http://www.gwn.com/news/story.php/id/11705/NYPost_Retailers_to_Pull_Plug_on_HD_DVD.html


Blu-ray sales have surpassed HD DVD, and analysts predict retailers will abandon the format next year.


The NY Post has just published a new article on the next-gen DVD format war. According to writer Lou Lumenick, retailers are set to abandon the HD DVD format next year due to lagging sales.

The Departed recently premiered on both formats, and the Blu-ray version came up trumps, selling more copies than the HD DVD version. According to the article:

...sales of Blu-ray discs have exploded to nearly three times those of HD DVD discs since Christmas.

It's the first clear sign that consumers are choosing sides in the nastiest video format war since VHS emerged victorious over Sony's Betamax machines in the 1980s.

"The format war is in its final phase," crows Steve Feldstein of 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment, which, like Sony and Disney, is releasing titles exclusively on Blu-ray. "It's never been a question of if Blu-ray will pass HD DVD, but a matter of when."

Some retailers are now claiming it's safe to buy a Blu-ray players without fear that that the format will lose. Analyst Alison Casey, from London's Understanding & Solutions group predicts that retailers will abandon the format some time in 2008. Reffering to European retailers, Casey said:

"They never wanted two formats. It confuses consumers and creates problems with them with returns. They're looking to go to a single format as soon as possible."

...sales of Blu-ray discs have exploded to nearly three times those of HD DVD discs since Christmas.


O RLY?

They just forgot to mention that there were next to on new HD-DVD releases in that timeframe!


"The format war is in its final phase," crows Steve Feldstein of 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment

According to Sony, it´s already over :eek: :eek:

does this mean now i have to ebay my hd dvd player????

Yeah, my guess is late '08.

Universal will probably announce blu-ray titles CES '08, so...

http://www.gwn.com/news/story.php/id/11705/NYPost_Retailers_to_Pull_Plug_on_HD_DVD.html


Blu-ray sales have surpassed HD DVD, and analysts predict retailers will abandon the format next year.


The NY Post has just published a new article on the next-gen DVD format war. According to writer Lou Lumenick, retailers are set to abandon the HD DVD format next year due to lagging sales.

The Departed recently premiered on both formats, and the Blu-ray version came up trumps, selling more copies than the HD DVD version. According to the article:

...sales of Blu-ray discs have exploded to nearly three times those of HD DVD discs since Christmas.

It's the first clear sign that consumers are choosing sides in the nastiest video format war since VHS emerged victorious over Sony's Betamax machines in the 1980s.

"The format war is in its final phase," crows Steve Feldstein of 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment, which, like Sony and Disney, is releasing titles exclusively on Blu-ray. "It's never been a question of if Blu-ray will pass HD DVD, but a matter of when."

Some retailers are now claiming it's safe to buy a Blu-ray players without fear that that the format will lose. Analyst Alison Casey, from London's Understanding & Solutions group predicts that retailers will abandon the format some time in 2008. Reffering to European retailers, Casey said:

"They never wanted two formats. It confuses consumers and creates problems with them with returns. They're looking to go to a single format as soon as possible."


agree 100% with this...

ofcourse it was a NY Post article... ;)

I would rather listen to spokespeople from the neutral studios like that dude from Paramount.

It's really gettin ridiculous some of these claims.

Yeah, my guess is late '08.

Universal will probably announce blu-ray titles CES '08, so...

LOL

The problem is that perception is reality, and if the mainstream press is saying HD DVD is doomed then there's no way the general public who reads this is going to buy into it. And if more of these articles proliferate it becomes something of a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The problem is that perception is reality, and if the mainstream press is saying HD DVD is doomed then there's no way the general public who reads this is going to buy into it. And if more of these articles proliferate it becomes something of a self-fulfilling prophecy.

There does appear to be a concerted campaign to pronounce the demise of hd-dvd, I think every trick in the book is being used to ensure victory.

News paper articles can wreck individuals/companys with a few choice penned words. Not very nice, but when the stakes are this high......

When I tell folks in my office I got a Blu-Ray player they say "I saw a commercial for a Blu-Ray movie, what exactly is Blu-Ray ?"

They all say they have never heard of HD-DVD.

I'm guessing early 2008. We'll see what happens.

The problem is that perception is reality, and if the mainstream press is saying HD DVD is doomed then there's no way the general public who reads this is going to buy into it. And if more of these articles proliferate it becomes something of a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Wasn't the mainstream press just saying the PS3 was a failure and Blu-ray was likely doomed? Those were the articles on Google News anyways. I guess we are supposed to ignore those and believe this one?

All these "news" (I use that term loosely for these opinion pieces) articles do is further confuse the general public and slow down adoption of both formats.

Sweet, sweet fud.

http://www.gwn.com/news/story.php/id/11705/NYPost_Retailers_to_Pull_Plug_on_HD_DVD.html




The NY Post has just published a new article on the next-gen DVD format war. According to writer Lou Lumenick, retailers are set to abandon the HD DVD format next year due to lagging sales.

"
Did you say just published? Please. We have been reading that FUD article for what, two weeks now. I'm glad he KNOWS what all retailers are going to do in 2008. What has Lou been contacting "the spirits"?

Mainstream press vs blog entries. That about sums up this part of the marketing warfare. There's still entries in blogland pronouncing that BD is doomed that HD DVD is outselling BD disks, etc etc etc.

Could be because one side serves salmon and sparkling water in their press conference while the other side serves donuts and coffee. Maybe main stream press reporters just prefer donuts over salmon. ;)

Sigh.......boring.

Sigh.......boring.
indeed, why do these flamebait threads even exsist .... sigh :(

Wasn't the mainstream press just saying the PS3 was a failure and Blu-ray was likely doomed? Those were the articles on Google News anyways. I guess we are supposed to ignore those and believe this one?

All these "news" (I use that term loosely for these opinion pieces) articles do is further confuse the general public and slow down adoption of both formats.

I wasn't ignoring or advocating anything. I was responding to this particular post. I have not seen any articles proclaiming Blu-ray was in trouble since the end of last year. Doesn't mean there are not any such articles that are more current, but the perception right now seems to be weighted heavily toward Blu-ray.

I agree it slows the general adoption of both formats. The problem is that even if HD DVD player prices fall to $199, J6P, if he's read any of these "doom" articles, still won't buy one. Why pay anything for a product that won't be around?

I'm guessing early 2008. We'll see what happens.

Yet this year (2007) is my expectation.

The problem is that even if HD DVD player prices fall to $199, J6P, if he's read any of these "doom" articles, still won't buy one. Why pay anything for a product that won't be around?

Especially when they don't have Disney, Fox, Sony or MGM.

At $200 people will buy a HD player of any brand. $199 for many familes is a save purchase that mitigates risk, $499 is not.

I realize the press just has to right about something so why not toss out an article of no substance. Retailers will abandon a product if they are not making money. All writers see is 3:1 ratio in movie sales and they don't even question how that came to be.

Here's whats going to happen. Hopefully the studios will fix the DRM breaches that have occured. Then by summer all studios will be cranking out titles in preparation of another hot HD Christmas season that should have 80+ million HDTV sold.

Blu-ray and HD DVD will still be here battling it out.

Why do the mods let these threads exist?

Why do the mods let these threads exist?

1st Amendment? Just a thought... :p

At $200 people will buy a HD player of any brand. $199 for many familes is a save purchase that mitigates risk, $499 is not.



When they find out they cannot watch Spider-man, Pirates, and other Fox/Disney/Sony/MGM/Lionsgate titles and they can on Blu-ray, they'll think twice. Especially by that time Blu-ray's hardware will be similarly priced. Come June, they'll only be a $200 price difference between HD DVD ($399) and Blu-ray ($599) standalone units - not counting the massive amount of PS3s, of course. By the end of the year, or early next year, Blu-ray will match HD DVD in hardware price and obviously exceed HD DVD's three studio support and title selection.

When they find out they cannot watch Spider-man, Pirates, and other Fox/Disney/Sony/MGM/Lionsgate titles and they can on Blu-ray, they'll think twice. Especially by that time Blu-ray's hardware will be similarly priced. Come June, they'll only be a $200 price difference between HD DVD ($399) and Blu-ray ($599) standalone units - not counting the massive amount of PS3s, of course. By the end of the year, or early next year, Blu-ray will match HD DVD in hardware price and obviously exceed HD DVD's three studio support and title selection.


LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.....massive amount of PS3's.....<sigh>...that was a good one.

When they find out they cannot watch Spider-man, Pirates, and other Fox/Disney/Sony/MGM/Lionsgate titles and they can on Blu-ray, they'll think twice. Especially by that time Blu-ray's hardware will be similarly priced. Come June, they'll only be a $200 price difference between HD DVD ($399) and Blu-ray ($599) standalone units - not counting the massive amount of PS3s, of course. By the end of the year, or early next year, Blu-ray will match HD DVD in hardware price and obviously exceed HD DVD's three studio support and title selection.

If HD-DVD supprters still don't realise the writings on the wall, they never will.

They're the hardcore of a tiny niche group!

The problem is that perception is reality, and if the mainstream press is saying HD DVD is doomed then there's no way the general public who reads this is going to buy into it. And if more of these articles proliferate it becomes something of a self-fulfilling prophecy.

David you're spot on and I've expressed this view in other threads when this and the IGN article were first posted. Advertisers and politicians use this principle to great effect every single day.

At $200 people will buy a HD player of any brand. $199 for many familes is a save purchase that mitigates risk, $499 is not.

I realize the press just has to right about something so why not toss out an article of no substance. Retailers will abandon a product if they are not making money. All writers see is 3:1 ratio in movie sales and they don't even question how that came to be.

Here's whats going to happen. Hopefully the studios will fix the DRM breaches that have occured. Then by summer all studios will be cranking out titles in preparation of another hot HD Christmas season that should have 80+ million HDTV sold.

Blu-ray and HD DVD will still be here battling it out.

Venturer discount HD-DVD player at the CeBIT show in Hannover this week.

http://www.hddvdprg.com/eng/event/31cebit.html

There are going to be plenty of those little red HD-DVD boxes surrounding it in Walmart and Target soon.

Despite the press and thier superior wisdom, I think this format war is going to continue for quite sometime. Both camps are in it for the long haul.

1st Amendment? Just a thought... :p
Which has nothing to do whatsoever with a privately owned forum, second thought?

The truth/falsity of the thread statement will, partially at least, depend upon how much money BRD & HDVDD throw at them for strategically placed displays in b&m stores. The "best location = best sales" theory has been mentioned many times before in these threads and I saw it in action myself this past weekend.

A new BB just opened up north of SF, maybe five miles from a currently operating BB. I visited for the first time recently and saw for myself why it would be easy to believe this thread title. Along a major aisle near the other video displays I saw not one but TWO BD displays, about fifteen yards apart and one was an endcap. Being a proud, observant, Format Neutral I immediately went to find the HDDVD display, which happened to be very obscurely located around the corner from the non-endcap BD display, and the Tosh A2 wasn't even hooked up for viewing.

I went to find a manager and asked him why he had two BD's on prominent display and one not-so-prominent HDDVD display & he basically stated that it was because BD had paid more money for more exclusive display locations within the store. For the record I saw very few people stopping to look at the displays & those who did really didn't appear to know what they were viewing.

My point is that retailers hold a tremendous amount of power regarding which format will survive, if not both, and that one of the major factors will be how much payola they receive. This doesn't surprise me but it's still somewhat frightening.

If SACD and DVD-Audio are still alive (kind of),
This is going to take longer...

hd,

If SACD and DVD-Audio are still alive (kind of),

SACD is still alive, with new releases almost every month. I own around 200 SACDs. They are great.

My cockatoo even refuses to poop on the NYPost, it's that worthless. I bet they sell most of their papers as a laugh, like the National Enquirer.

My cockatoo even refuses to poop on the NYPost, it's that worthless. I bet they sell most of their papers as a laugh, like the National Enquirer.

Nevertheless (and I agree with you about its worth), it has a wide circulation and the people who read it believe what they're reading is true. That is the problem for HD DVD.

Once again, no one seems to understand price but people on the HD DVD side.

Guess what I watched last night? Casino Royale. Great movie. Guess what I bought it on? SD DVD and watched it upconverted.

Why??

Not spending $500-1000 on a movie player.

As soon as the Blu-ray folk begin to get this through their heads, they might stop going crazy over their miniscule sales lead and instead of beating their chests going out and making an affordable BD player for the rest of us.


Oh, but I bought The Departed on HD DVD. A $200 option gave me that ability.

Perceived content, not price, is king.

Nevertheless (and I agree with you about its worth), it has a wide circulation and the people who read it believe what they're reading is true. That is the problem for HD DVD.

David F you are bang on the money with your post!

Yet another example of the twisted cascade effect, any media is a powerful platform to spread misinformation. Forums like AVS help folks make up their own minds after reading the pros and cons from both side.That article is proof, that basically a smear campaign is in place.

That NY post IMHO is a disgrace!

BD is emplying smear campaign and FUD to try and win. I became opposed to the BDA after their tactics at CES where they put out a newspaper like article and handed it to every attendee as if it were a news bulletin. That and getting editors at various tier 2 publications to put their names behind obvious PR release type materials to make them sound like news. Now, I work in sales and marketing and I've these tactics been used by government contracters in DC to try and win projects and political campaigns trying to win elections. These things are done, but that does not make it right. It doesn't help the consumer in any way.

Oh, come on, plazman. You've been against BDA and Blu-ray since at least early 2006. Don't try and claim it was anything different. And companies putting their weight behind media? Don't pretend like HD DVD supporters haven't been doing it either. And is it the BDA's fault that no one but Toshiba wants to make players?

BD is emplying smear campaign and FUD to try and win. I became opposed to the BDA after their tactics at CES where they put out a newspaper like article and handed it to every attendee as if it were a news bulletin. That and getting editors at various tier 2 publications to put their names behind obvious PR release type materials to make them sound like news. Now, I work in sales and marketing and I've these tactics been used by government contracters in DC to try and win projects and political campaigns trying to win elections. These things are done, but that does not make it right. It doesn't help the consumer in any way.

Why single out BD for smear and FUD? Both sides are guilty, but some are more equal than others.

As for perception vs. reality, a co-worker told me yesterday that he had read several news reports and he concluded that "HD DVD is dying". I was surprised, as even I wouldn't have jumped to that conclusion quite yet. The BDA is getting a fairly simple message out to the masses, and it appears to be working.

Whether the article is true or not is irrelevant. People who aren't into AV/HD stuff don't know any better so when all these "BD has won HD DVD is dead" articles are popping up all over the place they will be regarded as the truth by the uninformed. Format war was over in Dec/Jan when HD DVD camp inexplicably decided to release......nothing while Blu ray had multiple new releases every week with many "coming to DVD and Blu ray disc" TV spots.

BD is emplying smear campaign and FUD to try and win. I became opposed to the BDA after their tactics at CES where they put out a newspaper like article and handed it to every attendee as if it were a news bulletin. That and getting editors at various tier 2 publications to put their names behind obvious PR release type materials to make them sound like news. Now, I work in sales and marketing and I've these tactics been used by government contracters in DC to try and win projects and political campaigns trying to win elections. These things are done, but that does not make it right. It doesn't help the consumer in any way.

How can you be in sales and marketing and NOT know that stuff like the fake newspaper are standard trade show marketing techniques? It's run of the mill stuff designed to get attendees to notice and to talk about the product.

BD is emplying smear campaign and FUD to try and win. I became opposed to the BDA after their tactics at CES where they put out a newspaper like article and handed it to every attendee as if it were a news bulletin. That and getting editors at various tier 2 publications to put their names behind obvious PR release type materials to make them sound like news. Now, I work in sales and marketing and I've these tactics been used by government contracters in DC to try and win projects and political campaigns trying to win elections. These things are done, but that does not make it right. It doesn't help the consumer in any way.

I agree. The old fashioned way to sell your product was to offer great performance for a low price. Blu-ray doesn't seem to have that arrow in their quiver, so they have to use misleading information, empty rhetoric, bizarro press releases, and bullying tactics to get the competition to stand down. Blu-ray seems to think that, in order to win, they have to convince HD DVD users to abandon their own format and head for the nearest BB to "pick up" a PS3. That kind of marketing tsunami can in fact succeed with more susceptible minds, but it tends to turn off thoughtful persons who see beyond the almost comical exaggerations and hype. But, if we believe the hype from the BD news network, Blu-ray has not only already crushed HD DVD, but they are going to displace DVD within three years. If you repeat the most outrageous claim often enough ("we won, HD DVD is dead, DVD is dead"), some people will swallow it whole. I still put my money on HD DVD, which is showing more class in this marketing contest. HD DVD is not calling for the early retirement of DVD, nor is it doing last rites for BD. Sometimes, IMHO, it sounds like the difference between a loud drunk and a sober person. To paraphrase Lao-Tzu, "going too far" or "going to extremes" (rushing headlong) is self-defeating.

Nevertheless (and I agree with you about its worth), it has a wide circulation and the people who read it believe what they're reading is true. That is the problem for HD DVD.

