difference there.

What needs to happen is more Blu-ray hardware sales, which is happening now with more players on the shelves at lower price points, and more facings of Blu-ray on retail shelves which is still an open question, but should happen as the number of Blu-ray households grows.

Click on the link for more charts galore on Blu-ray and DVD revenues and units sold in the Blu-ray Sales thread. (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=16744367#post16744367) which is updated weekly.

http://i39.tinypic.com/33agu4l.jpg
http://i39.tinypic.com/dgmadk.jpg
http://i39.tinypic.com/2il25cl.jpg

Well to be fair, I have not researched each title to confirm their availability of BR or not, just that they are not being stocked at BB along with their DVD new release brethren.

OK, out of curiosity I checked a couple (not that I was planning on renting them all).

Princess Protection Program (Disney) - Not at BB & Not available at Amazon
The Code - (FIRST LOOK PICTURES) - Available at BB
12 Rounds - (FOX) - Available at BB
The Stone Of Destiny - (Alliance Atlantis) - Not at BB & Not available at Amazon
Street Fighter - (FOX) - Available at BB
Columbus Day - (Alliance) - Not at BB & Not available at Amazon

Of those I rented The Code BR and The Stone Of Destiny DVD.

I also made a mistake in that I think I said that only 2 of the 6 were in stock. I'm pretty sure I saw Street Fighter there on BR. That still leaves 3 of 6 with the 3 not present also not being available at Amazon.

The fact that what is available at BB and Amazon align leads me to believe that it is more likely than not that this is also the case for previous weeks.

We can argue whether or not these are significant release, but they were all being promoted at BB.

All things aside, I would just prefer to be able to rent the BR copy and I would think that it couldn't hurt perception to always have one releases with a DVD version.

Cheers

So it appears that some of the releases you are interested in are not available yet on Blu-Ray due to studio decisions. We could argue about demographics, costs, etc but I believe that it is just the case of still being an early adopter for Blu-Ray and that many of the smaller studios and less significant releases from major studios will eventually ramp up over time (at least that it my hope). I was an early adopter with DVD (bought my first player the year they were released) and I remember being in a similar situation with that format. Actually I believe that Blockbuster did not aggressively start renting DVD's in my local area at the time until 2000 or so. But I could be wrong about the year.

Are you really comparing 1981 absolute numbers to 2009 numbers? Surely you're not trying to spin that as somehow equivalent (and as showing some positive to Blu-ray)? Population numbers, revenue numbers, home video buying population were far fewer in 1981 than today. Another meaningless comparison.Considering that home video buying and revenue would have been the results of LD's success rather than barometers of it, it's not that meaningless. Plus, his numbers cover an entire year of LD sales (including the high-volume holidays) versus a particularly bad time of year for video. At best, if the population was ~1/3rd of what it is today (and at worst, the addition of holiday sales would make that more like 1/5th), you might have a point.

I would add that they would like to slow the erosion of disc prices.
That is what I meant by...
"Raise the price point for movies closer to what studios think they should sell for."
It really bugs the heck out of the studios to see their best movies in the $5 bin at Walmart. They really believe that all top movies should sell for close to $40 no matter how old.

I don't think the studios are that worried about downloads. I think they are encouraging it to some degree. I suspect they get more revenue and profit from someone renting from Apple, Vudu, etc than from say a Redbox machine or people borrowing a DVD from their family members or friends. With DRM they have much more control over distribution of a title.

They like downloads and the fact that mosts costs go away, but they are freaked out by the fact that someone like Apple may control/dominate distribution. The music industry did everything the could to slow down Apple, and yet iTunes has become largest music retailer. Also, many of the distribution costs that would get cut with downloads would hurt subsidiaries of the movie studios.

Something else you have ignored:

DO NOT attack each other over formats.

WHAT??? :confused:

How am I attacking you? I asked you a question to something you put out there. Which was: Why did YOU buy into HD DVD? What was the driving force that made you upgrade from DVD to HD DVD?

Stop playing the victim. You threw that question out there, and I threw it back at you. Care to answer it? :rolleyes:

Considering that home video buying and revenue would have been the results of LD's success rather than barometers of it, it's not that meaningless. Plus, his numbers cover an entire year of LD sales (including the high-volume holidays) versus a particularly bad time of year for video. At best, if the population was ~1/3rd of what it is today (and at worst, the addition of holiday sales would make that more like 1/5th), you might have a point.

Plus you look a lot better when compared to LD instead of CD, DVD, or even VHS. Really you should compare BD to SACD. :D

One other factor to remember is that when DVD came along not only was it the best quality and totally revolutionary it was also the cheapest media to distribute content. It was cheaper for a studio to produce for DVD than VHS or LD. Plus DVD players were not backwards compatible with legacy formats.

Now we have Blu Ray which is not only more expensive for studios when compared to DVD but all players are not just backwards compatible but also upconvert DVD! So someone who is waiting for a $50 Blu ray player in my opinion is probably going to end up buying more DVD than Blu ray unless the price gap closes completely. Also, how likely are the $50 to $100 buyers of Blu ray players likely to have the audio and display set ups needed to fully appreciate Blu Ray PQ and AQ improvements?

I believe Blu Ray players with DVD upconverters are helping DVD right now. The big blockbusters will do well on Blu Ray others will continue to sell well on DVD.

only option for studios is to price Blu ray at or below DVD prices or have longer exclusive release windows - I.e. first 3 weeks is only Blu ray.

Also there is no real competition from online as long as rentals are $4.99 or new releases which are only available on HD weeks after the Blu ray (for some studios) and have a 24 watch windows. That's 5x more than a red box DVD for HD and 4" for SD online v. red box for the 24 view model and as far as I know B&M don't have a 24 restriction - at least not when I used to rent from Blockbuster :)

So studios have it in their power to promote Blu ray as the next de facto home video format. It's not about hardware as much as about software pricing.