The press have short memories, collectively, as do voters and readers. When the significant number of HD titles are released and the Chinese players hit our shores, and Toshiba releases it G3 models, the press will be chasing those stories like nothing before it ever happened. It's March 2007, an eternity away from 2008 in the universe of electronics.

Yea, yea, before the BD guys remind me about Pirates and day/dates and such, these sensationalism jockeys will be all over that too. Means nothing. You have got to wait for an irreversible surge to take place, onesidedly over a significant period of time. This monthly prognosticating is the biggest joke, and we shouldn't let it be on us- regardless of which side we may favor.

P.S. I'm not at all convinced there will be an irreversible surge from either side.

Holy Johnson once stated " we are living in a world were sex and horror are the new gods" what a sad inditment of the press at large.

P.S. I'm not at all convinced there will be an irreversible surge from either side.

So true. But there does seem to be a tendency to sell wishful thinking as fate and fact these days.

Blu-ray and HD DVD will coexist and serve different needs for a long time.

No surge will come until one side or the other sells players and media that are dirt-cheap.

People love a bargain: That is an almost irrevocable trait of human nature. So, yes, price (linked to performance) does count.

So true. But there does seem to be a tendency to sell wishful thinking as fate and fact these days.

Blu-ray and HD DVD will coexist and serve different needs for a long time.

No surge will come until one side or the other sells players and media that are dirt-cheap.

People love a bargain: That is an almost irrevocable trait of human nature. So, yes, price (linked to performance) does count.

There is no reason why Blu-ray and HD-DVD will necessarily coexist. If either retailers or studios drop HD-DVD, it's done. Obviously, the same could be said for Blu-ray.

Per their announcement, Blu-ray has its work cut out for it. It has to defeat both HD DVD and DVD. HD DVD doesn't have to defeat, only coexist, with both Blu-ray and DVD. Success is defined differently for each format.

If one accepts that "Retailers will abandon HD DVD some time in 2008," can one expect that retailers will abandon DVD shortly thereafter (within the promised three years)? If Blu-ray defeats HD DVD, what kind of "colorful" sales tactics can we expect against DVD? In that case, retailers can use the abundant new shelf space for books, since the public will have become thoroughly disgusted with Blu-ray following their campaigns against both DVD and HD DVD. It would behoove Blu-ray to put on a smiley face and tone down the snarliness before more folks like myself become even more nauseated with their pot-banging sales pitches. Blu-ray should try to win this without scorching and salting the AV terrain, thus ensuring that nothing HD will ever grow there.

There is no reason why Blu-ray and HD-DVD will necessarily coexist. If either retailers or studios drop HD-DVD, it's done. Obviously, the same could be said for Blu-ray.

Retailers or studios could drop either format for political reasons, economic reasons, or both political and economic reasons. Certain big electronics stores have been trying to drop HD DVD for political reasons for quite some time, even though it would make sense for them to push the format for economic reasons.

In the end, I agree with your "necessarily" qualification, but I didn't use the word because it is only my prediction that the two formats will coexist for some time, but for mainly economic reasons. Money can be made on both sides.

That being said, I believe that the balance could shift quite suddenly one way or the other for political reasons. Studios or stores may go exclusive, forgoing some economic short-term gains in order to shut down the whole debate.

As long as studios and retailers are willing to lose money in order to pick a winner, then anything goes.

Right now, in terms of overall disk sales, neither format is a cash cow for studios or for retailers. In that sense, a political decision could be made on the cheap.

If you repeat the most outrageous claim often enough ("we won, HD DVD is dead, DVD is dead"), some people will swallow it whole.

Actually, most people will swallow it whole. We're not describing the zealous early adopters who frequent this forum and who are armed with a wealth of facts and data. J6P reads these articles and, in the absence of contrary articles touting the rise of HD DVD and the demise of BD, they'll come to believe what they read i.e. BD is the winning format. They'll walk into their local BB predisposed to purchase BD and, unless the salesperson (really the only other source of info which intrudes into their consciousness - and that's a scary thought!) holds a contrary position and is able to persuade them otherwise, they'll purchase that "winning" BD player.

Greg, I have to disagree with you. I've worked as a product manager for the then (perhaps still) third largest software company, for a mid tier (top 100 or so software company) and now for a smaller company (200 employees). I regularly go to trade shows and I don't recall such a blatant attempt at negative campaigning. The large company I worked for had a huge marketing budget, but there was a conscious attempt to keep it positive. Some companies may do negative campaigns, but that's not good, and I personally would not work there or be part of that....marketing is not about creating FUD. Not for me.

Once again, no one seems to understand price but people on the HD DVD side.

Guess what I watched last night? Casino Royale. Great movie. Guess what I bought it on? SD DVD and watched it upconverted.

Why??

Not spending $500-1000 on a movie player.

As soon as the Blu-ray folk begin to get this through their heads, they might stop going crazy over their miniscule sales lead and instead of beating their chests going out and making an affordable BD player for the rest of us.


Oh, but I bought The Departed on HD DVD. A $200 option gave me that ability.

While you enjoy your upconvertedness, someone out there, someone with a PS3 (who in the end spent the same amount of money as you did for 360+ 360addon) is enjoying a 1080p Casino Royale. It works both ways.

BD is emplying smear campaign and FUD to try and win. I became opposed to the BDA after their tactics at CES where they put out a newspaper like article and handed it to every attendee as if it were a news bulletin. That and getting editors at various tier 2 publications to put their names behind obvious PR release type materials to make them sound like news. Now, I work in sales and marketing and I've these tactics been used by government contracters in DC to try and win projects and political campaigns trying to win elections. These things are done, but that does not make it right. It doesn't help the consumer in any way.

This is 100% true. I was also shocked by this tactic. It was disguised to look like legitimate CES news published by CES. Very tricky.

-Robert

Greg, I have to disagree with you. I've worked as a product manager for the then (perhaps still) third largest software company, for a mid tier (top 100 or so software company) and now for a smaller company (200 employees). I regularly go to trade shows and I don't recall such a blatant attempt at negative campaigning. The large company I worked for had a huge marketing budget, but there was a conscious attempt to keep it positive. Some companies may do negative campaigns, but that's not good, and I personally would not work there or be part of that....marketing is not about creating FUD. Not for me.

Want some spin? Some FUD?

"CeBIT: HD DVD beats Blu-ray on all counts"

http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/index.cfm?newsid=8701

Both sides are dishing it out.

i am not shocked by this tactic. it is logical. it is promotion. who ever came up with that, is smart.

sony is a very big guy in the entertainment industry. it has sony bgm for audio. sony for equipent. sony for movies etc.

when somebody is trying to force themselfs in your hood,like toshiba and microsoft, you fight back which is logical.

microsoft does the same for their operation systems like windows etc. i find that only logical.

when your fighting the bull dont be afraid of the horns. so i am waiting now when the hd-dvd group are starting to fight back, or are most of them a bunch of pu$$ies....cats :)

Nevertheless (and I agree with you about its worth), it has a wide circulation and the people who read it believe what they're reading is true. That is the problem for HD DVD.

This is what we call a "self fulfilling prophecy". The BDA are doing a lot of announcements like this. There's a good chance it will work, too.

1st Amendment? Just a thought... :p

And a bad one at that! This is a privately owned forum.

While you enjoy your upconvertedness, someone out there, someone with a PS3 (who in the end spent the same amount of money as you did for 360+ 360addon) is enjoying a 1080p Casino Royale. It works both ways.

How many of those PS3's did they sell last month? Price does matter! It's all that matters to the general consumer. Who hasn't even taken a look at HD disks yet because of high prices. The format war has almost nothing to do it. Unless of course your a PR rep.

Want some spin? Some FUD?

"CeBIT: HD DVD beats Blu-ray on all counts"

http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/index.cfm?newsid=8701

Both sides are dishing it out.

Come on, we all know Microsoft has never be involved in anything questionable and would never have an interest in prolonging this format war. :)

If HD-DVD supprters still don't realise the writings on the wall, they never will.

They're the hardcore of a tiny niche group!

If bluray smurfs are so sure and confident of the writing on the wall, why must you continue to invade the HD DVD forums to tell us? Why not respect our right to discuss a dying format (in your opinion) if that's what we want? Feel threatened at the mere discussion of HD DVD? Botton line, you are not confident in big blue and your behavior reflects it. BTW IBM another blue company use to be very confident in its place within the computer market. I suspect both bluray like IBM will be past history in a year or two.

This is 100% true. I was also shocked by this tactic. It was disguised to look like legitimate CES news published by CES. Very tricky.

-Robert

Come on now, Robert.

Captain Renault: I'm shocked, shocked to find that marketing is going on in Trade Shows!

When I tell folks in my office I got a Blu-Ray player they say "I saw a commercial for a Blu-Ray movie, what exactly is Blu-Ray ?"

They all say they have never heard of HD-DVD.

This is the most clever thing I have seen so far in this format war - all the TV ads where they say "coming soon to own on DVD and Blu-Ray disc". That's absolutely brilliant. It only takes one second out of the ad they were going to put out for the DVD, but you hear that over and over on TV now, and it will stick with people who don't even know what Blu-Ray is.

Greg

This is the most clever thing I have seen so far in this format war - all the TV ads where they say "coming soon to own on DVD and Blu-Ray disc". That's absolutely brilliant. It only takes one second out of the ad they were going to put out for the DVD, but you hear that over and over on TV now, and it will stick with people who don't even know what Blu-Ray is.

Greg


Exactly. I had a friend come over and see all my Blue cases piled up and asked me what those were.. I showed him an example and he now knows what HD really is..

While you enjoy your upconvertedness, someone out there, someone with a PS3 (who in the end spent the same amount of money as you did for 360+ 360addon) is enjoying a 1080p Casino Royale. It works both ways.

Wrong again. I guarantee you if I went into the same store that person did on the same day, he spent $400 more than I did.

Sorry, but if you can't keep trying to deflect the sunk cost part of the equation. You can keep trying as you are, but it won't work.

And believe me, if only 127,000 people bought a PS3 in February, I'm sure they all didn't by Casino Royale.

eightninesuited
While you enjoy your upconvertedness, someone out there, someone with a PS3 (who in the end spent the same amount of money as you did for 360+ 360addon)

Stop with the bogus argument, we have had this discussion before. If you already own a 360, the addon costs $200.

By your logic, the PS3 actually costs thousands more than the list price, because you need a TV to use with it. By your logic every BD disc you buy costs several hundred dollars becuase you have to have the PS3 (or standalone player) to use it.

We both know that if someone asks you how much a BD disc costs, you just tell them the price of the disc. So stop already.

Wrong again. I guarantee you if I went into the same store that person did on the same day, he spent $400 more than I did.

Sorry, but if you can't keep trying to deflect the sunk cost part of the equation. You can keep trying as you are, but it won't work.And those PS3 owners who bought it just for games and later on decide that they want to buy a Blu-ray movie, will have a cost of $0 plus the cost of the movie, based on the sunk cost argument.

If the PS3 owner bought it in December and you both decided to get into HD on the same day at a later time, you spent $200 more (or whatever you paid) on that day than they did. Basically the same amount overall, depending on options.

BTW: Did you buy the wireless option for the XBOX360? If you have wireless, how much did you spend for it?

--Darin

darin,

And those PS3 owners who bought it just for games and later on decide that they want to buy a Blu-ray movie, will have a cost of $0 plus the cost of the movie, based on the sunk cost argument.

The answer is yes.

Look, just like I said above, what do you pay for a movie? The answer is the price of the disc. You dont say several hundred dollars, because you had to buy the player do you? That is the sunk cost. You seem to be an intelligent man, and I dont see why people cant see the issue, except that they insist on making a point that isnt valid.

The answer is yes.

Look, just like I said above, what do you pay for a movie? The answer is the price of the disc. You dont say several hundred dollars, because you had to buy the player do you? That is the sunk cost. You seem to be an intelligent man, and I dont see why people cant see the issue, except that they insist on making a point that isnt valid.What point isn't valid? Michael wants to say that it is $600 vs $200 because of sunk cost he applies to one side, but the same logic leads to $0 vs $200 (other than the movie) for another select group of people (much like the $200 was for a select group of people). Are you disagreeing with something?

EDIT: I saw your post above my previous one. If you want to claim it is $600 vs $200 just like Michael, then you are selectively using sunk cost for one side and not the other also.

If Sony started charging $10 to PS3 owners for a USB stick to enable Blu-ray movie playback, would Blu-ray then cost 1/20th of HD DVD?

--Darin

darin,

If Sony started charging $10 to PS3 owners for a USB stick to enable Blu-ray movie playback, would Blu-ray then cost 1/20th of HD DVD?

Yes.


i am not using the sunk cost argument selectively.

No matter what your two scenarios, assuming that the person already owned the 360, they paid $200 for the addon.

With the PS3, one has to know why they bought the machine.

If the person bought the player in December to play games, then he got the BD player for free, in other words 0$. So in this case, the cost of HD optical formats is 0$ vs. $200.

On the other hand, if the person bought the player to watch movies, then the person payed $600 for the player and they got a game console for free. So in this case, the cost of the optical formats is $600 vs. $200.

I have a simple question for you.

How much do you pay for a DVD?

Is it the cost of the disc?

or

Is it the cost of the disc + the cost of the player + cost of the TV + the cost of the soundsystem?

I am willing to bet you will give the first answer and not the second. And yet, people who say the add on costs $600 are essentially saying that the cost of a DVD is actually the second answer.

George,

So, I can go out and buy a 360 add-on for $200 and some HD DVDs and start watching movies? Great!!! That's so much cheaper than a PS3. By the way, I don't have a 360, will that be a problem?

moore,

First, you need to learn to read. I clearly stated that the assumption was that one already owned a 360.

Answer my question then. How much do you pay for a BD disc? The disc is worthless if you dont have a BD player right? Just like the add-on is largely worthless without the Xbox.

So by your logic, if the add on costs $600 then each BD disc costs about $525 dollars.

If you want to go around telling people you spend $525 per BD, be my guest, but then again, I sincerely doubt you do that.

If you dont want to figure sunk costs for the addon, then you cant figure sunk costs of your movies either.

And dont say the situations are different, because they arent. In both cases, you need either the 360 or the BD player to make your purchase work.

Wouldn't they have to embrace HD discs before they could abandon one or both?

moore,

First, you need to learn to read. I clearly stated that the assumption was that one already owned a 360.

Then darin is right and you are selectively using sunk costs to make a misleading argument. I can read just fine, and your even more absurd disc argument doesn't change anything.

moore,

first, I did not use sunk costs selectively.

Why is the disc argument absurd.

You want to say that the cost of the add on is $600. The logic behind that is that one has to purchase a 360 which is $400. Then you add the cost of the add on for $200. The total, according to you is $600. Fine I understand the logic.

However, in the same way, you buy a BD movie. For that movie to work, you have to purchase a BD player for roughly $500. The movie costs $25. Therefore, according to you, the cost of the movie is $525.

The two situations are logically identical. Both cases requre the purchase of equipment (either the 360 or a BD player) to make the second purchase (either the add on or the movie) functional.

You want to add the cost of the initial purchase to the Add on, but not the movie.

Yes.Sorry, but you thinking that if Sony made people buy a USB key for $10 to enable Blu-ray movie playback on the PS3 would mean that it would be accurate to say that Blu-ray cost 1/20th of HD DVD, pretty much means that we will probably never agree, given that I think that is fairly ridiculous.
How much do you pay for a DVD?

Is it the cost of the disc?Obviously, the cost of a DVD is the cost of the DVD. The cost to watch DVDs and the cost of a DVD are not the same thing.

The cost of the add-on is the cost of the add-on. If you consider the scenario of the add-on with an XBOX360, then it isn't an HD DVD player. Just go look at the specs for what an HD DVD player has to be able to do according to the HD DVD forum and I bet it won't qualify (I doubt the add-on can decode TrueHD). Now an XBOX360 with an add-on does qualify as meeting what an HD DVD player has to be able to do.

Those who claim that HD DVD players cost 1/3rd of Blu-ray players because of the add-on are being absurd. There is a select group who basically own half an HD DVD player already (the XBOX360) who can get HD DVD playback for another $200 buy buying another portion of a whole HD DVD player.
The two situations are logically identical.The cost of the add-on is $200, just like the cost of a DVD is the cost of a DVD. But the cost of an HD DVD player is not $200. Get the add-on, an HDTV, an audio system, and an HD DVD and you still can't watch that HD DVD unless you have or get the other half of the HD DVD player, which is the XBOX360 (or a PC). I don't think the add-on even includes decoders for VC-1, MPEG-2, or AVC/MPEG-4. I know you'll say that the HDTV isn't part of the cost, but if we are talking about what a player is, the add-on by itself is not one. The XBOX360 is part of that player.

--Darin

George: No. I did not say that the cost of the add on is $600. I said (well, implied) that the add on is useless to me without also buying a 360. So, to me the price of entry is about the same for BD and HD, maybe $100 cheaper with some of the HD stand alones.