Let me address some of the comments above with the perspective of someone who has been following the week to week sales trends for a few years now.Kosty, you got a lot of nerve posting facts in this thread :) :D Don't you know many here thrive on conjecture and BS. :(

One other factor to remember is that when DVD came along not only was it the best quality and totally revolutionary it was also the cheapest media to distribute content. It was cheaper for a studio to produce for DVD than VHS or LD. Plus DVD players were not backwards compatible with legacy formats.

Now we have Blu Ray which is not only more expensive for studios when compared to DVD but all players are not just backwards compatible but also upconvert DVD! So someone who is waiting for a $50 Blu ray player in my opinion is probably going to end up buying more DVD than Blu ray unless the price gap closes completely. Also, how likely are the $50 to $100 buyers of Blu ray players likely to have the audio and display set ups needed to fully appreciate Blu Ray PQ and AQ improvements?

I believe Blu Ray players with DVD upconverters are helping DVD right now. The big blockbusters will do well on Blu Ray others will continue to sell well on DVD.

only option for studios is to price Blu ray at or below DVD prices or have longer exclusive release windows - I.e. first 3 weeks is only Blu ray.

Well consumers who buy a $50 to $99 Blu-ray player are just going to be more price conscious than an early adopter. But they gain video quality and ease of use and better menus etc with Blu-ray even if their setup is not optimal or if they are just using their HDTVs speakers in stereo.

The studios 9and retailers) may have increased marginal costs over DVD for Blu-ray but tis still pretty small compared to the retail price and the fact that their is more margin and profit there over rentals and other downloads and streaming options ensures that they will release most new movies on Blu-ray and steadily release out their libraries as well.

only option for studios is to price Blu ray at or below DVD prices or have longer exclusive release windows - I.e. first 3 weeks is only Blu ray. Well thats not going to happen, nor does it have as Blu-ray sales will naturally grow as the number of new hardware owners increase. A bigger factor will how soon will Blu-ray players displace DVD players at retail.

It doesn't matter if Blu-ray costs slightly more to replicate or author as long as its profitable for most titles which it certainly is now for everything coming out from the major studios.

They like downloads and the fact that mosts costs go away, but they are freaked out by the fact that someone like Apple may control/dominate distribution. The music industry did everything the could to slow down Apple, and yet iTunes has become largest music retailer. Also, many of the distribution costs that would get cut with downloads would hurt subsidiaries of the movie studios.

Most of the major music industry labels signed deals with Apple long before the iPod and iTunes really took off (I know because I just read a book on the history of Apple and Steve Jobs and this was discussed heavily). After they saw how successful iTunes was some of the studios tried to renogotiate their song pricing (ie they wanted to charge more for more popular songs and artists and charge less for less popular songs and artists).

Steve Jobs said no.

Movies are different and it is pretty clear based on pricing that studios are taking a different approach with Apple this time. If they would have priced HD new releases at 99 cents I would own an Apple TV right now. But at the current pricing, I would much rather use Netflix or go to my local Blockbuster and get the Blu-Ray version of the same movie. Once my local Redbox carries Blu-Ray I will most likely use that service as well and just skip Blockbuster altogether.

Kosty, you got a lot of nerve posting facts in this thread :) :D Don't you know many here thrive on conjecture and BS. :(

Someone has to do it. :D

Its nice sometimes to throw in some actual data to put the discussion in perspective. ;)


Hey, I know that Blu-ray sales are not where they were projected to be 4 years ago. But a lot of that was hype and optimism with a lot of unknowns being unknown when both HD DVD and Blu-ray combined where less than 1% of packaged media revenues.

Blu-ray's growth has not been and will not be linear. Its the nature of the industry and new product growth curves.

Last year in 4Q 2008, Blu-ray experienced dramatic growth in scale and now is a significant consumer business. The first half of this year, Blu-ray experienced significant gains in top 20 new release market share. As the year moves along and as the Blu-ray hardware ownership base grows, those catalog sales and more day and date marketshare will result as retailers react to the larger number of Blu-ray owners.

Once Blu-ray starts routinely getting 30% of revenues and units, it will be natural for retailers to significantly increase their support of that growing category. Its just not linear and the higher volume second half of the year will coincide with cheaper Blu-ray players being shown to consumers along with the tent pole releases of Star Trek , Transformers ROTF et all.

I have never really seen it as Blu-Ray vs DVD vs Downloads/Streaming/Digital Distro and only one can be left standing.


Each has a relevant market and will be successful IMHO. None of these formats will be going away anytime soon.

I have never really seen it as Blu-Ray vs DVD vs Downloads/Streaming/Digital Distro and only one can be left standing.


Each has a relevant market and will be successful IMHO. None of these formats will be going away anytime soon.

Exactly. The fact is that Blu-ray was supposed to grow the overall market, and it has not. The market has contracted. The format by itself is fine, but it is ludicrous for anyone to state that the studios are "happy". One glance at their financials would make that clear.

The studios will be happy if/when their profits start seeing steady gains. If Blu-ray delivers that, then it will be a success for them.

More likely, it will be a mix of formats that deliver that success for them.

I have never really seen it as Blu-Ray vs DVD vs Downloads/Streaming/Digital Distro and only one can be left standing.


Each has a relevant market and will be successful IMHO. None of these formats will be going away anytime soon.

Actually they compliment each other. That is why Panasonic, Samsung and LG make players that play BDs, DVD and stream movies. An industry insider even said he thinks almost every BD 2.0 players will do all three with in the year.

It's a good plan. In a hurry? Stream a movie. Want super high quality for you favorite movie? Buy the BD. Want something nice to watch for the weekend? Rent (or buy for $5) a DVD.

We can all agree that the more choices for consumers the better.:)

I have never really seen it as Blu-Ray vs DVD vs Downloads/Streaming/Digital Distro and only one can be left standing.


Each has a relevant market and will be successful IMHO. None of these formats will be going away anytime soon.

And the best thing is that you can sell a box that does everything.

Exactly. The fact is that Blu-ray was supposed to grow the overall market, and it has not. The market has contracted. The format by itself is fine, but it is ludicrous for anyone to state that the studios are "happy". One glance at their financials would make that clear.