Please drop the disc argument, it's just stupid, the reason being that people will watch hundreds of discs either by renting or buying. You don't buy a new player for every disc.

I'm not arguing with you that there are millions of people out there who already have a 360 that they bought for gaming, and now, great news, they can get into HD for only $200! Good for them. Doesn't do me or the other 40 million people who have a HDTV but no 360 any good. Hey, I even have an old HTPC that theoretically I could use with the add-on, but I would have to upgrade the video card, probably CPU/mobo, for at least $300. Meh. I'd rather just have a standalone player.

Darin,

Those who claim that HD DVD players cost 1/3rd of Blu-ray players because of the add-on are being absurd.

That is true and you dont get any argument from me.

There is a select group who basically own half an HD DVD player already (the XBOX360) who can get HD DVD playback for another $200 buy buying another portion of a whole HD DVD player.

Again, you get no argument from me.

However, you seem to be agreeing with eight who was stating that the cost of the add on was $600.

http://www.gwn.com/news/story.php/id/11705/NYPost_Retailers_to_Pull_Plug_on_HD_DVD.html


Blu-ray sales have surpassed HD DVD, and analysts predict retailers will abandon the format next year.


The NY Post has just published a new article on the next-gen DVD format war. According to writer Lou Lumenick, retailers are set to abandon the HD DVD format next year due to lagging sales.

The Departed recently premiered on both formats, and the Blu-ray version came up trumps, selling more copies than the HD DVD version. According to the article:

...sales of Blu-ray discs have exploded to nearly three times those of HD DVD discs since Christmas.

It's the first clear sign that consumers are choosing sides in the nastiest video format war since VHS emerged victorious over Sony's Betamax machines in the 1980s.

"The format war is in its final phase," crows Steve Feldstein of 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment, which, like Sony and Disney, is releasing titles exclusively on Blu-ray. "It's never been a question of if Blu-ray will pass HD DVD, but a matter of when."

Some retailers are now claiming it's safe to buy a Blu-ray players without fear that that the format will lose. Analyst Alison Casey, from London's Understanding & Solutions group predicts that retailers will abandon the format some time in 2008. Reffering to European retailers, Casey said:

"They never wanted two formats. It confuses consumers and creates problems with them with returns. They're looking to go to a single format as soon as possible."

Don't believe everything you read. I will believe it when it hapens. Blu ray is scare the war is going too far and they are going to loose ground.

However, you seem to be agreeing with eight who was stating that the cost of the add on was $600.I'm not sure if I agree with him on other things, but I agree with this statement from him:
While you enjoy your upconvertedness, someone out there, someone with a PS3 (who in the end spent the same amount of money as you did for 360+ 360addon) is enjoying a 1080p Casino Royale. It works both ways.Of course it is a lot more complicated than that when considering each person's options, but on that one I agree. I don't think either one of us say that the add-on costs $600.

BTW: While I understand the argument about Microsoft giving people a choice and Sony not, I would love it if Microsoft would make an all-in-one XBOX360 with as much stuff as the PS3 (HDMI with HDMI audio support, built in HD disc drive (HD DVD for the XBOX360), fast response, bitrate meters and time bars, etc.) for $600. I would buy it tomorrow. As a game system I currently prefer my XBOX360, but do wish they would make an all-in-one unit with some of the things I like about the PS3.

--Darin

Darin,



That is true and you dont get any argument from me.



Again, you get no argument from me.

However, you seem to be agreeing with eight who was stating that the cost of the add on was $600.


IMO you guys' arguments are silly. The ps3 costs $500 or $600. The 360 costs $500 or $600 (core or prem + add-on).

Therefore, the cost of the player itself shouldn't even factor into whatever you guys are trying to prove.

BTW: Hello aiea dude :p

George,

So, I can go out and buy a 360 add-on for $200 and some HD DVDs and start watching movies? Great!!! That's so much cheaper than a PS3. By the way, I don't have a 360, will that be a problem?


about a month ago i saw the hd-a1 toshiba hd dvd player for 199.00 at best buy.

Blu-ray seems to think that, in order to win, they have to convince HD DVD users to abandon their own format and head for the nearest BB to "pick up" a PS3.


Haha, if there marketing strategy is to get people to buy PS3's then it's failing pretty badly by February's standard's.

Haha, if there marketing strategy is to get people to buy PS3's then it's failing pretty badly by February's standard's.

But they are trying like hell in the HD DVD forums to convince us we made the wrong choice. I think they are motivated because they fear they made the wrong choice.

And those PS3 owners who bought it just for games and later on decide that they want to buy a Blu-ray movie, will have a cost of $0 plus the cost of the movie, based on the sunk cost argument.

And will have paid $600 up front for it.

If the PS3 owner bought it in December and you both decided to get into HD on the same day at a later time, you spent $200 more (or whatever you paid) on that day than they did. Basically the same amount overall, depending on options.

Incorrect. I walked in and put down $199+ tax. I did not walk in and put down $599+ tax.

BTW: Did you buy the wireless option for the XBOX360? If you have wireless, how much did you spend for it?

Irrelevant. How much was your TV you bought to watch your PS3-Blu-Ray movies on? By all means add that onto the cost of your purchase then if you are going to continue to play this game.

And your receiver.

And anything else you purchased in the past that led you to be able to watch your movies.

If you want to try and play that card yet again.

Incorrect.You are flat out wrong, as what I said is true. Not sure if you had a problem understanding what I said, or if you want to act like I said something else.
I walked in and put down $199+ tax.On that day you paid that and they would have paid nothing on that day other than the price of a disc. Just like I said. On that day, you paid more. Earlier they paid more and they add up to about the same amount.
I did not walk in and put down $599+ tax.Yep. Your's was split across 2 purchases. If you want to claim that sunk cost means you only paid $200, then a person who bought the PS3 for gaming and later decided to get into HD movies (like you did) and went out and got some Blu-ray discs, didn't pay $599 for that, like you say you didn't.
Irrelevant. How much was your TV you bought to watch your PS3-Blu-Ray movies on? By all means add that onto the cost of your purchase then if you are going to continue to play this game.The difference is that the PS3 comes with wireless for the $599 price, so if you want to claim that you got the equivalent for $599 then you either need to ignore that you bought your wireless part for the XBOX360 (at least from the sounds of it) or include that for equivalence. If the XBOX360 came with your TV, I'm sure you would want the PS3 guys to have to include the TV.

Still hard to believe that you are playing the sunk cost card while either not comprehending how it applies to many PS3 owners, or purposely ignoring how it applies. Yes sunk cost applies. But it applies to both sides here and not just to the side you want it to apply to.

I'll ask you the same question I asked George:
If Sony started charging $10 to PS3 owners for a USB stick to enable Blu-ray movie playback, would Blu-ray then cost 1/20th of HD DVD?And if you answer "Yes", then a follow-on. If Sony did that $10 charge for enabling the Blu-ray movie playback, would it mean PS3 owners paid less for Blu-ray movie playback than how things are currently?

--Darin

So...what does all of this have to do with whether or not "Retailers will abandon HD DVD some time in 2008?"

Anyways, I agree with Darin. Can we get back to the subject at hand?

BD is emplying smear campaign and FUD to try and win. I became opposed to the BDA after their tactics at CES where they put out a newspaper like article and handed it to every attendee as if it were a news bulletin. That and getting editors at various tier 2 publications to put their names behind obvious PR release type materials to make them sound like news. Now, I work in sales and marketing and I've these tactics been used by government contracters in DC to try and win projects and political campaigns trying to win elections. These things are done, but that does not make it right. It doesn't help the consumer in any way.

Absolutely. Media outlets have become so lazy about real investigative journalism, that they take some of this prepared stuff as if it were their own and out it goes. It fills pages or time slots and doesn't cost them a dime.

Absolutely. Media outlets have become so lazy about real investigative journalism, that they take some of this prepared stuff as if it were their own and out it goes. It fills pages or time slots and doesn't cost them a dime.

I can't disagree with you about the sad fate of todays media (somewhere out there the ghost of William Randolf Hearst has a ****-eating grin on it's face), but it's nothing but fantasy to claim the BDA is engaging in more dishonest marketing than the HD DVD promo group. And worse, this has NOTHING to do with the thread topic. Start a thread on dishonest marketing and we can all hash it out there.

darin,

BTW: While I understand the argument about Microsoft giving people a choice and Sony not, I would love it if Microsoft would make an all-in-one XBOX360 with as much stuff as the PS3 (HDMI with HDMI audio support, built in HD disc drive (HD DVD for the XBOX360),

I partially agree. I would like to see an Xbox with everything but an HD DVD drive, unless they are going to start producing games in HD DVD. If not, then leave it off, as I perfer single purposes devices - they tend to do the job better. But HDMI etc would be great.

On the topic of this thread...

I am so sick and tired of all this Sony PR spin BS and their viral marketing army and their constant press releases about how they are "winning" and trying to put the fear of god into anyone who dare think about going HD DVD.

It only sinks the Blu Ray side to a new low every time some shill at Fox, Sony, Pioneer, etc. have to open their mouth and spew the same old tired recycled crap. They can't let their format do the talking for itself and their persistent overuse of fear tactics is truly nauseating.

The BDA can not fall soon enough, though I suspect they have their reasons for wailing on like a bunch of Blu Banshees. You know what they say... empty vessels make the most noise. It all reeks of desperation and makes them look weak as a platform.

I wonder if they know how transparent their whole approach is? They might get a lot more people on their side if they would just STFU and quit trying to scare people away from other platforms.

it's nothing but fantasy to claim the BDA is engaging in more dishonest marketing than the HD DVD promo group

^^Probably the most inaccurate and untrue statement I have ever read on AVS.

^^Probably the most inaccurate and untrue statement I have ever read on AVS.
Actually it's probably accurate. Truth is, both sides are being very deceptive about their positioning; that's why it's called propaganda.

Really the only reason you may notice the BDA dreaming up numbers and scenarios is because they do a lot more marketing.

Otherwise, I trust Sony and Fox talking heads as much as I trust Toshiba and Universal talking heads, which is a nice way of saying I don't trust any of them.

This sunk cost arguement is ridiculous. If I had an xbox 360....and decided to buy a Toshiba instead of the add-on....would you be telling me that I spent 800 dollars to watch Hd-DVD? The bottom line is simple.....the add-on was an option. If I didn't want to watch the movies...I would not have paid for it. For those of us who ALREADY had the box....we were given the luxury of saving up a little bit of cash to purchase the add-on. The problem here is that people say....ohh...but we spent all the money on the same day when we got our PS3. True....but...since most of us do not have 600 UP FRONT....the lack of OPTION sucks. Furthermore.....not everybody wants to buy a game machine and a blu-ray player. Most people would have preferred one or the other. Thats why they are sitting around at all the stores. Sunk cost or not.....the option and time to save up here is key. Thats why....MS has 10 million POTENTIAL HD-DVD owners while Sony could barely push 130,000 PS3s this month.

Oh...lets not forget about the eventual console price drop coming for the xbox. Then the 400 - 500 dollar "bundle" vs. the 600 dollar PS3. There goes your "bundle cost" arguement as well.

Thats why....MS has 10 million POTENTIAL HD-DVD owners while Sony could barely push 130,000 PS3s this month.

Nice of you to compare total 360 sales with the worst month for PS3 sales.

10 million total for 360 after 16 months

2 million total for PS3 after 4 months

So PS3 is at about 80% the rate, for a machine that costs 30-50% more.

Oh...lets not forget about the eventual console price drop coming for the xbox. Then the 400 - 500 dollar "bundle" vs. the 600 dollar PS3. There goes your "bundle cost" arguement as well.

PS3 20GB = $500 already.

2 million total for PS3 after 4 months

So PS3 is at about 80% the rate, for a machine that costs 30-50% more.

And you believe this rate is going to be maintained all the way to 10 million? Sales reports strongly suggest otherwise.

Actually it's probably accurate. Truth is, both sides are being very deceptive about their positioning; that's why it's called propaganda.

Really the only reason you may notice the BDA dreaming up numbers and scenarios is because they do a lot more marketing.

Otherwise, I trust Sony and Fox talking heads as much as I trust Toshiba and Universal talking heads, which is a nice way of saying I don't trust any of them.

Good point. But the one incontrovertible fact is that what is getting the most widespread press pick-up is the Neilsen/Videoscan numbers, which are 3rd party ... as you know there are lots of articles now stating Blu-Ray is outselling HD DVD 2+:1. Once that perception is firmly establushed in the consumers minds, it's going to be real hard to change that. No amount of press releases spin/FUD like "CeBIT: HD DVD beats Blu-ray on all counts" http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/index.cfm?newsid=8701 is going to have an impact, unless they contain some real independent 3rd-party data.

And you believe this rate is going to be maintained all the way to 10 million? Sales reports strongly suggest otherwise.
sales volume is dependent on amount of good titles released. While we don't think too much about games in this forum, the games released and their ability to drive costs down will determine how this thing unfolds. Right now, Sony is in a different situation from msft. While MSFT wanted to force transition from xbox to 360 by abandoning the xbox, Sony seems to continue to manufacture PS2 in quantity. In fact, the success of wii, is probably telling us that highdef 3D gaming is not unfolding as fast as projected, meaning that the the SD-gaming world of PS2 and wii's still have a couple of years life left.

The same thing is true about the movie side, the number of good movies will determine how it unfolds in 2007. And good movies mean good PQ AND top boxoffice. SD DVD also has many years left.

It's surprising how important software is to PC and Console and Movie business isn't it?

And you believe this rate is going to be maintained all the way to 10 million? Sales reports strongly suggest otherwise.

These numbers ARE from sales reports. Kind of the only data we have at this point. If you prefer wild speculation, I could suggest that the European launch and a number of actually desirable games might have an impact (as Neo says above). Or I could ask how many more 360s will be sold, and out of those how many add-ons will be sold?

The reality is, as wrong as articles like this Post piece are, and the inevitability campaign of BD is, it's also completely off-base to pretend the PS3 won't make a difference in the BD vs HD game. The PS3 could very well come in 3rd place in the console wars and still push mass BD adoption over the top. Or, like with the PS2, demand could go up and stay up for 5+ years, while the other two consoles fade. We obviously won't know for a long time.

fatius,

If I had an xbox 360....and decided to buy a Toshiba instead of the add-on....would you be telling me that I spent 800 dollars to watch Hd-DVD?

Not at all, and I dont know where you would think that, because the 360 doesnt play HD DVDs by itself. Therefore, the cost to you of watching HD DVDs is the cost of the Toshiba player.

On the topic of this thread...

I am so sick and tired of all this Sony PR spin BS and their viral marketing army and their constant press releases about how they are "winning" and trying to put the fear of god into anyone who dare think about going HD DVD.

It only sinks the Blu Ray side to a new low every time some shill at Fox, Sony, Pioneer, etc. have to open their mouth and spew the same old tired recycled crap. They can't let their format do the talking for itself and their persistent overuse of fear tactics is truly nauseating.

The BDA can not fall soon enough, though I suspect they have their reasons for wailing on like a bunch of Blu Banshees. You know what they say... empty vessels make the most noise. It all reeks of desperation and makes them look weak as a platform.

I wonder if they know how transparent their whole approach is? They might get a lot more people on their side if they would just STFU and quit trying to scare people away from other platforms.

Hey Sean...what does STFU stand for? Don't answer that! :p

I think its hard to say what will happen in 2008, hell just 3-4 months back I remember reading articles saying that BD lost and HD DVD won. Now its turned, maybe there will be another turn for the HD group. Maybe both formats will stick around, but whatever happens its to early to call. Yes BD has sold more disks now, but lets face it they had lots of releases here HD didn't-HD needs more studio support becasue thats whats being feed to the consumer, even if its true or not. You go to CC or BB and every employee will tell you go with BD they have the studio support, HD has to change this image or they are doomed, unless they can pull some other tricks out their bag.

Now its turned, maybe there will be another turn for the HD group. How? HD DVD has no PS3.

How? HD DVD has no PS3.

We keep being told by posters here that incredibly cheap 'Chinese players' are coming. No actual brands, specs, or other info. And no word on how $199 MSRP players are going to save the day when $350 street price players + 5 free discs doesn't seem to be moving many units. Yeah, more will sell, but millions? No. Too little too late.

On the topic of this thread...

I am so sick and tired of all this Sony PR spin BS and their viral marketing army and their constant press releases about how they are "winning" and trying to put the fear of god into anyone who dare think about going HD DVD.

It only sinks the Blu Ray side to a new low every time some shill at Fox, Sony, Pioneer, etc. have to open their mouth and spew the same old tired recycled crap. They can't let their format do the talking for itself and their persistent overuse of fear tactics is truly nauseating.



that the the clear difference between BDA and the HD DVD group. HD DVD let their products do the 'talking'. On the other hand, BDA lets their PR do the talking ;)

fatius,



Not at all, and I dont know where you would think that, because the 360 doesnt play HD DVDs by itself. Therefore, the cost to you of watching HD DVDs is the cost of the Toshiba player.

consumers already owned the Xbox 360. or they may already own a HTPC to match the Add On 360. consumers have been using the XBox 360 system 'for a year'. Check the purchase receipt of Add On, it really IS $199.