The studios will be happy if/when their profits start seeing steady gains. If Blu-ray delivers that, then it will be a success for them.

More likely, it will be a mix of formats that deliver that success for them.

I would think that the #1 fear for studios would be services like Redbox. $1 a day rentals. Not only will it be hard for companies like Blockbuster to compete, but it will greatly slow the adoption for downloads/streaming that are not the same price or cheaper.

I think the studios also thought they were "recession proof" and they were not. Whether that is due to people being more reluctant to buy into Blu-Ray, buy into streaming/downloading, or people are simply renting more vs buying, (or people turning to piracy), or most likely a combination of all these factors. It also does not help that many Hollywood movies are simply not worth owning these days. I have personally tried to be much more selective of what I buy vs rent than I was in the past with DVD. Especially with the economy. I don't mind paying $15-25+ for a movie if it is something I will watch multiple times and loan out to friends and family.

And the best thing is that you can sell a box that does everything.

Very true. I see it as a win-win for everybody (consumers, CE's, studios). Well, except maybe the retailers :)

So it appears that some of the releases you are interested in are not available yet on Blu-Ray due to studio decisions. We could argue about demographics, costs, etc but I believe that it is just the case of still being an early adopter for Blu-Ray and that many of the smaller studios and less significant releases from major studios will eventually ramp up over time (at least that it my hope). I was an early adopter with DVD (bought my first player the year they were released) and I remember being in a similar situation with that format. Actually I believe that Blockbuster did not aggressively start renting DVD's in my local area at the time until 2000 or so. But I could be wrong about the year.

I agree... Mostly ;)

The reasons why some of the movies are not there are most likely for the reason you stat plus obviously the studios do not feel their is enough of a market or else they ran into some delays in the BR preperations.

However the movies I am referring to are completely arbitrary from my perspective. They just happened to be the BB new releases that were featured this week (IE. Released today). I didn't pick them. The movies that were released last week and the week before and all the weeks before that were similarly not selected by me in any way shape or form.

All I'm saying is that it appears that pretty consistently only about 50% of the new releases featured at BB are released on BR at the same time they appear on DVD. I would like to see them all released on both to promote adoption whether I would like to see them or not. Surely there is no argument to it being better to have the BR also. At least from the consumers perspective.

Of the 6 I listed, I was really only interested in 2-3 of them and rented 2 as I stated. The third was Columbus day and that was DVD only, but was a maybe for me anyway as I had never heard of it. Interestingly, if there had been the BR copy, I may have rented it. Hey studios, help push me over the edge on rentals, release all on BR :D

The same could be said for some purchases. There have been times when there was a movie I would consider buying only to rent the DVD instead since the BR was not yet available. In that case, having already seen the movie, if I were to ever buy the BR, it would only be much later and assuming I wanted to watch it a few times (No impulse buy opportunity etc)

Cheers

PS. What Kosty says is encouraging also. The sooner the better. Hopefully this fall and Christmas will really push things over the edge. I think once there are a few players in and around the $150-200 mark, it becomes really tempting for the average consumer if they are looking for a player and/or as an upsell to go with an HDTV.

My local Sam's Club just put out six new Blu-ray models this weekend and all were under $228. Wal-Mart is continuing the sales to exhaustion of its $128 Magnavox Fathers Day special. Target just reduced prices to $14.99 on a few dozen Blu-ray titles. So there has been some recent progress.

BTW last week was a real exception for Blu-ray missing out on the day and date titles. Besides TV box sets, the general rule has been that most new DVD releases also have the Blu-ray version coming out at the same time. Thats been that way all year with some ethnic comedies and RomCom chick flicks being the exception.

We should get some information on 2Q 2009 Blu-ray hardware sales within a few weeks and that will give some idea of the early impact of the lower prices and greater availability of the 2009 generation Blu-ray hardware.

EDIT, Just came back from a shopping trip to my local Sam's Club. 3 of the Blu-ray models are $188 or less, and they sold a bunch in the last few days. Anecdotal sure, but its a real change in what they had just weeks before.

I would think that the #1 fear for studios would be services like Redbox. $1 a day rentals. Not only will it be hard for companies like Blockbuster to compete, but it will greatly slow the adoption for downloads/streaming that are not the same price or cheaper.

I think the studios also thought they were "recession proof" and they were not. Whether that is due to people being more reluctant to buy into Blu-Ray, buy into streaming/downloading, or people are simply renting more vs buying, (or people turning to piracy), or most likely a combination of all these factors. It also does not help that many Hollywood movies are simply not worth owning these days. I have personally tried to be much more selective of what I buy vs rent than I was in the past with DVD. Especially with the economy. I don't mind paying $15-25+ for a movie if it is something I will watch multiple times and loan out to friends and family.

Anything that erodes what they customers are willing to pay is scary to them, unless it is via a model that compliments a big increase in overall consumption. Kiosks are indeed a nasty situation since it puts the price point to watch big new releases at $1, while still requiring people to leave their homes and make a decision to make two trips to watch and return the title.

As kiosks continue to expand, I think the studios will realize that a subscription model where they stand to see an increase in consumption and more revenue per viewing is something they will want to embrace and encourage.

My local Sam's Club just put out six new Blu-ray models this weekend and all were under $228. Wal-Mart is continuing the sales to exhaustion of its $128 Magnavox Fathers Day special. Target just reduced prices to $14.99 on a few dozen Blu-ray titles. So there has been some recent progress.

I'm just interested. If you think $15 for an old catalog title is a good price (that's how i read your comment maybe I'm wrong), how does it compare to the same old catalog title on DVD that is being sold for $5-$6?

What is the incentive to a mainstream consumer to pick up 2 and half times more expensive title that will most likely have questionable encode anyways?

Hardware prices are not an issue, they will go down, but media prices are the issue that I'm more concerned about.

http://i39.tinypic.com/dgmadk.jpg


So total disc revenue is down again this year (2008DVD+BD vs. 2009DVD+BD)? That means total disc sales are down even more since BD which brings in higher revenues is a larger piece of that pie.

While its good that BD is increasing, that has to have the studios worried. Total disc revenues down and total disc sales are down again this year. I am sure they were hoping BD would offset DVD's decline.

I would think that the #1 fear for studios would be services like Redbox. $1 a day rentals. Not only will it be hard for companies like Blockbuster to compete, but it will greatly slow the adoption for downloads/streaming that are not the same price or cheaper.

I think the studios also thought they were "recession proof" and they were not. Whether that is due to people being more reluctant to buy into Blu-Ray, buy into streaming/downloading, or people are simply renting more vs buying, (or people turning to piracy), or most likely a combination of all these factors. It also does not help that many Hollywood movies are simply not worth owning these days. I have personally tried to be much more selective of what I buy vs rent than I was in the past with DVD. Especially with the economy. I don't mind paying $15-25+ for a movie if it is something I will watch multiple times and loan out to friends and family.

Well as a good note about piracy, The Pirate Bay has been sold and they are going legit (a la Napster). The biggest torrent site folding will have an impact.

I'm just interested. If you think $15 for an old catalog title is a good price (that's how i read your comment maybe I'm wrong), how does it compare to the same old catalog title on DVD that is being sold for $5-$6?

What is the incentive to a mainstream consumer to pick up 2 and half times more expensive title that will most likely have questionable encode anyways?

Hardware prices are not an issue, they will go down, but media prices are the issue that I'm more concerned about.

Maybe because they want to see them in HiDef and it is bellow the psychological barrier of 20$.

And why do you think they would have questionnable encodes. I've seen budget titles having better encodes than some high priced titles.

So total disc revenue is down again this year (2008DVD+BD vs. 2009DVD+BD)? That means total disc sales are down even more since BD which brings in higher revenues is a larger piece of that pie.

While its good that BD is increasing, that has to have the studios worried.

Total disc revenues down and total disc sales are down again this year. I am sure they were hoping BD would offset DVD's decline. Not too worried as its only down 2.4% and thats too small to worry about much as the main part of the sales year is still in the future.

Still time to easily close that up, as the gap is pretty tiny and there is a lot of year including the 4Q yet to go.

But the sales gap is less a studio issue than a retail one as the attrition is in older DVD title sales and their revenues. Those are a retail cash flow concern as they are long ago sales for the studios.

Total sales revenues for DVD+BD are only down $126.8 M year to date (HMM stats) , which is kinda a rounding error at this point in the year and its half a week sale volume with basically 3/5 of the years sales volume still to come (4Q counting as double). 2.4% down could be made up in a single week and performance by various titles could make up for that as would any change in consumer confidence.



Date Range DVD Blu-ray DVD+BD BD/(DVD+BD) BD/DVD*100 BD% of
Week Ending revenue revenue revenue revenue revenue top 20 units

TOTAL FOR PERIOD
01/04/09 - 06/21/09 4,678.12 410.64 5,088.76 8.07% 8.78 11.44%
01/06/08 - 06/22/08 5,035.37 180.27 5,215.64 3.46% 3.58 5.32%

WEEKLY AVERAGE FOR PERIOD
Average YTD 2009 187.12 16.43 203.55 8.07% 8.78 11.44%
Average YTD 2008 201.41 7.21 208.63 3.46% 3.58 5.32%





http://i44.tinypic.com/mk9f68.jpg

So total disc revenue is down again this year (2008DVD+BD vs. 2009DVD+BD)? That means total disc sales are down even more since BD which brings in higher revenues is a larger piece of that pie.

While its good that BD is increasing, that has to have the studios worried. Total disc revenues down and total disc sales are down again this year. I am sure they were hoping BD would offset DVD's decline.

Total top 20 disc sales for both DVD and Blu-ray are both up.

Its the non top 20 DVD units and revenues that are continuing their downward trend but the increasing revenues from Blu-ray are mostly offsetting that attrition.

How much they will continue to do so is of course an open question.

I'm just interested. If you think $15 for an old catalog title is a good price (that's how i read your comment maybe I'm wrong), how does it compare to the same old catalog title on DVD that is being sold for $5-$6?

What is the incentive to a mainstream consumer to pick up 2 and half times more expensive title that will most likely have questionable encode anyways?

Hardware prices are not an issue, they will go down, but media prices are the issue that I'm more concerned about.

I love how you make it sound like all catalog titles have questionable encodes :rolleyes:

The vast majority of catalog titles on Blu-Ray are a huge step up over the DVD version. Even the worst of the Blu-Ray encodes tends to be a step up over the DVD or what you see on an HD cable/sat channel.

At $10-15 or less many people will simply buy the movie without much thought IMHO. It is an impulse buy. Especially if it is a movie they really enjoy. I know over the years I have picked up a number of movies that I found on a bargain sale only to wonder what I was thinking after I brought it home and it was sitting on my shelf. I probably had over 100 or so DVD's that I only watched once. I am trying to be more selective with Blu-Ray but it is enticing when I see catalog titles going for $7-14....

The studios and retailers know this.

Anything that erodes what they customers are willing to pay is scary to them, unless it is via a model that compliments a big increase in overall consumption. Kiosks are indeed a nasty situation since it puts the price point to watch big new releases at $1, while still requiring people to leave their homes and make a decision to make two trips to watch and return the title.

As kiosks continue to expand, I think the studios will realize that a subscription model where they stand to see an increase in consumption and more revenue per viewing is something they will want to embrace and encourage.

I am not holding my breath on a subscription model for steaming/downloading. At least for new releases.

The goal of the studios is to increase revenue, not lose revenue or stay flat. At some point they may be forced to introduce a subscription model for streaming/downloading new releases, but I suspect they may cap how many movies you can stream/watch and on how many players at a time (ie 4 movies for $10 a month, 10 movies for $20 per month, 20 movies for $30 per month, etc). And I can see it being a pay for play. Meaning if my kid wants to watch "Cars" 5 times a week, that would count against my cap. Anything over your cap maybe they charge you $2-4 per movie.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. On one hand you have consumers that want it all, and they want it cheaper than ever before. And on the other you have the studios who are facing escalating costs to make and distribute a movie, and trying to please the board of directors, stock analysts, and shareholders.