You can't buy an addon, take it home and watch a movie all by itself. So how is the cost $199 to watch HD DVD again?

You can't buy an addon, take it home and watch a movie all by itself. So how is the cost $199 to watch HD DVD again?

Your right, you also have to buy a HD DVD movie to put in it to watch a HD DVD movie. Same as the PS3, except it's a BR movie.

This rediclious agruement is getting real old. Why would anybody buy the addon by itself unless they already owned the xbox 360 or planned to use it on a computer.

On the subject of this thread, I was at Wal*Mart tonight and noticed that they had increased the amount of space for Blu-ray Discs from two columns (12 titles) to three columns (18 titles). The HD DVD section remained the same size (two columns/12 titles). Also, Casino Royale (and one other title) were sold out, with some others (The Departed, Crank, and 2-3 more) only having 1-2 copies left. HD DVD titles appeared to be fully stocked with the exception of Superman Returns and King Kong.

Maybe this is just a local thing, but it could be a sort-of testing of the waters before pulling HD DVD and giving BD the full HD disc space.

jblackow

I will let you in on a little secret. You cant buy a bd disc take it home and watch it all by itself either. I will let you in on another little secret. Guess what, you have to buy a player first.

So how is the price of a BD disc $20-30?

Ilka, the fact is that when HD DVD was ahead it didn't prevent 1 M or so BD fans from buying a PS3 to watch BD. Did it? Also, while current sales are important, I don't believe it is anywhere near a big deal as people are making it out to be. OK 50K BD titles sell per week and 23K HD DVD titles sell per week. In the grand scheme of things that difference is insignificant. For now, we are in early adopter territory and HD DVD hardware sales have been consistent and at least on Amazon selling better than BD standalone players. So, the contention that people are NOt buying HD DVD because of the 2:1 ratio is not borne out by what we see. Rememer, every week BD adds a lot more players to the market and they have also been releasing a lot of titles. Yet, even Neilson shows that the sales ratio is staying pretty constant.

I'd say there are as many PS3 being sold in a month than Tosh players since inception!

So, HD DVD sales being as close as they are is surprisingly good.

This sunk cost arguement is ridiculous. If I had an xbox 360....and decided to buy a Toshiba instead of the add-on....would you be telling me that I spent 800 dollars to watch Hd-DVD?The thing that is really ridiculous is people applying one set of rules to one side and a different set of rules to the other side. Basically, hypocrisy. Not sure if you'll do that or if you even considered your analogy for the other side, so I'll ask some questions. Using MSRPs, first we'll establish that your position is that HD DVD cost you $199. Seems like you'll agree to that. Then please answer these:

1. What is your claim for how much a PS3 owner had to pay for Blu-ray movie playback?
2. Consider 2 people who bought 60GB PS3s in December just for the gaming part. They each paid $599. Now both decided that they want to get into watching Blu-ray movies when "Casino Royale" came out. One of them decides to use the PS3 and so goes out and gets it. The other one wants to use his universal remote and so he goes out and buys a Sony BDP-S1 for $999. How much did each of them pay for Blu-ray movie playback?

Do you see how that works? Basically the same as what you said except applied to the other side. Would you be telling me that the 2nd guy paid $1598 to watch Blu-ray? Your question above would imply that anybody claiming the first guy paid $599 would have to say $1598 for the 2nd guy. So, do you claim the first, but not the 2nd?

Sunk cost applies to both sides. These things get complicated because of the different methods chosen by Microsoft and Sony, but people really shouldn't be applying one set of rules to one side without being willing to apply the same set of rules (or basically equivalent rules) to the other side. And of course using reasonable rules.

And BTW: Why are people using the $599 PS3 for the comparison? The $499 PS3 includes the 20GB hard drive that the $399 XBOX360 has, along with HDMI that the XBOX360 doesn't have. The major differences between the $599 PS3 and the $499 PS3 are the extra 40GB in the hard drive and the wireless. But the $399 XBOX360 doesn't include either of those features, so why use the $599 PS3 for that comparison? When I brought up the wireless part for the XBOX360 (which MSRPed for $99 last time I checked) I was told that it was irrelevant. At least as far as MSRP the $499 PS3 is $100 more than the XBOX360 that has the equivalent 20GB hard drive and $100 less than that XBOX360 plus add-on (although the PS3 doesn't come with the remote control). A $499 XBOX360 with 20GB hard drive that could be upgraded by the user, with HDMI audio that included lossless audio support (not all HDMI does) and an internal HD DVD drive would be great IMO.

EDIT: Okay, if Sony discontinued the 20GB PS3 as somebody has reported I could see it, but back when it could be ordered I don't see why people needed to use the more expensive PS3 for the comparison when the extras were things the $399 XBOX360 didn't come with.

--Darin

Sony is NOT discontinuing the 20GB model. Best Buy is not stocking it anymore, that's all. The 20GBs can be found, they are just a minority of the stock most places.

fatius,



Not at all, and I dont know where you would think that, because the 360 doesnt play HD DVDs by itself. Therefore, the cost to you of watching HD DVDs is the cost of the Toshiba player.

But thats exactly what I have been trying to tell people. They call it sunk cost cause in the end....the add on plus the xbox equals about the same as the PS3. I say hogwash....I paid 399 to play great games...and I CHOSE to pay 199 to watch movies. If they want to call it sunk costs.....then any player I buy has to be added up along with the xbox.

Thanx George.

The thing that is really ridiculous is people applying one set of rules to one side and a different set of rules to the other side. Basically, hypocrisy. Not sure if you'll do that or if you even considered your analogy for the other side, so I'll ask some questions. Using MSRPs, first we'll establish that your position is that HD DVD cost you $199. Seems like you'll agree to that. Then please answer these:

1. What is your claim for how much a PS3 owner had to pay for Blu-ray movie playback?
2. Consider 2 people who bought 60GB PS3s in December just for the gaming part. They each paid $599. Now both decided that they want to get into watching Blu-ray movies when "Casino Royale" came out. One of them decides to use the PS3 and so goes out and gets it. The other one wants to use his universal remote and so he goes out and buys a Sony BDP-S1 for $999. How much did each of them pay for Blu-ray movie playback?

Do you see how that works? Basically the same as what you said except applied to the other side. Would you be telling me that the 2nd guy paid $1598 to watch Blu-ray? Your question above would imply that anybody claiming the first guy paid $599 would have to say $1598 for the 2nd guy. So, do you claim the first, but not the 2nd?

Sunk cost applies to both sides. These things get complicated because of the different methods chosen by Microsoft and Sony, but people really shouldn't be applying one set of rules to one side without being willing to apply the same set of rules (or basically equivalent rules) to the other side. And of course using reasonable rules.

And BTW: Why are people using the $599 PS3 for the comparison? The $499 PS3 includes the 20GB hard drive that the $399 XBOX360 has, along with HDMI that the XBOX360 doesn't have. The major differences between the $599 PS3 and the $499 PS3 are the extra 40GB in the hard drive and the wireless. But the $399 XBOX360 doesn't include either of those features, so why use the $599 PS3 for that comparison? When I brought up the wireless part for the XBOX360 (which MSRPed for $99 last time I checked) I was told that it was irrelevant. At least as far as MSRP the $499 PS3 is $100 more than the XBOX360 that has the equivalent 20GB hard drive and $100 less than that XBOX360 plus add-on (although the PS3 doesn't come with the remote control). A $499 XBOX360 with 20GB hard drive that could be upgraded by the user, with HDMI audio that included lossless audio support (not all HDMI does) and an internal HD DVD drive would be great IMO.

EDIT: Okay, if Sony discontinued the 20GB PS3 as somebody has reported I could see it, but back when it could be ordered I don't see why people needed to use the more expensive PS3 for the comparison when the extras were things the $399 XBOX360 didn't come with.

--Darin

Nice try Darin.... :D

I'll answer.

1. My claim is that IF you wanted to watch blu-ray movies...the CHEAPEST available player (regardless of what it can do) is...600 dollars. Do you agree?

2. According to your analogy. Unless you have wads of cash in your pocket...the second person TECHNICALLY bought 2 blu-ray players. Using the universal remote would be a matter of preference. Bottom line, however, the second guy had a fully capable blu-ray player BEFORE his second purchase that cost him....600 dollars. :D

BTW: I can not and will not argue about the wireless part of the PS3 cuz....I'm not sure what it even does. Is this some kind of adapter that allows you to put the PS3 wherever you want or something? Please....fill me in.

1. My claim is that IF you wanted to watch blu-ray movies...the CHEAPEST available player (regardless of what it can do) is...600 dollars. Do you agree?The cheapest available Blu-ray player (MSRP) is $499 at the moment. The 20GB PS3. The cheapest available HD DVD player is something close to that since the add-on isn't a player. It is basically half a player. Those who already own half a player (the XBOX360) can spend another $199 to get the 2nd half of a player and then have a whole player.
2. According to your analogy. Unless you have wads of cash in your pocket...the second person TECHNICALLY bought 2 blu-ray players. Using the universal remote would be a matter of preference. Bottom line, however, the second guy had a fully capable blu-ray player BEFORE his second purchase that cost him....600 dollars. :DSo I'm clear, even after you said:
If I had an xbox 360....and decided to buy a Toshiba instead of the add-on....would you be telling me that I spent 800 dollars to watch Hd-DVD?you are now claiming that the 2nd guy (who bought a PS3 for games, didn't want to use it for movies and bought a BDP-S1 for that) spent 1600 dollars to watch Blu-ray. Is that right, or is that not your position?
BTW: I can not and will not argue about the wireless part of the PS3 cuz....I'm not sure what it even does. Is this some kind of adapter that allows you to put the PS3 wherever you want or something? Please....fill me in.It is built in wireless that allows the 60GB PS3 to attach to the internet without a physical connection to the PS3. The XBOX360 has an adapter that can be purchased for it ($99 MSRP last I checked) to do the same thing, or people can try to put something together with other parts to accomplish that.

--Darin

1. My claim is that IF you wanted to watch blu-ray movies...the CHEAPEST available player (regardless of what it can do) is...600 dollars. Do you agree?
20GB PS3 is $499 and still on sale in limited quantities even now (though there are rumors of it being axed - they're still around though).

The G1 Samsung players are also floating in the $500ish or lower range on eBay these days.

2. According to your analogy. Unless you have wads of cash in your pocket...the second person TECHNICALLY bought 2 blu-ray players. Using the universal remote would be a matter of preference. Bottom line, however, the second guy had a fully capable blu-ray player BEFORE his second purchase that cost him....600 dollars. :D
...and an Xbox 360 without the add-on would cost you $299 to $399. Put in the add-on and you're at ... hmm... $598. Amazing how the logic works. I'm glad we could agree on this (well, unless you'd like to try and convince me that an unmodified Xbox 360 can play an HD DVD disc without the add-on).

BTW: I can not and will not argue about the wireless part of the PS3 cuz....I'm not sure what it even does. Is this some kind of adapter that allows you to put the PS3 wherever you want or something? Please....fill me in.
It's a wireless network adapter used for WiFi connections. If you have a wireless network, it obviates the need for wiring to connect your PS3 to the Internet. Considering the morass of wires that most home theater/entertainment centers tend to be, reducing the number of wires is generally a desirable trait.

Mark or Ken - This may technically be the wrong location for the following post but given the thread title I thought my comments would be appropriate here.

The truth/falsity of the thread statement will, partially at least, depend upon how much money BRD & HDVDD throw at them for strategically placed displays in b&m stores. The "best location = best sales" theory has been mentioned many times before in these threads and I saw it in action myself this past weekend.

A new BB just opened up north of SF, maybe five miles from a currently operating BB. I visited for the first time recently and saw for myself why it would be easy to believe this thread title. Along a major aisle near the other video displays I saw not one but TWO BD displays, about fifteen yards apart and one was an endcap. Being a proud, observant, Format Neutral I immediately went to find the HDDVD display, which happened to be very obscurely located around the corner from the non-endcap BD display, and the Tosh A2 wasn't even hooked up for viewing.

I went to find a manager and asked him why he had two BD's on prominent display and one not-so-prominent HDDVD display & he basically stated that it was because BD had paid more money for more exclusive display locations within the store. For the record I saw very few people stopping to look at the displays & those who did really didn't appear to know what they were viewing.

My point is that retailers hold a tremendous amount of power regarding which format will survive, if not both, and that one of the major factors will be how much payola they receive. This doesn't surprise me but it's still somewhat frightening. Toshiba marketing executives know this, but they also have a plan.

Blu-ray has been squandering money on those placements in the first quarter, to little effect.

Expect to see Toshiba end caps and increased advertising and Point of Sales presence as the second quarter comes in and consumer electronics sales perk up after historically bleak first quarter sales.

Toshiba and the HD DVD PRG are spending money in a smart manner. Sony and other Blu-ray CE companies and the BDA have been burning it up in a inefficient manner to try for a early PR victory, IMHO, and have been spending it in ways that give short term gains at high cost, at unsustainable levels.

Actually, most people will swallow it whole. We're not describing the zealous early adopters who frequent this forum and who are armed with a wealth of facts and data. J6P reads these articles and, in the absence of contrary articles touting the rise of HD DVD and the demise of BD, they'll come to believe what they read i.e. BD is the winning format. They'll walk into their local BB predisposed to purchase BD and, unless the salesperson (really the only other source of info which intrudes into their consciousness - and that's a scary thought!) holds a contrary position and is able to persuade them otherwise, they'll purchase that "winning" BD player. There have not been enough mainstream press articles or advertising to impact at all on the general public.

It takes a lot of sustained impressions to do that. The impact of a dead tree newspaper article dies after 7 days unless it a huge trend.

the NY Post article is already dead and gone and is in recycling bins or on the bottom of bird cages already.

Plus the NY Post is not a editorial leading publication, that is it does not set editorial trends on what is considered to be common knowledge. The NY Times. LA times, Wash Post , Chicago Tribune, Wall Street Journal and San Jose Mercury all are more significant in setting a safe editorial tone, along with AP and Reutors writeups.

Greg, I have to disagree with you. I've worked as a product manager for the then (perhaps still) third largest software company, for a mid tier (top 100 or so software company) and now for a smaller company (200 employees). I regularly go to trade shows and I don't recall such a blatant attempt at negative campaigning. The large company I worked for had a huge marketing budget, but there was a conscious attempt to keep it positive. Some companies may do negative campaigns, but that's not good, and I personally would not work there or be part of that....marketing is not about creating FUD. Not for me. I saw and heard a significant press backlash toward Blu-ray at CES. Even with the large Blu-ray sales advantage in the 1st quarter there have not been a lot if any mainstream articles besides this one that have taken the blue pill.

Most of this article was straight form the BDA press kit and used the Blu-ray copy point lines, including the sourcing from the London based rent a quote consultants.

I think a lot of the mainstream press have accepted that the PS3 has problems, and they see the linkage between the PS3 and Sony and Blu-ray and that the BDA = Sony and maybe Fox, so they are naturally leary toward Sony.

A lot of technical writers cover the PS3 gaming side as well as HDTV and the format wars, so PS3 sales issues make them very cynical of BDA claims.

BD is emplying smear campaign and FUD to try and win. I became opposed to the BDA after their tactics at CES where they put out a newspaper like article and handed it to every attendee as if it were a news bulletin. That and getting editors at various tier 2 publications to put their names behind obvious PR release type materials to make them sound like news. Now, I work in sales and marketing and I've these tactics been used by government contracters in DC to try and win projects and political campaigns trying to win elections. These things are done, but that does not make it right. It doesn't help the consumer in any way. Originally Posted by DTV TiVo Dealer
This is 100% true. I was also shocked by this tactic. It was disguised to look like legitimate CES news published by CES. Very tricky.

-RobertCome on now, Robert.

Captain Renault: I'm shocked, shocked to find that marketing is going on in Trade Shows! LOL. :D

I thought it was smart marketing. But it set a high expectation and it overreached. Something about the story of the boy that cried wolf


Of course people knew it was a marketing piece, even if it was inserted into the day 1 TWICE issue for every attendee.

If you started reading it, it was clear it was marketing BS not a news magazine.

Robert, don't be so dramatic. :p

I agree with plaz, that i think the BDA negative campaigning and the PR offensive is overreaching, and that the PR attempt to kill HD DVD in the 1st qtr will fail.

Real reporters find these tactics a bit irritating, and a article that is spoonfeed from a press release won't start a trend.



.

I have read this entire thread, perhaps I missed it but there seems to be no comments on the technical merits of either format. All I saw was exchanges about questionable methods used by both sides to enhance their positions in the market place.

So those who have an opinion as to the technical reason why one or the other format should win please step up and express it. I am not interested in knowing which has more or better titles because we know for now that is Blue Ray, that will change when the winner of the format war has been determined. I will concede that content may win the war but that is not the issue I am interested in.

Set aside cost and just stick with why you think one is the better technology than the other. Convince others that your's is the best.