That is why I am not holding my breath on the studios going the subscription model route with streaming/downloading.

They have a history of being greedy ;)

That is why I am not holding my breath on the studios going the subscription model route with streaming/downloading.

They have a history of being greedy ;)

Studio "greed" is usually a much bigger limitation then any technical issue.

But on the other hand the studios knows that most user have a limited budget on how much the spend on movies, so by grabbing a fixed rate every month, could make sense for them.

But there are other methods they could use. You could have a subscription they let you rent 6 new movies and 50 catalog movies (example).

But is there any limitation to sell BD players with built in burners to buy discs online. Can you add AACS to a BD-R?

I think Q4 this year is going to be the real teller. Either Blu-ray sales will explode, or be dissapointing. I think Q4 this year will probably start to show exactly what role BD is going to play in the grand scheme of home video (along with how the dust settles in Q1 2010).

Its going to explode upward in the 4Q 2009 period, the only questions is how high and how much market share it gains against DVD and if the combined DVD+Blu-ray revenues and units sold gains from last years numbers.



Top 20 Units

http://i40.tinypic.com/9pygs3.jpg

http://i39.tinypic.com/qxks2x.jpg

http://i44.tinypic.com/23hr9f8.jpg




Revenues

http://i39.tinypic.com/2a0cdiu.jpg

http://i41.tinypic.com/14e7xq9.jpg

http://i44.tinypic.com/mk9f68.jpg

As far as subscriptions go I think that's definitely going to be the next thing studios will do if situation with Blu doesn't get better for their plans.

It's very simple, they want your credit card. Instead of them trying to force you to shell out your credit card each time you purchase I can totally see them wanting to go with greater availability of subscription models where they have your card on file and make it easier to charge. Especially knowing that people use it or not will hardly ever cancel stuff unless it's really an issue.

Apple did one fantastic thing with iTunes store. They introduced for the first time that i've seen then a one click shopping. You enter your CC once and it's so easy to purchase.

Subscription model might not as effective but will give them opportunity to offer other things you can "upgrade to" or simply buy in addition to your subscription and make these impulse buys much easier and guilt free.

Its going to explode upward in the 4Q 2009 period, the only questions is how high and how much market share it gains against DVD and if the combined DVD+Blu-ray revenues and units sold gains from last years numbers.

In those charts though I still don't understand why they use top 20 unit sales. To me, by logic, that doesn't say much. A true and honest way of looking at it is to look at all Blu-ray titles and how they sell compared to DVD and how well Blu grows overall not just for a specific number of movies.

It could be that top 20 titles match more of the demographic of PS3 crowd or some other factors that don't necessarily show the overall growth. Don't know. For example the percentage of Blu-ray sales overall might be much lower if top 20 units sold great because they touch a specific demographic but other 500 or whatever Blu-ray titles don't even take 1% of DVD sales. Makes sense?

This would erode the overall percentage of Blu-ray vs DVD sales and not look so bright and would actually give us the answer to whether or not Blu-ray is gaining ground and how well it's compensating for DVD sales overall not just based on 20 titles.

I'm speculating now, but I'd be really interested to see what are the sales of other DVD titles vs Blu-ray titles available outside top 20. I'm betting that there is a much larger number of catalog titles and other day/date titles (outside top 20) that made good money/still reach a much larger audience on DVD vs Blu-ray for the same title. That would gives us also a much better picture, but I'm doubtful we'll find those cause I guess it might not paint a good picture.

Is there a chart that shows total blu-ray sales vs DVD sales and the growth of that? I'd definitely like to see that, because that would include catalog titles as well as titles that are possibly not in PS3 demographic for example.

If you have those, I'd definitely like to see it (you can link the sales thread of your post - no need to repost)..

Not too worried as its only down 2.4% and thats too small to worry about much as the main part of the sales year is still in the future...

Any numbers on total disc sales rather than revenue? I know the studios are pushing BD and those BDs with a DVD that cost a little more. That is a great way to boost revenue. I would be curious to see how much total disc sales have dropped. That would be a better indicator about how many people are buying movies.

For example, if studios sell 100 $30 discs they have the same revenue (and maybe higher profits) than selling 300 $10 discs. Of course that would mean less consumers (1/3rd) are watching their movies.

Any numbers on total disc sales rather than revenue? I know the studios are pushing BD and those BDs with a DVD that cost a little more. That is a great way to boost revenue. I would be curious to see how much total disc sales have dropped. That would be a better indicator about how many people are buying movies.

Paramount looking for distribution partner

Paramount, like other studios, is grappling with the maturation of the DVD market, which saw consumer sales fall by about 15% in the first quarter. Though sales of the Blu-ray Disc high-def format are growing by more than 100%, neither it nor new digital formats are large enough yet to counterbalance the DVD decline.

http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6668402.html?nid=3513

Paramount looking for distribution partner
http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6668402.html?nid=3513

yeah I read that yesterday.. This means that Paramount is pretty much not getting optimistic about DVD and Blu-ray is seemingly costing them too much so better to give it to the buddies Fox and Sony who owns most replication for Blu-ray anyways.

Bad news for quality and prices because Sony and Fox are absolute worst with encodes and prices of their releases. I can imagine what will happen with Paramount's releases now.

This also seems that one of the main studios is not really pursuing home entertainment on optical. Pretty wild.

yeah I read that yesterday.. This means that Paramount is pretty much not getting optimistic about DVD and Blu-ray is seemingly costing them too much so better to give it to the buddies Fox and Sony who owns most replication for Blu-ray anyways.

Bad news for quality and prices because Sony and Fox are absolute worst with encodes and prices of their releases. I can imagine what will happen with Paramount's releases now.

This also seems that one of the main studios is not really pursuing home entertainment on optical. Pretty wild.

A little of topic, but I heard on the news the other day that despite Star Trek, Transformers and big increases in over all theater attendence, Paramount is having money problems. The said a few movies like that last Eddie Murphy one really hurt them.