Consider me format neutral, sell me on your decision for one or the other. I am serious, other than equipment cost and present content availability I honestly don't know the difference, consider me the Joe Six Pack, some so often mention. Sell me on your technical position, if you would be so kind.

The cheapest available Blu-ray player (MSRP) is $499 at the moment. The 20GB PS3. The cheapest available HD DVD player is something close to that since the add-on isn't a player. It is basically half a player. Those who already own half a player (the XBOX360) can spend another $199 to get the 2nd half of a player and then have a whole player.
So I'm clear, even after you said:
you are now claiming that the 2nd guy (who bought a PS3 for games, didn't want to use it for movies and bought a BDP-S1 for that) spent 1600 dollars to watch Blu-ray. Is that right, or is that not your position?
It is built in wireless that allows the 60GB PS3 to attach to the internet without a physical connection to the PS3. The XBOX360 has an adapter that can be purchased for it ($99 MSRP last I checked) to do the same thing, or people can try to put something together with other parts to accomplish that.

--Darin

Ok.....in order of your responses.....

1. Half of a player?? That thing works on PC's as well. You are just making excuses here. A player is a player. The fact that it works as an attachment does not make it half of anything. I either wanted it...or I didn't.

2. Nice try but..... the difference between me and guy number two is that guy number two bought a fully functional blu-ray player....I didn't. The second guy already had a machine that was capable of watching hi-def movies. The 360 alone can't. So no....guy number two spent 1600 because he felt like it. I spent 399 to play games. The machine I bought can't play hi-def movies by itself. I then spent 199 to watch movies. I could have spent 500, 600, or even 1000. Lucky for me...there was a viable option available to me allowing me to watch these movies for.....199.

3. your 499 model is being discontinued sooo....technically....your cheapest player is now....599. :D

Oh....like wi-fi? The Wii has that too. (not jabbing the PS3 here either) I got ya now...thanks for clarifying that. I appreciate it.

...and an Xbox 360 without the add-on would cost you $299 to $399. Put in the add-on and you're at ... hmm... $598. Amazing how the logic works. I'm glad we could agree on this (well, unless you'd like to try and convince me that an unmodified Xbox 360 can play an HD DVD disc without the add-on).



Like I told Darin.....I didn't have to buy the add-on. I could have bought any HD-DVD player I wanted. I chose the add-on because it was the cheapest. So no.....my gaming machine cost....399. My player cost...199. Period! :D

Like I told Darin.....I didn't have to buy the add-on. I could have bought any HD-DVD player I wanted. I chose the add-on because it was the cheapest. So no.....my gaming machine cost....399. My player cost...199. Period! :D
By that logic, I own 8 games for my PS3. My cost for the gaming machine: $599. My cost for the Blu-ray player: $0. :)

By that logic, I own 8 games for my PS3. My cost for the gaming machine: $599. My cost for the Blu-ray player: $0. :)


ASSUMING...that you don't have any movies and you want to use that logic....then its a shame you paid 599 for a machine that has features you don't really intend on using. The PS3 could have easily come with the standard DVD format and you would have paid less. Instead they stuck you with this new format playing capabilities and all you are using it for is games. I'd say its your loss......by your logic anyway. :D

ASSUMING...that you don't have any movies and you want to use that logic....then its a shame you paid 599 for a machine that has features you don't really intend on using. The PS3 could have easily come with the standard DVD format and you would have paid less. Instead they stuck you with this new format playing capabilities and all you are using it for is games. I'd say its your loss......by your logic anyway. :D
On the contrary, I also own 16 Blu-ray movies, with 7 more coming down the pipeline on order.

So again, using your logic, my PS3 is a sunk cost of $599, and thus I paid $0 for the Blu-ray playback.

To be honest, I'd be leery of getting the attachment for my 360, because it's working fine and I don't want to change anything to do with that. I've heard some horror stories on the hardware quality of the 360.

On the contrary, I also own 16 Blu-ray movies, with 7 more coming down the pipeline on order.

So again, using your logic, my PS3 is a sunk cost of $599, and thus I paid $0 for the Blu-ray playback.


I did say ASSUMING! But you Icemage are not the norm. Most people buy Playstations to PLAY games. There are those (myself included) that feel that we are being force fed the option to own blu-ray. Thus, we are being asked to pay more for something we don't care to have at the moment.

Guys like you are taking full advantgae of the machine's capabilities..and to you I say....good for you. I'm sure you are enjoying the investment. But for us....its not sunk cost.....its money we didn't feel like spending. See the difference? I FELT like spending 199 to watch HD-DVD (not to mention I had a year to save up for it.) Most people (becuz you are not the norm) do not want to spend 600 on a gaming system that happens to have blu-ray playback.

Look...lolol...we will go at this all day. The bottom line here (IMHO) is OPTION. I had it and I chose to spend the 199. You obviously saw the benefits of the PS3 and paid the 600 for the machine. For many, however, the don't have the option...which is why the machine is still sitting in many stores....becuz THEY don't have the OPTION.


I'll even try to help you and I still come out on top. Assuming your logic lets just say that since you use your machine for everything.....lets split it. 300 for gaming...and 300 for playback...correct? If so then....your cheapest player is 300. Still 100 more than the add-on. Bottom line....I save...AND....I CHOSE!

(Please don't try to divide the cost of the PS3 with EVERY single function cause then we'll be here all day. Lets stick to the point between playback and gaming.)

Sorry for the warning...but I see the potential and I don't want to go there. :D

True. The PS3 is an overpriced gamw console and hence why sales are lagging. It is also an underpriced BD player and hence why it is the best selling BD Player.

Both of these are problems for Sony. The HD format war has a ways to go, but Sony shot themselves in the console war for sure.

HDDVD did it to themselves. All those hybrid disks confuses people and they add 10 bucks to the price of the movie. That's part of the reason it happened!

To be honest, I'd be leery of getting the attachment for my 360, because it's working fine and I don't want to change anything to do with that. I've heard some horror stories on the hardware quality of the 360.

I don't own a 360, you could call me a ps3 fanboy, and I have heard of tons of bricked 360s. But even I wouldn't claim that the external usb drive would kill one.

The only real problem I see is the lack of hdmi, which is becoming very important for lossless audio. That problem might be remedied this summer or fall.

There are those (myself included) that feel that we are being force fed the option to own blu-ray. Thus, we are being asked to pay more for something we don't care to have at the moment.

I doubt you are speaking for console owners, in general, when you make this assertion. The "force fed" argument is a frequent talking point by the x360 crowd. They don't intend to buy a PS3, in the first place, so what do we care what they think?

The PS3 could have easily come with the standard DVD format and you would have paid less. Instead they stuck you with this new format playing capabilities and all you are using it for is games.

Several PS3 titles max out single layer BD already. I don't think people would be happy to read "game paused - insert DVD #3" while they are playing motorstorm.

Boy, I'll be glad when there are BD drives commonly cheaper than the PS3 so these silly arguments can stop, or at least stay in the gaming forum.

Several PS3 titles max out single layer BD already. I don't think people would be happy to read "game paused - insert DVD #3" while they are playing motorstorm.

Boy, I'll be glad when there are BD drives commonly cheaper than the PS3 so these silly arguments can stop, or at least stay in the gaming forum.


Hey moore...I see where you are coming from but.....can you explain how the xbox360 is doing this so well then?

Apples to oranges...a developer is going to target the amount space that is available for a specific platform. If more is available, they'll find a way to fill it, sooner or later.

I doubt you are speaking for console owners, in general, when you make this assertion. The "force fed" argument is a frequent talking point by the x360 crowd. They don't intend to buy a PS3, in the first place, so what do we care what they think?


HA HA HA!! Good one. If every console gamer wanted all the stuff that the PS3 DOES come with then....why are they sitting around in stores? 4 months into it and you only push 127k units? I see a problem here. True gamers who really don't care too much about movies do not feel like spending the cash for a feature they do not want. Its not an arguing point....its the truth. If every gamer DID want ALL the PS3 features....then Sony would be crushing the competition right now....but they're not.

But please....maybe you can better explain why after only 4 months the most hyped-up, all-powerful, and feature filled console on the market right now......is lagging BIG time.

I doubt you are speaking for console owners, in general, when you make this assertion. The "force fed" argument is a frequent talking point by the x360 crowd. They don't intend to buy a PS3, in the first place, so what do we care what they think?

So true, how many of those complaining about PS3/Blu-ray have any intention of buying.

They seem to be HD-DVD/360 owners 'looking out' for the rest of us!

back to the topic of the thread. In many respects, I dont understand the article or some of its logic.

"They never wanted two formats. It confuses consumers and creates problems with them with returns. They're looking to go to a single format as soon as possible"

If this were really true, why wait until 2008. Why not pull the plug right now? What is stopping them? I mean it seems as if BB is not going to stock the 20GB PS3 anymore, why wouldnt they just say, no more, we arent going to stock HD DVD anymore.

Why are they waiting a year?

Ok.....in order of your responses.....

1. Half of a player?? That thing works on PC's as well. You are just making excuses here. A player is a player. The fact that it works as an attachment does not make it half of anything.If a person uses a PC to do that part that a player has to be able to do, but that the add-on can't, then they have to buy the software to use it. If the add-on was a player by itself then there wouldn't be need to buy the software or attach it to something to get the functions that a player provides. Do you understand that an HD DVD player has to be able to decode VC-1 and AVC/MPEG-4 video streams? Can your add-on decode VC-1 and AVC/MPEG-4 video streams?I'll even try to help you and I still come out on top. Assuming your logic lets just say that since you use your machine for everything.....lets split it. 300 for gaming...and 300 for playback...correct? If so then....your cheapest player is 300. Still 100 more than the add-on. Bottom line....I save...AND....I CHOSE!What about the guy who bought the PS3 for gaming and later decides to get a few movies? Did the price for gaming just go down to $300 for him? To go back, how much are you claiming the person paid for gaming? How much for Blu-ray movie playback? Were you claiming $599 for gaming AND $599 for Blu-ray movie playback?

And you still don't seem to want to give a straight answer to this question. Would you be telling me that the 2nd guy spent 1600 dollars to watch Blu-ray movies? It seems obvious that you want to change the words to keep from directly answering the question you asked before, except for the other side. I already know he spent $1600 just like I know you spent $600. That wasn't the question. The question was whether you claim he spent $1600 for Blu-ray movie playback while you spent $200 for HD DVD movie playback.

--Darin

Sweet, sweet fud.

This forum won't be the same without it. ;)

But please....maybe you can better explain why after only 4 months the most hyped-up, all-powerful, and feature filled console on the market right now......is lagging BIG time.

Don't get crazy; it's just a pricing issue right now.

Hey moore...I see where you are coming from but.....can you explain how the xbox360 is doing this so well then?

Well, I know that one has 5x the room and bandwidth of the other, and it's up to the developers whether they use it or not. 360 took the Nov 2005 debut and the early market lead, maybe they will have to pay the price or maybe compression will save them.

Oh, and:

3. your 499 model is being discontinued

No. One big retailer is not stocking them anymore. Sony is still making them. There have been component BD players sold at 499 street price, by the way.

4 months into it and you only push 127k units? I see a problem here.

Total PS3s sold after 4 months = 1,160,500
Total 360s sold after 4 months = 1,117,000

Hmmm. Most PS3s were $600. Most 360s were $400. Hmmm.

Looks like MS took a 33% paycut in revenue and still ended up selling less units.

I'm not an Xbox fanboi here, I hate Microsoft as much as any computer person out there (really strongly that means :) ), but remember 2 things.

1. the XBox 360 had some serious supply problems the first 6 months of production, they were extreeemely hard to find. PS3's can be seen floating around just about everywhere.

2. Xbox 360 sold horribly in Japan due to it's demographic, Japan is the PS3's home front.

Moore,

These comparisons to the launch are pointless, in spite of what all the BD boys want to do to downplay the poor sales of the PS3.

The "success" of the launch is not determined by what MS does or how many 360 units get sold. The "success" of the launch is determined by what Sony said they were going to do and how many units they said they were going to sell. Sony claims they will sell 6 million units by the end of the year. That is the only yardstick that matters.

On point #1, this comes as all the more ironic, since the x360 crowd would frequently bash the PS3 launch as needlessly production constrained due to the inclusion of the "fancy blue laser"/Cell/whatever. Yet, Sony manages to produce more (enough to leave surplus on the shelf), sell more, and bring in more for each unit.

So what was x360's excuse, since they had "wisely" chosen to design on less production-constrained componentry? To what end did they achieve in picking more down to earth components, giving up potential revenue at a lower pricepoint, and selling less, ultimately?

Simple. Microsoft put CHOICE in the consumer's hands, as opposed to Sony cramming thier intrests (blu-ray) down their customer's windpipes.

360 alone = great gaming at great price

360 + HD DVD = great gaming and HD DVD movies at a great price

Simple. Microsoft put CHOICE in the consumer's hands, as opposed to Sony cramming thier intrests (blu-ray) down their customer's windpipes.

360 alone = great gaming at great price

360 + HD DVD = great gaming and HD DVD movies at a great price

This is a red herring argument, since you have absolutely no idea how many PS3 users preferred their console with a plain jane dvd drive. It's like making an argument that MS shoves MSLive down people's throats for buying the premium model.

moore


Those numbers are not correct!

More like this

PS3 sold after 4 months 1,160,500
Xbox360 sold after 4 months 2,497,250
http://www.vgcharts.org/

Not sure where on VGCharts.org you are getting those numbers? I just checked:

http://www.vgcharts.org/aconscomps.php?name1=PS3&name2=X360&type=0&align=0

you are correct I miss read the post :o

Moore,

These comparisons to the launch are pointless, in spite of what all the BD boys want to do to downplay the poor sales of the PS3.



I'm not a "BD boy" if that's what you're implying. I don't own either format or console. I just find it kind of ridiculous how relentless the Sony bashing is here, just as MS bashing (on Vista, at the moment) is pretty prevalent elsewhere. When there's bashing, people jump on every little thing, like weak Feb sales, and blow it all out of proportion. That is the spirit in which I posted the comparison, just to put some perspective back into things. The PS3 has sold as many units as the Xbox360 did as far after launch, in spite of being so "expensive", having "poor launch titles", Sony's "arrogance", and all of the other things people keep saying.

Facts are all we have. In a couple of months if Sony is only moving 100k of these a month worldwide, then I'll pile right on, because they will be sucking wind pretty hard at that point, and they won't have much room to manuever. But right now it's pretty premature.

Its funny that those that most want to push 1st quarter Blu-ray disc sales as conclusive are the first to defend the low Feb PS3 numbers as being premature.

and vice versa ;)

moore,

I just find it kind of ridiculous how relentless the Sony bashing is here

There is no Sony bashing on my part. Heck I own an SACD player and a couple hundred SACDs. What the problem is, is that the PS3 isnt selling well, and quite a few people, not necessarily you, are doing a lot of hand waving to make that go away.

Kosty - I don't see your point? The numbers are not premature, they just don't mean any more or less than they did with the 360. A lot of people were writing off the 360 a year ago, and I thought that was premature as well. Where's the inconsistency?


George - I didn't say you were bashing Sony. You took issue with my posting of those numbers, and so I explained why I did it - in response to someone repeatedly dragging out the Feb numbers, I think the same person who compared that one month total with every 360 ever sold earlier, which was a really ridiculous and annoying thing to do.

Yes, there are blind Sony fans here too, and they are equally annoying.

Kosty - I don't see your point? The numbers are not premature, they just don't mean any more or less than they did with the 360. A lot of people were writing off the 360 a year ago, and I thought that was premature as well. Where's the inconsistency? Sorry. The post wasn't directed at you, although it was inspired by your post. :)

Your statements were not inconsistent. I was mostly swinging at others.

I think that making a big deal out of either the current Blu-ray or Xbox 360 sales lead is premature as is predictions of doom based on current PS3or HD DVD sales.

Too early in the game for any predictions of death and destruction. Though I see mostly predictions of HD DVDs demise being pushed by official BDA spokesmen and passionate Blu-ray advocates.

I don't see many people saying that Blu-ray is suddenly gonna die or has lost the war or that the PS3 will fail. I've only seen musings that 127,000 PS3 sales is a dangerous trend for the PS3 if it continues and those kinda numbers make it difficult to reach Sony's projections.

But I don't think either hardware or software sales in the first quarter of year are terribly significant anyway. :D

kosty,

those kinda numbers make it difficult to reach Sony's projections.

they arent going to sell 6 million players by the end of the year. They are going to take a hit on it, and the question is, when do they take the hit.

My hunch is they will wait till the end of the year when they hope the "war" is settled. My hunch is that this is their strategy. Declare victory, hope that the perception builds, and that HD goes away. That way, they can minimize not hitting their projections.

they arent going to sell 6 million players by the end of the year. They are going to take a hit on it, and the question is, when do they take the hit.If you are talking about their projection for 6 million by the end of this month (which is the end of their fiscal year), they are going to have to take a hit for not achieving that pretty soon. I don't recall seeing projections from them for the end of calendar year 2007, but at least worldwide they should be much higher than 6 million. Of course, they'll have to pick up the pace significantly in the 2nd half of the year to reach likely projections.

--Darin

If a person uses a PC to do that part that a player has to be able to do, but that the add-on can't, then they have to buy the software to use it. If the add-on was a player by itself then there wouldn't be need to buy the software or attach it to something to get the functions that a player provides. Do you understand that an HD DVD player has to be able to decode VC-1 and AVC/MPEG-4 video streams? Can your add-on decode VC-1 and AVC/MPEG-4 video streams?What about the guy who bought the PS3 for gaming and later decides to get a few movies? Did the price for gaming just go down to $300 for him? To go back, how much are you claiming the person paid for gaming? How much for Blu-ray movie playback? Were you claiming $599 for gaming AND $599 for Blu-ray movie playback?

And you still don't seem to want to give a straight answer to this question. Would you be telling me that the 2nd guy spent 1600 dollars to watch Blu-ray movies? It seems obvious that you want to change the words to keep from directly answering the question you asked before, except for the other side. I already know he spent $1600 just like I know you spent $600. That wasn't the question. The question was whether you claim he spent $1600 for Blu-ray movie playback while you spent $200 for HD DVD movie playback.

--Darin


Ok.....Darin....

1. I am a representative of the J6P crowd. Translation....I don't care about codecs.....I care about popping in a disk and watching movies. Thats what I paid for with the add-on. I used the PC arguement to give the add-on more value but....the egg has landed on my face. BUT....regardless of your point....the add-on is STILL a player and IT still costs....199.99.


2. Regardless of how you put it....the BOTTOM LINE is this......in order to watch blu-ray movies...I need a blu-ray player. The cheapest BLU-RAY player on the market right now goes for......499 or 599 (depending on the whole 20 gig situation. I give up on that one.) Unless you can tell me how someone can pay less to enjoy blu-ray....thats my story and I'm stickin to it.

3. As for you 2-man scenario...it goes down like this. This extravagant guy you have told me about.....decided to spend an EXTRA 900 dollars to watch movies.
Darin....I paid 399 to PLAY GAMES. When I PAID the money to PLAY GAMES...the machine I bought COULD NOT play hi-def movies. In orde to join the hi-def arena I had many choices....blu-ray/hd-dvd. On one corner I had the PS3...great machine for movie viewing and hopefully good gaming machine. (I sound negative becuz i know the state of Sony's lineup and it looks rather bleek right now and I am referring to the future not the launch.) I could have spent 1000 on a Samsung or something like as well. On the HD-DVD side...I could have paid 499 or even 899 for the Toshiba. But why do that when I have the OPTION to purchase an add-on that does pretty much everything the Toshiba does for...199.99? Just becuz the player was designed to work with another machine does not make it sunk cost. I CHOSE IT. Your man bought a PS3 to play games. He ALREADY had the LUXURY of watching blu-ray movies. In short....your man PAID 900 dollars to USE A UNIVERSAL REMOTE.


In short Darin.....if there was no add-on......I'd still be waiting for the prices of players to drop. The add-on gave me the price range I needed to begin to enjoy this wonderful technology. If the PS3 was 399 without blu-ray...I'd probably own one. (I paid practically that much for my PS2 when it came with Gran Turismo3).


I know you will never agree with me but hey....I love the debate. :D

__________________
xboxlive member name: Fatius Jeebs (there is a space between both names)

So true, how many of those complaining about PS3/Blu-ray have any intention of buying.

They seem to be HD-DVD/360 owners 'looking out' for the rest of us!

Did it ever occur to you that those of us using the PS3/blu-ray arguement are using it becuz we DID intend to buy one? :eek:

That had to hurt.

Moore,

These comparisons to the launch are pointless, in spite of what all the BD boys want to do to downplay the poor sales of the PS3.

The "success" of the launch is not determined by what MS does or how many 360 units get sold. The "success" of the launch is determined by what Sony said they were going to do and how many units they said they were going to sell. Sony claims they will sell 6 million units by the end of the year. That is the only yardstick that matters.

Sony said they would sell 6 million units by March. The original number was 20 million units by the end of the year, which was revised to 16 million units.

My mistake. IMO they still wont hit 16 million.

They will be lucky to hit 6 million by years end if the sales continue to drop.

I think there's a fairly good chance they'll ship 6 mil by the end of march, as that was the forecast. I doubt they'll sell 6 mil though.

abandoning HD DVD? havent heard the news? USA's largest electronic retail BB is abandoning BD's cheapest player, the 20GB PS3 .... :D

The thing that is really ridiculous is people applying one set of rules to one side and a different set of rules to the other side. Basically, hypocrisy. Not sure if you'll do that or if you even considered your analogy for the other side, so I'll ask some questions. Using MSRPs, first we'll establish that your position is that HD DVD cost you $199. Seems like you'll agree to that. Then please answer these:

1. What is your claim for how much a PS3 owner had to pay for Blu-ray movie playback?
2. Consider 2 people who bought 60GB PS3s in December just for the gaming part. They each paid $599. Now both decided that they want to get into watching Blu-ray movies when "Casino Royale" came out. One of them decides to use the PS3 and so goes out and gets it. The other one wants to use his universal remote and so he goes out and buys a Sony BDP-S1 for $999. How much did each of them pay for Blu-ray movie playback?

Do you see how that works? Basically the same as what you said except applied to the other side. Would you be telling me that the 2nd guy paid $1598 to watch Blu-ray? Your question above would imply that anybody claiming the first guy paid $599 would have to say $1598 for the 2nd guy. So, do you claim the first, but not the 2nd?

Sunk cost applies to both sides. These things get complicated because of the different methods chosen by Microsoft and Sony, but people really shouldn't be applying one set of rules to one side without being willing to apply the same set of rules (or basically equivalent rules) to the other side. And of course using reasonable rules.

And BTW: Why are people using the $599 PS3 for the comparison? The $499 PS3 includes the 20GB hard drive that the $399 XBOX360 has, along with HDMI that the XBOX360 doesn't have. The major differences between the $599 PS3 and the $499 PS3 are the extra 40GB in the hard drive and the wireless. But the $399 XBOX360 doesn't include either of those features, so why use the $599 PS3 for that comparison? When I brought up the wireless part for the XBOX360 (which MSRPed for $99 last time I checked) I was told that it was irrelevant. At least as far as MSRP the $499 PS3 is $100 more than the XBOX360 that has the equivalent 20GB hard drive and $100 less than that XBOX360 plus add-on (although the PS3 doesn't come with the remote control). A $499 XBOX360 with 20GB hard drive that could be upgraded by the user, with HDMI audio that included lossless audio support (not all HDMI does) and an internal HD DVD drive would be great IMO.

EDIT: Okay, if Sony discontinued the 20GB PS3 as somebody has reported I could see it, but back when it could be ordered I don't see why people needed to use the more expensive PS3 for the comparison when the extras were things the $399 XBOX360 didn't come with.

--Darin

That the add-on is only half a player (as far as cost) is only true to the people who don't own a X360. If they bought their X360 a while ago without even knowing or expecting it would be able to play HD DVD movies with the add-on later, to them, $199 is the price of entry to HD DVD, no ifs, and, or but. They didn't buy the X360 in order to play HD DVD, they bought it for gaming... Then, along came the HD DVD add-on, and they bought it for HD DVD movies. To them, that is a player, not half of a player.

By your logic, your price of entry to BR is BR player + HDTV, and BR is half a player without the HDTV. Most likely though, you had an HDTV before you bought your BR player, therefore the price of entry to BR was the BR player.

xboxboi, you hit the nail on the head. The optical HD disc market is volatile and very fluid. Everything is changing, the software, hardware, firmware, consumer and wholesale prices, new second generation players, PC/MAC recorders and software applications are emerging, home HD video production is the next frontier to burst wide open and will support HD DVD an BD stand alone sales.

You will see some amazing things very shortly from both camps, especially on the HD DVD side. The competition has just begun and it is and will be a long hard fort business battle.

-Robert

The cheapest BLU-RAY player on the market right now goes for......499 or 599 (depending on the whole 20 gig situation. I give up on that one.)

You 'give up'? Depending? Do you just not believe the words that I typed? It isn't difficult: 20GB is still available, AND there are standalone component BD players that sell for $499 (street). So stop using the MSRP of the 60GB Blu-ray as the minimum price of entry for Blu-ray, please. Your argument isn't really affected anyway, so I don't see why you need to exaggerate and muddy the facts.

Sony: "and when you buy a blu ray player, at least there are no live rodents in the box, like some others."

HD DVD: "We don't have rats!"

Market shifts to Blu Ray by 1%

Sony: "And with FULL HD, you won't have brain anyurisms, like with interlaced material others use"

HD DVD: "There are no medical problems with our product"

Market shifts to Blu Ray by ANOTHER 1%

Does anybody remember the old SNL or SCTV skit that played out like this? It was with grocery stores....by the end of the skit the shady store had taken over all the business. I'm sorry guys, but it really is over. Evil won...again.

By your logic, your price of entry to BR is BR player + HDTV, and BR is half a player without the HDTV.No. A player doesn't have to have a display to be a player. But a player does have to be able to do certain things, like decode the video. If the device can't decode the video it isn't an HD DVD player. The XBOX360 with the add-on qualifies as a player. The add-on by itself cannot do what a player is required to do in order to be an HD DVD player. You understand that the HD DVD rules say that players have to be able to do certain things, right? Like decode TrueHD audio. But the add-on doesn't have to be able to do those things because it isn't an HD DVD player. It just has to transport that stuff to the XBOX360 so it can do the rest of the stuff that HD DVD players have to be able to do.

The add-on is a great choice for certain people. But there is also going to be a base of people (PS3 owners who only bought it for games) that the studios can target and those people will just need to get the movies to start watching them, even if they never intended to use the PS3 for that.

I'll ask basically the same question I asked a couple of pages ago:
If Sony started charging $10 to PS3 owners for a USB stick to enable Blu-ray movie playback (meaning the PS3 wouldn't play Blu-ray movies out of the box), would Blu-ray then cost 1/20th of HD DVD?
--Darin

You 'give up'? Depending? Do you just not believe the words that I typed? It isn't difficult: 20GB is still available, AND there are standalone component BD players that sell for $499 (street). So stop using the MSRP of the 60GB Blu-ray as the minimum price of entry for Blu-ray, please. Your argument isn't really affected anyway, so I don't see why you need to exaggerate and muddy the facts.


Moore...not calling you a liar man....these threads have posted diffderent things about the 20 gig PS3 thats all. I am confused...nothing more.

xboxboi, you hit the nail on the head. The optical HD disc market is volatile and very fluid. Everything is changing, the software, hardware, firmware, consumer and wholesale prices, new second generation players, PC/MAC recorders and software applications are emerging, home HD video production is the next frontier to burst wide open and will support HD DVD an BD stand alone sales.

You will see some amazing things very shortly from both camps, especially on the HD DVD side. The competition has just begun and it is and will be a long hard fort business battle.

-Robert

Spill the BEANS Robert....what do you know?!?!?!?!? :D

No. A player doesn't have to have a display to be a player. But a player does have to be able to do certain things, like decode the video. If the device can't decode the video it isn't an HD DVD player. The XBOX360 with the add-on qualifies as a player. The add-on by itself cannot do what a player is required to do in order to be an HD DVD player. You understand that the HD DVD rules say that players have to be able to do certain things, right? Like decode TrueHD audio. But the add-on doesn't have to be able to do those things because it isn't an HD DVD player. It just has to transport that stuff to the XBOX360 so it can do the rest of the stuff that HD DVD players have to be able to do.

The add-on is a great choice for certain people. But there is also going to be a base of people (PS3 owners who only bought it for games) that the studios can target and those people will just need to get the movies to start watching them, even if they never intended to use the PS3 for that.
--Darin

I thought the focus of this was cost of entry to the end user, not a technical one. What is your argument regarding my 1st paragraph ? I know you are always right, so please give me your version of the facts.

No. A player doesn't have to have a display to be a player. But a player does have to be able to do certain things, like decode the video. If the device can't decode the video it isn't an HD DVD player. The XBOX360 with the add-on qualifies as a player. The add-on by itself cannot do what a player is required to do in order to be an HD DVD player. You understand that the HD DVD rules say that players have to be able to do certain things, right? Like decode TrueHD audio. But the add-on doesn't have to be able to do those things because it isn't an HD DVD player. It just has to transport that stuff to the XBOX360 so it can do the rest of the stuff that HD DVD players have to be able to do.

The add-on is a great choice for certain people. But there is also going to be a base of people (PS3 owners who only bought it for games) that the studios can target and those people will just need to get the movies to start watching them, even if they never intended to use the PS3 for that.

I'll ask basically the same question I asked a couple of pages ago:

--Darin

Bingo. I bought my PS3 for gamings first and foremost and would have bought it even if it didn't play blu-ray movies. I'm up to 20+ blu-ray movies now though since I didn't have to buy any additional hardware for my PS3 to get blu-ray movie playback. I would have gladly paid $100 more for my 360 to have HDMI and HD-DVD abilities. As is instead I have the option to pay $200 more ($100 more than I paid for my PS3 to play HD-DVD's and still can't even listen to them in lossless sound, this is why I'm passing on the HD-DVD add-on for my 360. Lossless on the PS3 sounds amazing.

Moore...not calling you a liar man....these threads have posted diffderent things about the 20 gig PS3 thats all. I am confused...nothing more.

Umm... OK. For a "hi-def fanatic", I would have thought 30 seconds of searching outside this forum would have been worthwhile to you. Google, pricegrabber, amazon, not difficult.

It kind of wastes my time, and anyone else who fact checks before they post, if we post correct info and are just ignored because you're "confused". Does that make sense? I don't mean to pick on you, there are worse examples (like whomever started the "20GB is canceled" thread) but this kind of crap is what's adding noise to the forum.

brian,

did you ever buy the olevia set and if so, how do you like it?

Umm... OK. For a "hi-def fanatic", I would have thought 30 seconds of searching outside this forum would have been worthwhile to you. Google, pricegrabber, amazon, not difficult.

It kind of wastes my time, and anyone else who fact checks before they post, if we post correct info and are just ignored because you're "confused". Does that make sense? I don't mean to pick on you, there are worse examples (like whomever started the "20GB is canceled" thread) but this kind of crap is what's adding noise to the forum.

Sure is a nice way to make him feel welcome... :rolleyes:

If you didn't have any time to waste, why do you even bother rolling him in the dirt ?

1. Half of a player?? That thing works on PC's as well. You are just making excuses here. A player is a player. The fact that it works as an attachment does not make it half of anything. I either wanted it...or I didn't.

are PC dvd burners players too then?

are PC dvd burners players too then?

I think the point he's been trying to make is that of capability, not techicality. In essence, if somebody owns a PC BR burner, that makes him capable of buying BR movies. Granted, that wouldn't be very cost efficient to buy a burner if the only purpose was to play movies on the PC. His point is, I believe, that for somebody who owns a X360 already, $199 is the cost of entry to HD DVD, nothing more, nothing less. And considering there are 10 millions or more X360s out there, that is not anecdotal.

By the way, not that I want to waste anyone's time, but are there any PC BR players (I mean ROM only) available for purchase ?

...are there any PC BR players (I mean ROM only) available for purchase ?FWIW, the Pioneer BDC-202 (http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/pna/v3/pg/press/release/detail/0,,2076_310069589_396277707,00.html) is supposed to be coming out in the second quarter. Pioneer says its targeted at computer OEMs and system builders.

I think the point he's been trying to make is that of capability, not techicality. In essence, if somebody owns a PC BR burner, that makes him capable of buying BR movies. Granted, that wouldn't be very cost efficient to buy a burner if the only purpose was to play movies on the PC. His point is, I believe, that for somebody who owns a X360 already, $199 is the cost of entry to HD DVD, nothing more, nothing less. And considering there are 10 millions or more X360s out there, that is not anecdotal.

Well if that's the case fine. Just stop being intellectually dishonest about it. the cheapest hd dvd solution is $199 IF YOU OWN A 360 ALREADY.

Well if that's the case fine. Just stop being intellectually dishonest about it. the cheapest hd dvd solution is $199 IF YOU OWN A 360 ALREADY.

Agreed. This line of argumentation is just goofy, IMO.

brian, I am assuming you have an hdmi receiver. I don't believe most folks have that. As for video output, what is the advantage of the PS3 having hdmi? It cannor upscale SD DVD, which the xbox does over VGA and component. I admit I'm not too familiar with the xbox, but if someone does not have an hdmi receiver, doesn't the xbox drive and the PS3 pretty much have the same capabilities?

With the added advantage that with the xbox you get a regular remote and KingKong v. a game controller and Taledega Nights and the xbox drive can be integreated with any universal remote, whereas the PS3 can't.

However, with an hdmi receiver the PS3 has a clear advantage on the audio side, but still has the other disadvantages such as the BT remote and no SD upscaling...:

At $200, the xbox drive is an excellent value for someone who wants to add HD DVD capabilities to their xbox game console. But they also have the option of buying a standalone player and not feel guilty about wasting the HD DVD features in their xbox. The PS3 does not offer this flexibility of choice to a consumer. In fact every PS3 sold is bad news for any BD CE vendor. Which is why I am puzzled by why folks like Samsung believe they can survive in the BD market.