I'm just interested. If you think $15 for an old catalog title is a good price (that's how i read your comment maybe I'm wrong), how does it compare to the same old catalog title on DVD that is being sold for $5-$6?

What is the incentive to a mainstream consumer to pick up 2 and half times more expensive title that will most likely have questionable encode anyways?Aside from the 6x resolution and better sound, there's the fact that DVD has been around for 4x as long, and was not "comparing" the same to VHS or LD price-wise at the same point in-life-cycle.
Hardware prices are not an issue, they will go down, but media prices are the issue that I'm more concerned about.I don't know how many news items from studios and retailers you have to go out of your way to ignore in order to make this claim over and over, but it's quite a few.
yeah I read that yesterday.. This means that Paramount is pretty much not getting optimistic about DVD and Blu-ray is seemingly costing them too much so better to give it to the buddies Fox and Sony who owns most replication for Blu-ray anyways.Proof that Sony and Fox own most replication?
Bad news for quality and prices because Sony and Fox are absolute worst with encodes and prices of their releases. I can imagine what will happen with Paramount's releases now.Wow. Pointedly false, even here at AVS, and has been for pretty much the last year or so.

I'm going to be generous and assume you're not reading any PQ thread anywhere instead of making something up, since even one minute's searching would tell you that the worst in catalog PQ is almost without exception Paramount themselves (see also: Star Trek movies), followed closely by Warner, especially New Line releases.
This also seems that one of the main studios is not really pursuing home entertainment on optical. Pretty wild.Considering there's nothing in the article that even hints at that, I'd love to know where this doozy came from.

For those of you that think Blu-Ray growth is poor, you may not want to read this then:
Digital-media sales stalled in Q1
DIGITAL: Ad-supported revenue falls on economic downturn

Long expected to surge as demand for such packaged media as DVDs flattens, digital media sales stalled during the first quarter as the economic slowdown cut advertising spending needed to support many media-content Web sites, according to one report.

Sales of digital video, music and videogame content for the 12 months ended March 31 rose less than one percent from a year earlier, slowing from 3.4% and 6.6% trailing-twelve-month sales increases for the two previous quarters, Strategy Analytics said in a statement. Consumer paid digital sales rose 2.9% for the year ended March, while ad-supported digital-media revenue fell 0.7%, according to Jia Wu, analyst at Strategy Analytics and author of the report.

http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6668382.html

Looks like optical disc media aint going anywhere.....

For those of you that think Blu-Ray growth is poor, you may not want to read this then:


http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6668382.html


You may want to do some research to understand exactly what they are measuring and how that relates to seasonal issues as well as the general ad-based issues every media outlet is experiencing.

http://www.strategyanalytics.com/img_up/pr/20090623-3.png

That said, this is not the place for that discussion. The correct location is here: http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=16752826#post16752826

EDIT: For some context, the growth they are talking about is off a $74 billion base.

http://www.internetfinancialnews.com/insiderreports/featured/ifn-2-20090320GlobalDigitalMediaReaches74Billion.html

Looks like optical disc media aint going anywhere.....
No, its not, but the number of optical discs sold continues to decline at a steady pace.

I cannot get to your article, but it looks like they are combining digital video (tiny market), music (huge market) and videogame content (big market) in to one number and says sales are not increasing as fast as they have been...but they continue to increase. Also, I would be curious to know if the Nextflix/Amazon/Panasonic/LG/Samsung movies are counted, because I think those are more of rentals. That is the market that I think is going to do the best over the next couple of years...and BD will do pretty well too.

For those of you that think Blu-Ray growth is poor, you may not want to read this then:Joost cuts off its Internet TV arm. Looks like another causality of these bad economic times.

Any numbers on total disc sales rather than revenue? I know the studios are pushing BD and those BDs with a DVD that cost a little more. That is a great way to boost revenue. I would be curious to see how much total disc sales have dropped. That would be a better indicator about how many people are buying movies.

For example, if studios sell 100 $30 discs they have the same revenue (and maybe higher profits) than selling 300 $10 discs. Of course that would mean less consumers (1/3rd) are watching their movies.

Valid. I'd like to know this as well.

This reminds me of the metrics about movie attendance. It's up this year... but (at least a couple of months ago) that is revenue. Number of tickets sold was down from a few years ago, I think.

I know they are both relevant, but I'd also like to know both. After all, I read "Winning Numbers" in college- the more info you get, the less likely it is just spin.

Joost cuts off its Internet TV arm. Looks like another causality of these bad economic times.

For those interested in actual context of why they are shutting down...


Internet TV service Joost has given up on its attempt to compete with YouTube and the increasingly successful Hulu, backed by Fox, Disney and NBC.

That is from the Variety story with the title "Joost cuts off its Internet TV arm".

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118005565.html

Joost cuts off its Internet TV arm. Looks like another causality of these bad economic times.

More like a casualty of no business plan. Hard to blame this on on the economy.

In those charts though I still don't understand why they use top 20 unit sales. To me, by logic, that doesn't say much. A true and honest way of looking at it is to look at all Blu-ray titles and how they sell compared to DVD and how well Blu grows overall not just for a specific number of movies.

It could be that top 20 titles match more of the demographic of PS3 crowd or some other factors that don't necessarily show the overall growth. Don't know. For example the percentage of Blu-ray sales overall might be much lower if top 20 units sold great because they touch a specific demographic but other 500 or whatever Blu-ray titles don't even take 1% of DVD sales. Makes sense?

This would erode the overall percentage of Blu-ray vs DVD sales and not look so bright and would actually give us the answer to whether or not Blu-ray is gaining ground and how well it's compensating for DVD sales overall not just based on 20 titles.

I'm speculating now, but I'd be really interested to see what are the sales of other DVD titles vs Blu-ray titles available outside top 20. I'm betting that there is a much larger number of catalog titles and other day/date titles (outside top 20) that made good money/still reach a much larger audience on DVD vs Blu-ray for the same title. That would gives us also a much better picture, but I'm doubtful we'll find those cause I guess it might not paint a good picture.

Is there a chart that shows total blu-ray sales vs DVD sales and the growth of that? I'd definitely like to see that, because that would include catalog titles as well as titles that are possibly not in PS3 demographic for example.

If you have those, I'd definitely like to see it (you can link the sales thread of your post - no need to repost)..

Top 20 titles are the standard industry metric for current release sales and dominant revenues as DVD units sold drop dramatically after several weeks of release and thus the top 20 titles are doing the majority of current sales.

Plus once they fall off the top 20/30/50 charts or after 8 weeks of a DVD release they blend in the great grey goo of older releases at low sales volumes.

Most importantly though for our purposes, thats the only weekly data we get for units and together with overall format revenues they together give a more complete picture.

If you give me better data for units, I'll keep track of it.

From time to time HMM releases the Nielsen Videoscan first alert unit weekly figures and that closely tracks the trends of my estimated top 20 unit graphs.

More importantly as the data has been tracked now for more than 18 months now even if its magnitude is off the growth trends of the consistently compiled database are very useful over time to gain a perspective of the trends.

Any numbers on total disc sales rather than revenue? I know the studios are pushing BD and those BDs with a DVD that cost a little more. That is a great way to boost revenue. I would be curious to see how much total disc sales have dropped. That would be a better indicator about how many people are buying movies.

For example, if studios sell 100 $30 discs they have the same revenue (and maybe higher profits) than selling 300 $10 discs. Of course that would mean less consumers (1/3rd) are watching their movies.

We don't have that data except from a DEG estimate at the end of the year or an occasional claim in a article or press release. Certainly not weekly.

All that is for certain is that on average Blu-ray sell for more than their DVD versions and catalog DVD prices have fallen a lot in the past 3 years.

yeah I read that yesterday.. This means that Paramount is pretty much not getting optimistic about DVD and Blu-ray is seemingly costing them too much so better to give it to the buddies Fox and Sony who owns most replication for Blu-ray anyways.

Bad news for quality and prices because Sony and Fox are absolute worst with encodes and prices of their releases. I can imagine what will happen with Paramount's releases now.

This also seems that one of the main studios is not really pursuing home entertainment on optical. Pretty wild.

Means nothing of the sort. A belt tightening move and a possible sign that Sony DADC is offering better deals than Technicolor and there is worry Technicolor may not have enough BD50 capacity in the future to met demand.

Sony DADC dominance of Blu-ray BD50 production capacity is another discussion.

I'm speculating now, but I'd be really interested to see what are the sales of other DVD titles vs Blu-ray titles available outside top 20. I'm betting that there is a much larger number of catalog titles and other day/date titles (outside top 20) that made good money/still reach a much larger audience on DVD vs Blu-ray for the same title. That would gives us also a much better picture, but I'm doubtful we'll find those cause I guess it might not paint a good picture.

Is there a chart that shows total blu-ray sales vs DVD sales and the growth of that? I'd definitely like to see that, because that would include catalog titles as well as titles that are possibly not in PS3 demographic for example.


Actually the opposite is true.

Blu-ray sales outside the top 20 Blu-ray titles actually contribute a lot more to the Blu-ray total than DVD titles do , and Blu-ray titles have a much larger active sales period that grow market share over time.

DVD sales are dominated by the top 20/30 releases while with Blu-ray 100/200 and more titles are actively contributing weekly sales. So a top 100 DVD versus top 200 Blu-ray unit chart would actually favor Blu-ray more.

Only thing that DVD has a huge advantage is total units sold as the zillions of releases that sell a few copies and the bargain bin titles sell a bunch, but no one really cares as those units gain little margin and are long off the studio books.

DVD sales volumes really fall off a cliff on a per title basis once you get beyond the top 20 or so releases. By the time you get to number 30 its getting into generic title territory.

Since the Blu-ray hardware base is still growing rapidly and retail facings are steadily increasing the catalog Blu-ray titles have a better chance over time to link up with a new owner who has not seen them yet and adopt them and take them home.

http://www.the-numbers.com/dvd/charts/weekly/thisweek.php

By #20 DVD titles are less than 7-10% of the top title and by #30 its 3-5% while Blu-ray has been consistently having titles that contribute down far below that number.

Volumes are still an order of magnitude below DVD but that trend has held steady as Blu-ray volumes have increased.

http://www.the-numbers.com/dvd/charts/weekly/thisweek.php

By #20 DVD titles are less than 7-10% of the top title and by #30 its 3-5% while Blu-ray has been consistently having titles that contribute down far below that number.


Well this would be relevant to the actual number of units sold from the top title too? If it's a smaller number of units I would imagine that percentage difference between the later titles on Blu-ray would be higher because it's easier to compensate specific number of units relative to the first title.

From your chart if we look at the weekly sales revenue the difference is not that different then the actual sales of units.

As I said, I would like to see hard numbers that compare overall units sales for all titles on DVD vs overall sales on all title on Blu-ray in order to claim that it's growing as it is portrayed in top 20 titles especially since those titles are sometimes different too. Do they compare exactly same movies on top 20 titles between DVD and Blu-ray as well? Or just top 20 DVD titles and top 20 Blu-ray titles no matter what movie? I ask this because if a movie is not that interesting to mainstream audience but Blu-ray demographics enjoys it Blu-ray will have a noticeable percentage increase in statistics.

As I said, I would like to see hard numbers that compare overall units sales for all titles on DVD vs overall sales on all title on Blu-ray in order to claim that it's growing as it is portrayed in top 20 titles especially since those titles are sometimes different too. Do they compare exactly same movies on top 20 titles between DVD and Blu-ray as well? Or just top 20 DVD titles and top 20 Blu-ray titles no matter what movie? I ask this because if a movie is not that interesting to mainstream audience but Blu-ray demographics enjoys it Blu-ray will have a noticeable percentage increase in statistics.

If you would really like to see those numbers that tracking data is available for a fee. Just contact the sales department at the tracking firm. Nothing is hidden it just isn't free. It costs a lot of money to compile those numbers.