The PS3 was a high end game console and low end DVD player. The PS3 is a high end BD player (feature wise) with few noteworthy games.

As for the OP, will retailers drop HD DVD if it only has 30% of the HD market? Well, will retailers drop the PS3 platform if it does 30% of the next gen game console business - I guess the PS3 must be pretty close to that now? The determining factor is not the %, but the size of the market....

I thought the focus of this was cost of entry to the end user, not a technical one. What is your argument regarding my 1st paragraph ? I know you are always right, so please give me your version of the facts.Fairly amusing after your fit the other day in the Chinese player thread where you didn't seem to comprehend how what I posted was relevant to the thread and I had to explain it in detail to get you to stop the, "I'm onto you ..." kind of BS. Told me a fair amount. But I'm going to answer your post above. Back to your first paragraph:
That the add-on is only half a player (as far as cost) is only true to the people who don't own a X360. If they bought their X360 a while ago without even knowing or expecting it would be able to play HD DVD movies with the add-on later, to them, $199 is the price of entry to HD DVD, no ifs, and, or but. They didn't buy the X360 in order to play HD DVD, they bought it for gaming... Then, along came the HD DVD add-on, and they bought it for HD DVD movies. To them, that is a player, not half of a player.If you just answer what the $xxx would be in your own sentence, but with the PS3 instead of the XBOX360, then maybe you will understand my position.

"If they bought their PS3 a while ago without even knowing or expecting it would be able to play Blu-ray movies later, to them, $xxx is the price of entry to Blu-ray movies, no ifs, and, or but."

What is the xxx in $xxx there in your view?

As I've said before, these things get a little bit complicated with the different strategies employed, but some people want to apply one set of rules to one side and a different set of rules to another side. Sunk cost applies in some ways to both sides.

--Darin

Which is why I am puzzled by why folks like Samsung believe they can survive in the BD market.I can't figure out how they are going to make money on either side. Seems like either one is a battlefield, just for slightly different reasons.

--Darin

brian,

did you ever buy the olevia set and if so, how do you like it?

Hey George, How you doing?

I slacked on the deal until the last day, then they were sold out. They did have it for the same price last weekend. However I've decided to wait on the 2nd tv for now. Might end up making my primary tv the the 2nd room set and upgrading. Basically I'm in no hurry right now.

Cheers,
Brian

If you just answer what the $xxx would be in your own sentence, but with the PS3 instead of the XBOX360, then maybe you will understand my position.

exactly Darin. That was my point " I believe, that for somebody who owns a PS3 already, $0 is the cost of entry to blu-ray, nothing more, nothing less."

Aside from xbox360 route not offering nearly as good audio as well for that $200 more :(

The PS3 is a high end HD movie player and top tier video gaming system.

edit: Yes, Plazman I have a Denon AVR987. Most folks don't have HD movies period, yet somehow that is ok with me enjoying my gear and posting about it at sites that most people don't visit ;)

I think the point he's been trying to make is that of capability, not techicality. In essence, if somebody owns a PC BR burner, that makes him capable of buying BR movies. Granted, that wouldn't be very cost efficient to buy a burner if the only purpose was to play movies on the PC. His point is, I believe, that for somebody who owns a X360 already, $199 is the cost of entry to HD DVD, nothing more, nothing less. And considering there are 10 millions or more X360s out there, that is not anecdotal.

By the way, not that I want to waste anyone's time, but are there any PC BR players (I mean ROM only) available for purchase ?

I don't think those things will sell. At a minimum, to achieve any reasonable volume on PCs, you need the include the DVD/RW burning capabilities on top of the BD-ROM or HD DVD-ROM. All PCs sold today include a dvd burner and desktop PCs retailing with two optical drives are available, but rare.

Note also that DVD burners are priced retail around $20, making the extra cost a barrier for mass market. There are still SKUs in Dell sold with the DVD+BD burner as options or built in for desktops and laptops.

Gateway also sells the BD burners as accessories and upgrade.

Fairly amusing after your fit the other day in the Chinese player thread where you didn't seem to comprehend how what I posted was relevant to the thread and I had to explain it in detail to get you to stop the, "I'm onto you ..." kind of BS. Told me a fair amount. But I'm going to answer your post above.

Tell me, Mr Righteous, why TL51 is such a high priority to you ? Do you work in the encoding business by any chance ? Do you really think that they're going to change HD DVD specs under the nose of the few hundred thousand owners already out there ? Do you really think they would do that right before producing chinese units and trying to flood the market with low cost players ?

I wouldn't mind something else than a "pick and choose" answer this time, but I know you can't accept being challenged, so let's see if you can answer all questions above without your usual logic fornication.

Back to your first paragraph:
If you just answer what the $xxx would be in your own sentence, but with the PS3 instead of the XBOX360, then maybe you will understand my position.

"If they bought their PS3 a while ago without even knowing or expecting it would be able to play Blu-ray movies later, to them, $xxx is the price of entry to Blu-ray movies, no ifs, and, or but."

lol. So you're telling me there are people out there that buy the PS3 without knowing it's also a BR player ? So damn funny that we can even go this low, seeing as $ony spent millions advertising the PS3 as THE low cost BR player.

What is the xxx in $xxx there in your view?

Irrelevant since there is no way in hell any person that comprehends english or has ever been on the internet wouldn't know one of PS3's main advertised and hyped features is its BR player capability. Do you need the indication on the box to be in bigger blue fonts than it already is ?

As I've said before, these things get a little bit complicated with the different strategies employed, but some people want to apply one set of rules to one side and a different set of rules to another side. Sunk cost applies in some ways to both sides.


Funny you would say that, 'cause that's exactly how I see your argument. You try to apply a rule that can't be applied in this very context. But I wouldn't expect anything less from you.

Tell me, Mr Righteous, why TL51 is such a high priority to you ?First of all, this isn't life or death. People can see that I brought up the subject of the possible tradeoff between changing HD DVD to support TL51s and the Chinese format that has the advantage of being very similar to HD DVD and then you started going off:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10012073&&#post10012073

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=10013889&&#post10013889

I'm wondering why it was important to you that the subject (which was relevant to the thread) not be discussed.

But, back to your question. I would like to see Toshiba do HD51s, especially with increased bandwidth that I think would make HD DVD a better format as we move forward, as I am sure I have explained multiple times. Do you need me to go into details of this stuff again?
Do you work in the encoding business by any chance ?Nope. The company I work for is in medical and doesn't have anything to do with either side. Do you work for anybody that is involved on either side here?
Do you really think that they're going to change HD DVD specs under the nose of the few hundred thousand owners already out there ? Do you really think they would do that right before producing chinese units and trying to flood the market with low cost players ?I think there is a good chance that they won't make the change and the Chinese format is one of the things that could keep them from doing the TL51s (and maybe not the DL34s), which is one reason I mentioned the decisions left to make. Again, wondering why it was so important to you that this not be discussed in a thread that was about the Chinese format along with the advantage of having it be so similar to HD DVD, and why you went and had your little fit about me bringing the subject up.

Toshiba has mentioned the TL51s on more than one occasion and is making people think that they will submit them to the forum and that there is a chance they will make it into the HD DVD format. If they have no plans of adding them (as you seem to think) because of the Chinese format then they are just fooling people. Maybe they will add them and maybe they won't, but if they play both sides by making people think that they will be approved while also playing up the advantages of the Chinese format being so close to HD DVD, then we should be somewhat skeptical.
lol. So you're telling me there are people out there that buy the PS3 without knowing it's also a BR player ? So damn funny that we can even go this low, seeing as $ony spent millions advertising the PS3 as THE low cost BR player.

Irrelevant since there is no way in hell any person that comprehends english or has ever been on the internet wouldn't know one of PS3's main advertised and hyped features is its BR player capability. Do you need the indication on the box to be in bigger blue fonts than it already is ?Sony has sold over 1 million PS3s and there were definitely English speaking people who bought it without knowing about the Blu-ray movie playing capability. To claim otherwise is just ridiculous and it is probably a total waste to even try to discuss this rationally with someone who claims there weren't any English speaking people who bought it without knowing. I could ask if your $199 for an HD DVD player applies to people who bought an XBOX360 knowing that they could buy an add-on later if they wanted to, but didn't care about that feature at the time, but that is probably a waste.

--Darin

Especially when they don't have Disney, Fox, Sony or MGM.

You obviously have some fixation on these names - this is the 2nd topic, ~3-4th post you're throwing these like it would mean anything...

As for the OP, will retailers drop HD DVD if it only has 30% of the HD market? Well, will retailers drop the PS3 platform if it does 30% of the next gen game console business - I guess the PS3 must be pretty close to that now? The determining factor is not the %, but the size of the market....

PS3 is nowhere close to 30%, that'd be plain hilarious to claim. :) Even 20% is quite a stretch...
So far 360 is somewhere at 11-12M, Wii is around 5M, PS3 is somewhere between 1-2M worldwide.
MOnthly sales in February: http://www.usatoday.com/tech/gaming/2007-03-19-ps3-woes_N.htm
PS3 gets beaten badly, taking less than 20% of all sales.

So far 360 is somewhere at 11-12M

Oh please!

Microsoft still hasn't sold through the two to three million 360s they flooded the market with from late November and December to make their PR claim of 'ten million' sold. They have already warned about this quarter's shipment numbers due to the massive channel stuffing.

The 360 is sitting at 8-9 million in actual sales. Even 9 million is being generous and comes from padding out the European/minor territories sales estimates where solid sales data is more scarce compared to the other markets.

The 360 is selling to the very same ~23 million Xbox owners and at the same rate as the first Xbox worldwide.

The 360 is selling to the very same ~23 million Xbox owners and at the same rate as the first Xbox worldwide.

At least half of 360 owners never owned an xbox before.

Someone is just jealous becuz their console has lost practicallyall of its exclusives.

Oh please!

Microsoft still hasn't sold through the two to three million 360s they flooded the market with from late November and December to make their PR claim of 'ten million' sold. They have already warned about this quarter's shipment numbers due to the massive channel stuffing.

The 360 is sitting at 8-9 million in actual sales. Even 9 million is being generous and comes from padding out the European/minor territories sales estimates where solid sales data is more scarce compared to the other markets.

The 360 is selling to the very same ~23 million Xbox owners and at the same rate as the first Xbox worldwide.


Your point could be true - but for every mfr. PS3 did not sell that much and perhaps even Wii haven't leapfrogged the $4M as they said...

...however NPD data clearly shows PS3 is badly beaten by everybody else, particularly Wii (3:1).

So in other words without actual links I cannot consider your point seriously, sorry. :p

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.....massive amount of PS3's.....<sigh>...that was a good one.

Well, lets get real....already about 2 million sold worldwide counting the European launch.

It appears to be following the same path as the 360...slow out of the gate and then within 6-12 months, picks up steam.

You simply can not deny (no matter what camp you are in) the power the PS3 will have in deciding this war...

Conservatively estimate 4 Million in HH's by year end...

Hate Sony or not...even if the PS3 never sells the quantity of the 360, its still going to be millions and millions of systems...and thats all its going to take to end this war.

Well, lets get real....already about 2 million sold worldwide counting the European launch.

It appears to be following the same path as the 360...slow out of the gate and then within 6-12 months, picks up steam.

You simply can not deny (no matter what camp you are in) the power the PS3 will have in deciding this war...

Conservatively estimate 4 Million in HH's by year end...

Hate Sony or not...even if the PS3 never sells the quantity of the 360, its still going to be millions and millions of systems...and thats all its going to take to end this war.

I thought the war was already over? Thats what Sony keeps saying. Don't you agree with Sony?

Let us all welcome Lian, our new "BD can do no wrong, and the PS3 is a smashing success" poster.

Well, lets get real....already about 2 million sold worldwide counting the European launch.

It appears to be following the same path as the 360...slow out of the gate and then within 6-12 months, picks up steam.

You simply can not deny (no matter what camp you are in) the power the PS3 will have in deciding this war...

Conservatively estimate 4 Million in HH's by year end...

Hate Sony or not...even if the PS3 never sells the quantity of the 360, its still going to be millions and millions of systems...and thats all its going to take to end this war.

yup !! i can see Sony scrapping PS3 altogether and announcing PS4 with either HD DVD drive or DVD :D

the first sign is already here. USA's largest electronic retail chain is abandoning the cheapes Blu-ray Disk player/PS3. Derive whatever you desire with the imminent fact. ;)

Hate Sony or not...even if the PS3 never sells the quantity of the 360, its still going to be millions and millions of systems...and thats all its going to take to end this war.

Well you would be correct if...

A) PS3 were connected to the main HDTV in the house.

B) If the PS3 was not primarily a gaming console application.

C) If the PS3 could do a decent job of playing SD DVDs.

D) If Sony had not pared a very poorly example of the true quality BD can produce.

No question the PS3 will help sell BD titles and many users use their PS3 for BD playback, but the vast majority does not. So I am sorry to say you are not correct.

The things that will help decide which format gets and maintains the biggest market share is stand alone hardware sales HD players that are connected to the main viewing HDTV in the household. And for now and the foreseeable future HD DVD has a lower cost more viable solution.

We all know and agree that HD DVD and BD are more equal than different. Both deliver an incredible picture and what we need is low cost players so the general public will buy this category in very high mass volume.

-Robert

Well you would be correct if...

A) PS3 were connected to the main HDTV in the house.

[more snipped]
Are you saying most PS3s aren't being connected to the main HDTV in the house? That is a surprise to me.

So it sounds like you are saying that the majority of PS3 purchasers are either
a) buying an HD gaming system and not hooking it up to HDTVs or
b) owners of multiple HDTVs and they are hooking their PS3 up to the non-main set.

Is that correct? I would have guessed the majority ARE hooking them up to their main HDTV (like me). What are you basing this presumption on?

Rich I assume you agree that the vast majority of PS3 sales are purchased with the intent to play PS3 games. For example in my own home my son has a PS3 in his bedroom. My next-door neighbor's kids use their PS3 in the computer room.

On a larger scale we have installed thousands of new HDTVs and I have never once connected a PS3 to the family/living room HDTV. However, many of these homes have PS3s.

Of course, I understand that a lot of AVS Forum members have purchased PS3's and connected them to their main HDTV and I even agree that many members use their PS3 a an BD player frequently. However, this is not the mainstream mass marketplace.

The vast majority of PS3s are not connected to the main HDTV and are not used frequently if at all to play BD discs as the bulk of the buyers are using the console for gaming.

-Robert

Rich I assume you agree that the vast majority of PS3 sales are purchased with the intent to play PS3 games. For example in my own home my son has a PS3 in his bedroom. My next-door neighbor's kids use their PS3 in the computer room.

On a larger scale we have installed thousands of new HDTVs and I have never once connected a PS3 to the family/living room HDTV. However, many of these homes have PS3s.

Of course, I understand that a lot of AVS Forum members have purchased PS3's and connected them to their main HDTV and I even agree that many members use their PS3 a an BD player frequently. However, this is not the mainstream mass marketplace.

The vast majority of PS3s are not connected to the main HDTV and are not used frequently if at all to play BD discs as the bulk of the buyers are using the console for gaming.

-Robert

If this is the case, then how do you explain the disparity between BD and HD DVD in software sales, with BD far outselling HD DVD? Stand alone player sales are roughly the same, so if it's not the PS3 owners driving BD movie sales, what is?

I'm not arguing for one thing or the other, but your assertion doesn't appear to make much sense based on other data. Anectodal evidence based on what your company has installed doesn't really wash as being either comprehensive or authoritative. What applies to your company/region may have little or no bearing on the rest of the country.

David, The one month surge BD title sales was mostly due to a nice group of new titles that stand alone BD customers jumped in on as well as the free BD movie offers that spiked the sales.

No question the high volume of new PS3 consoles added to the BD sales spike as well.

How people use their PS3 in my region is very much how users across America set up their systems as well.

-Robert

David, The one month surge BD title sales was mostly due to a nice group of new titles that stand alone BD customers jumped in on as well as the free BD movie offers that spiked the sales. It wasn't a "one month surge", it's been almost three months at 2:1 Blu-ray, starting sometime in the last weeks of December. That means the surge started some weeks before, most likely right after the PS3 came out. The Amazon sale didn't hit until the first week of March.

Robert, that doesn't make any sense at all - you (and all your customers with a PS3) paid for an expensive, newly released, hard-to-find (at least initially), next-gen HD gaming system to play on a small SD screen?!? If that's the case, why not stick to Wii/PS2/XBox and actually have great games to actually enjoy? It's not like Sony came out with tons of must-have HD game titles.

I'm not even remotely close to this industry, yet I've already hooked up 3 PS3's and 1 Xbox360 add-on to the main HDTV for friends/family since December. I just happen to be considered the high-tech geek in my circle. Besides posters on the internet, I've yet to see a brand new PS3 relegated to a secondary home television set. This might happen in a couple of years as multiple-HDTV homes become common, but I'd say if customers were keen enough to seek out an overhyped PS3, they're definitely hooking up their shiny new toy to the main HDTV, even just to show it off.