Top 20 isn't a conspiracy dreamt up by the BDA it has been a standard measure in the entertainment industry going back to at least the 1950s if not earlier, measuring the top vinyl records sold, top 45s and top songs played on the radio.

All this stuff has been discussed ad nauseum in the sales thread. In fact if I am not mistaken some of Kosty's replies up there are just copy and paste jobs as he has typed the answer out to many times by now.

As I said, I would like to see hard numbers that compare overall units sales for all titles on DVD vs overall sales on all title on Blu-ray in order to claim that it's growing as it is portrayed in top 20 titles especially since those titles are sometimes different too So would I. :D

Care to pay for the access of a weekly basis and the rights for public disclosure and publication? :p

What I can tell you is that the free top 20 estimate matches what is used by industry sources for paid data pretty closely, and its....free and available for us. :)

No one cares about individual DVD title sales that are below the top 100 units anyway on a weekly basis and cumulative sales per quarter or year or per release are the only metrics of concern.

As I said, I would like to see hard numbers that compare overall units sales for all titles on DVD vs overall sales on all title on Blu-ray in order to claim that it's growing as it is portrayed in top 20 titles especially since those titles are sometimes different too.

Do they compare exactly same movies on top 20 titles between DVD and Blu-ray as well? Or just top 20 DVD titles and top 20 Blu-ray titles no matter what movie?

I ask this because if a movie is not that interesting to mainstream audience but Blu-ray demographics enjoys it Blu-ray will have a noticeable percentage increase in statistics. The top 20 estimate for units is just the same as the pie chart. Its based of the units sold of the 20 bestselling DVD titles and the units sold of the 20 bestselling Blu-ray titles for that week.

Don't look at it as a snapshot so much for the individual week, look at it best as a tool at looking at the longer term growth trends.

If you would really like to see those numbers that tracking data is available for a fee. Just contact the sales department at the tracking firm. Nothing is hidden it just isn't free. It costs a lot of money to compile those numbers.

Top 20 isn't a conspiracy dreamt up by the BDA it has been a standard measure in the entertainment industry going back to at least the 1950s if not earlier, measuring the top vinyl records sold, top 45s and top songs played on the radio.

All this stuff has been discussed ad nauseum in the sales thread. In fact if I am not mistaken some of Kosty's replies up there are just copy and paste jobs as he has typed the answer out to many times by now.

Actually, I type fast and in this case I didn't even bother to look up and cut and paste the answers since I know them so naturally that they just flow out the keyboard.

The bottom line is there is no conspiracy to make Blu-ray look good here in the top 20 selection. As a matter of fact, when I started doing them, some industry people were irritated as they did not put Blu-ray last year in a very good light and the numbers were so close to the actual Nielsen Vidoscan and The Redhill Group numbers that I had to defend my methodology and prove that they were from open source data and not from any NDA stuff. I've published them weekly, good and bad for Blu-ray and DVD and let them pretty much speak for themselves.

They have become more useful over time, but I'm talking whats available and my key contribution is the routine persistence in compiling them every week and presenting them in a inderstandable format.

Its actually pretty amazing we have access to the data we get. I've never seen anything like it and its a pleasure to keep track of it over time. :)

If you would really like to see those numbers that tracking data is available for a fee. Just contact the sales department at the tracking firm. Nothing is hidden it just isn't free. It costs a lot of money to compile those numbers. Even if you did, you would not be able to publish them , with limited exceptions, as they would be under a non disclosure agreement. :)

Actually the opposite is true.

Blu-ray sales outside the top 20 Blu-ray titles actually contribute a lot more to the Blu-ray total than DVD titles do , and Blu-ray titles have a much larger active sales period that grow market share over time.

DVD sales are dominated by the top 20/30 releases while with Blu-ray 100/200 and more titles are actively contributing weekly sales. So a top 100 DVD versus top 200 Blu-ray unit chart would actually favor Blu-ray more.

Only thing that DVD has a huge advantage is total units sold as the zillions of releases that sell a few copies and the bargain bin titles sell a bunch, but no one really cares as those units gain little margin and are long off the studio books.

As you know, The Numbers website tracks DVD's top 30 sellers for the week with disc numbers and revenue.

Looking at the 21 to 30 entries - I see a lot of sales there:

http://www.the-numbers.com/dvd/charts/weekly/thisweek.php

As you know, The Numbers website tracks DVD's top 30 sellers for the week with disc numbers and revenue.

Looking at the 21 to 30 entries - I see a lot of sales there:

http://www.the-numbers.com/dvd/charts/weekly/thisweek.php

For DVDs 26-30 I see these numbers of discs sold:
78,715
78,571
77,850
77,660
72,804

That is not a big drop off. I would bet that there were a fair number more DVDs that sold 50,000 units last week.

How many discs did the top BDs sell last week?

For DVDs 26-30 I see these numbers of discs sold:
78,715
78,571
77,850
77,660
72,804

That is not a big drop off. I would bet that there were a fair number more DVDs that sold 50,000 units last week.

How many discs did the top BDs sell last week?

The revenue was $20 million. So what is the average price of a BD?

My bad. Last week they have there is a bit higher than average for those 21-30 titles , probably because there was not a big release last week.

If you toggle back week after week you can see for almost all of the year the top 30 titles units hover around 30,000 units. Thats a fraction of the top 10 titles and Blu-ray versions of many of those top 30 titles have a much higher market share than when they are released.

Its the sheer number of misc DVD titles that add up off the non top 20/30 releases, not any individual titles.

My bad. Last week they have there is a bit higher than average for those 21-30 titles , probably because there was not a big release last week.

If you toggle back week after week you can see for almost all of the year the top 30 titles units hover around 30,000 units. Thats a fraction of the top 10 titles and Blu-ray versions of many of those top 30 titles have a much higher market share than when they are released.

Its the sheer number of misc DVD titles that add up off the non top 20/30 releases, not any individual titles.

We looking at the same link here? :confused:

I just went back 6 weeks and it averages out that #21 is about 70,000+ while #30 is 35,000+

Last week is part of a trend and not the anamoly that you claim it is.