As a prominent CE retailer, shouldn't you actually be encouraging your customers to fully benefit from their high price HDTV & audio equipment? I'd say a 1080p gaming & movie player is another great way to enjoy their purchase. Something you should consider counselling your customer base on, especially given the respect people have for your company.

Robert, please help me understand this. What are the majority of PS3 owners hooking them up to? Are they SDTVs? Or do some have multiple HDTVs and it's not the main one? Or some of both?

Honestly, even if most buyers are using them mostly for gaming I just can't see the logic in spending $500-$600 or more on an HDTV gaming system unless you are going to use it with an HDTV. Why buy one then when you can get a PS2 for what, about $150 maybe and the games would play about the same.

Edit: I see Chefboy asked much the same thing just before me.

David, The one month surge BD title sales was mostly due to a nice group of new titles that stand alone BD customers jumped in on as well as the free BD movie offers that spiked the sales.

No question the high volume of new PS3 consoles added to the BD sales spike as well.A spike generally has two sides. You would help your credibility if you didn't claim it was a one month surge when people can go look at the Nielsen data and see how far off your claim is. My memory is that even after Nielsen was showing sales at 2:1 for Blu-ray you claimed that discs through a couple of big distributors still favored HD DVD. What is your position now relative to that?

--Darin

The answer to Robert's observations is that whether or not you see a ps3 hooked up to an hdtv is highly reliant on the time context of a household being pre-hdtv-installed vs. post-hdtv-installed. It's understandable that the first time an hdtv is shipped to a household, the natural thing they will connect to it is a dvd player (or some sort of movie player). What gets connected to it in the days after the installer leaves, could be a whole myraid of things, including a ps3 or other game console. Hence, what you see hooked up at the time of installation of the tv isn't necessarily a good/indicative/representative sample of what will ultimately get hooked up during the actual useage of the tv. It only suggests what a basic setup would involve in order to get the system baseline functional.

chefboy1, maybe my region is different, but literally all of my local customers do not have their gaming consoles connected on the main HDTV. For the most part gaming consoles are connected to kids rooms, dens and basement HDTVs. No one has an SD analog TV connected to a PS3, xBox 360 or Wii and I did not and would never say that.

I always encourage every customer to pair their HDTV's to HD DVD and or BD players and we have almost a 100% attach rate.

Free BD disc promotions, great titles and stand alone and PS3 hardware sales have spiked BD title sales and will continue to do so. This is great news for all of us.

-Robert

Why would anyone be surprised that consumers who are buying into these formats at this stage in the game have more than one HDTV? :confused:

Why would anyone be surprised that consumers who are buying into these formats at this stage in the game have more than one HDTV? :confused:

I think that is a great point. Early adopters on the gaming front may have been early HDTV adopters . . .

I think Robert's point is well-taken: gaming consoles (outside of this forum) aren't being used as primary next gen HD disc viewing machines. No way to absolutely, empirically PROVE this (other than a long a detailed survey), but it makes sense (to me).

Why would anyone be surprised that consumers who are buying into these formats at this stage in the game have more than one HDTV? :confused:
I would expect a lot of PS3 buyers to have more than one HDTV but I am certainly surprised it is the vast majority as Robert has said. But he ought to know so it likely is correct.

I think that is a great point. Early adopters on the gaming front may have been early HDTV adopters . . .
So as early HDTV adopters they have multiple HDTV sets. That seems to make sense.

The answer to Robert's observations is that whether or not you see a ps3 hooked up to an hdtv is highly reliant on the time context of a household being pre-hdtv-installed vs. post-hdtv-installed. It's understandable that the first time an hdtv is shipped to a household, the natural thing they will connect to it is a dvd player (or some sort of movie player). What gets connected to it in the days after the installer leaves, could be a whole myraid of things, including a ps3 or other game console. Hence, what you see hooked up at the time of installation of the tv isn't necessarily a good/indicative/representative sample of what will ultimately get hooked up during the actual useage of the tv. It only suggests what a basic setup would involve in order to get the system baseline functional.

We connect all of our customers previously owned and new equipment to their HDTVs as our customers prefer to have us make the connections and set-up the systems and remote control unit.

-Robert

A spike generally has two sides. You would help your credibility if you didn't claim it was a one month surge when people can go look at the Nielsen data and see how far off your claim is. My memory is that even after Nielsen was showing sales at 2:1 for Blu-ray you claimed that discs through a couple of big distributors still favored HD DVD. What is your position now relative to that?

--Darin

My position is unchanged. We buy our BD and HD DVD titles through distributors and our sales are not counted.

-Robert

for evidence of what early adopter consumers connect to their HDTVs just look at the photos of set-ups on this forum. a large percentage of those with bd have a ps3 connected up to their hdtv. this is unlikely to be unusual to this forum.

as to a "spike" in bd sales, that's an interesting way of putting it. a more accurate description would be that bd software has steadily grown in sales volume, and has now surpassed hd dvd by at least 2:1.

My position is unchanged. We buy our BD and HD DVD titles through distributors and our sales are not counted.Just to be clear about your position. Is it that HD DVD software is outselling Blu-ray software currently? Or that it is outselling Blu-ray for those distributors? Can you tell us whether your HD DVD disc sales are more or less than 1000 discs per week?

--Darin

There is no doubt that BD has outsold HD DVD by 2:1 and greater ratio for all of Jan, Feb and March. During this period we had over 2 million PS3 owners, with very few games to buy.....and no HD DVD hardware even came close in terms of volume. Xbox also had several marquee games that were released....so the add on was not on the mind of most xbox owners.

Now the question is, how were BD sales distributed? If CR Royale sold 50% of all HD disks sold and HD DVD sold 25%. Then one can say, if you take out the impact of the top BD disk, then the rest of the sales were pretty even. I know studios, just like other businesses look at sales from various angles and the ratio is not such a big deal. Absolute sale and $ per unit are far more important. However, HD DVD showing a huge decline in Jan (not sure about Feb) compared to Nov and Dec last year is not good news for the format. IMO. For me weekly growth is a critical metric for either format.

If anyone can point me to a source that shows me that HD DVD has shown growth this year in software sales?

rename this thread to "Most AVS users completely ignorant of the outside world"

There is no doubt that BD has outsold HD DVD by 2:1 and greater ratio for all of Jan, Feb and March. During this period we had over 2 million PS3 owners...Not in the US or North America. Are you counting Japanese units now? In the US it looks like the PS3 started that period with less than 1 million and will ended it with something higher than that (but not even close to 2 million).
If CR Royale sold 50% of all HD disks sold and HD DVD sold 25%. Then one can say, if you take out the impact of the top BD disk, then the rest of the sales were pretty even.Looks like CR sold more than all other BDs and sold more than all HD DVDs, but I don't think your math works out.

If the ratio was 4:1 for the week, than that would be 80 to 20. If CR was half of all discs, that leaves 30 to 20, or still a 1.5:1 ratio without even counting the biggest title. If CR was just half of BDs (and not half of all discs), that would leave the ratio at 2:1 for other titles with the above assumptions.

--Darin

Just to be clear about your position. Is it that HD DVD software is outselling Blu-ray software currently? Or that it is outselling Blu-ray for those distributors? Can you tell us whether your HD DVD disc sales are more or less than 1000 discs per week?

--Darin

Darin, we ship about 200 HD DVD discs per week. But remember we are just one retailer and three top DVD distributors sell tens of thousands of retailers.

I honestly do not know what the future sales ratio will be for BD vs. HD DVD. Both sides are about to release some very powerful software announcements.

Darin, I love this forum and enjoy participating. I have excellent relationships with many HD DVD authoring, Toshiba technical, engineering and sales/marketing executives and specialists. I will stay on this forum for as long as I live and always support what I believe in. I love all HD sources, but as you know I professionally prefer HD DVD. HD DVD has an excellent ready to go replication industry with lower and easier replication costs, and delivers an excellent product. I do not see the need to re-invent the wheel and obsolete the replication plants around the world for nothing more than the benefit of big business.

I am just asking for your mutual respect when you address me.

-Robert

Classy post Robert. It's people like you that bring fresh air to the stench that has become this particular area of the fora.

I personally don't care about Nielsen/NPD ratios. I know what I've seen....few releases on HD DVD vs a slew of BD releases. People can look at the data however they wish but in 2007 there has not been a level playing field here.

I personally don't care about Nielsen/NPD ratios. I know what I've seen....few releases on HD DVD vs a slew of BD releases. People can look at the data however they wish but in 2007 there has not been a level playing field here.

And you're surprised by this? This is something we all knew given the new release titles due in 2007.

Look, I have nothing against HD DVD personally. It was my first purchase. And In fact I wish HD DVD had come out in 2005 and taken a massive lead to the point where Blu-ray never came out. That way we avoid this mess we're in. But both formats are out, and if you want to buy new releases and blockbusters Blu-ray is clearly the format of choice at the moment and near future. And we're seeing this reflected in the sales figures.

I personally don't care about Nielsen/NPD ratios. I know what I've seen....few releases on HD DVD vs a slew of BD releases.Translation: "I don't care about facts, it's only what I've seen in my extremely limited area that counts."
People can look at the data however they wish but in 2007 there has not been a level playing field here.Then how does that explain the week of 1/16? It was well before the "slew" of titles, with plenty of HD DVD exclusives, yet was the first definitive period we know of 2:1 sales.

I know you want to tell yourself there's no trend, but every piece of evidence, every last one, proves you wrong.

And you're surprised by this? This is something we all knew given the new release titles due in 2007.

Look, I have nothing against HD DVD personally. It was my first purchase. And In fact I wish HD DVD had come out in 2005 and taken a massive lead to the point where Blu-ray never came out. That way we avoid this mess we're in. But both formats are out, and if you want to buy new releases and blockbusters Blu-ray is clearly the format of choice at the moment and near future. And we're seeing this reflected in the sales figures.

No I'm not surprised. I'm not a feckn idiot. I saw that there were few HD DVD titles coming in the first 90 days of 2007. Blu-ray had no choice but to deliver more movies they were already behind. The piracy concerns are very evident. ALL the studios seem to be delaying titles until April. You guys toss out stats like you understand how they came to be. That's not doing me any good. If there's a disparity in movie sales I need to know why. Many people (including myself at times) simply want to take the easy path and claim 3:1 or post sales rankings as some affirmation of our beliefs. Little surprises me regarding this HD boondoggle. I have a good idea why the disparity exists that explains NPD numbers.

JBlacklow,I believe you will see a spike in HD DVD sales when we get the announcement I am expecting in the next week or two. And I am involved in getting other great titles replicated in HD DVD.

All of this competition is great news for both sides and particularly the end users. If BD or HD DVD were the only format we would not see as many firmware upgrades and new models coming out so fast or the hardware price dropping as fast as it has. We would not see multi-channel lossless audio support or a push to the studios to get up to speed as fast either.

Lets stop complaining and shooting at each other we'll all looking for the same things... the best picture and audio quality, advanced features and content and our free enterprise system is the best way to get all of the hardware and software suppliers to get it for us as fast as possible.

-Robert

Translation: "I don't care about facts, it's only what I've seen in my extremely limited area that counts."
Then how does that explain the week of 1/16? It was well before the "slew" of titles, with plenty of HD DVD exclusives, yet was the first definitive period we know of 2:1 sales.

I know you want to tell yourself there's no trend, but every piece of evidence, every last one, proves you wrong.

JBlacklow. Don't write checks your ass can't cash. You don't know anything about the limitations of my area.

HD DVD release began to slow down in December 06.

http://www.eproductwars.com/dvd/graphs/currentcount-1-1-All.jpg

Note the parity of titles that are shippable mid December. The HD DVD slowdown happened 4 months ago and has hampered the formats growth. This could be due to studio concerns over AACS breaches or a variety of reasons. The PS3 Effect is also substantial. It was BD's first affordable player and it is a force to be reckoned with as well as the content advantage.

You're not telling me anything I don't already know or haven't ascertained. A child could see why HD DVD was passed up quickly. I'm still stunned quite honestly. They spent all this time developing a bunk encryption system that was cracked faster than CSS.

Pehaps this is karma and what the studios deserve.

Note the parity of titles that are shippable mid December. The HD DVD slowdown happened 4 months ago and has hampered the formats growth.I think we should consider what caused these things, but that chart shows the close to parity in December like you said, but then shows Blu-ray behind for title count and doesn't reaching parity until around the end of January. Grubert's list shows HD DVD with 22 releases for December and Blu-ray with 20, if my count is right. The last 2 weeks of the year it shows 11 for HD DVD and 8 for Blu-ray. And how do you explain the sales for the week ending January 21st, after HD DVD had 7 new releases that week and Blu-ray had 5?

--Darin

We connect all of our customers previously owned and new equipment to their HDTVs as our customers prefer to have us make the connections and set-up the systems and remote control unit.

-Robert

This speaks volumes, such that if it is so easy to characterize your entire customer base in one monolithic behavior group, then your business is obviously applicable to a niche group that is merely a subset of the larger group where many behaviors are possible. My point remains relevant, in that it is relatively weak evidence to judge what "everyone" is doing with their home theater setup just by observing its state when you are there to install something. It could be different beforehand. It could be different afterwards. It could be entirely unalike for all of the homes that do not involve an installer visit, altogether. You have no way of knowing, w/o making some fairly wide assumptions.

You're not telling me anything I don't already know or haven't ascertained. A child could see why HD DVD was passed up quickly. I'm still stunned quite honestly. They spent all this time developing a bunk encryption system that was cracked faster than CSS.

Pehaps this is karma and what the studios deserve.

The way I had it explained to me was something like this: You can't create a media to be read only. If you allow people access to the data to be read, it can be cracked. The only "uncrackable" format is the one that you don't allow users to access at all.

So for cd, dvd, hd-dvd, blu-ray, etc etc... it's only a matter of time.

rename this thread to "Most AVS users completely ignorant of the outside world"

Sounds a lot like "Point Counterpoint" on SNL, when Dan Akroyd would say to Jane Curtin, "Jane, you ignorant slut!" Good for a laugh, but it doesn't shed much light on the conversation. Explain yourself please-- remember you said "most AVS users"; that includes both sides.

In addition to disk sold by format, it would be great if Nielson could put out HD movies sold by studio across both formats. That would be a better metric to see how specific studios are doing overall in the format war...

Another meteic could be $ value generated by format. That would be total value of software + hardware. So we would effectively eliminate sales and discounts and price cuts and be able to see true market growth.

Having a BI background there lots of potential for real analysis....but as long as we can get good data.

I think we should consider what caused these things, but that chart shows the close to parity in December like you said, but then shows Blu-ray behind for title count and doesn't reaching parity until around the end of January. Grubert's list shows HD DVD with 22 releases for December and Blu-ray with 20, if my count is right. The last 2 weeks of the year it shows 11 for HD DVD and 8 for Blu-ray. And how do you explain the sales for the week ending January 21st, after HD DVD had 7 new releases that week and Blu-ray had 5?

--Darin

Yeah I noticed the disparity as well. I thought I could go to HD Digest and find out when current titles were released in list form but they don't have that. So I'll keep searching. I think we all need to know what titles shipped on what date. My memory tells me that even when the release titles were equal the Blu-ray movies released were more recent in many cases (causing comparisons of quality for the last 10 releases by some) and popular. In all honesty the HD DVD threw out a lot of slop (Half Baked? Come on) early.

The way I had it explained to me was something like this: You can't create a media to be read only. If you allow people access to the data to be read, it can be cracked. The only "uncrackable" format is the one that you don't allow users to access at all.

So for cd, dvd, hd-dvd, blu-ray, etc etc... it's only a matter of time

I realize this now. The best encryption methods all have weak points that hackers are growing better at exploiting.

Yeah I noticed the disparity as well. I thought I could go to HD Digest and find out when current titles were released in list form but they don't have that. So I'll keep searching. I think we all need to know what titles shipped on what date. My memory tells me that even when the release titles were equal the Blu-ray movies released were more recent in many cases (causing comparisons of quality for the last 10 releases by some) and popular. In all honesty the HD DVD threw out a lot of slop (Half Baked? Come on) early.Grubert's lists are good ones. You can get to the 2007 list by going to the stickies on this forum and there is a link to the 2006 list. Direct links are 2007 Release List (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=766588) and 2006 Release List (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=665702).

Blu-ray did have the carryovers of "The Covenant" and "Crank" from January 2nd and 9th for the sales data for the week ending the 21st, but the releases for January 16th look better to me on HD DVD than Blu-ray. Blu-ray did have "Employee of the Month" and "Gridiron Gang", while HD DVD had "Clerks 2", "Lucky Number Slevin", "The Mummy Returns" and "Poseidon".

--Darin

Darin, what were the respective titles released on both formats in the week you are mentioning....Were they similar types of titles?

IMO the PS3 has been a big factor. Everyone I know who owns a PS3 uses it mostly for movies now. In fact I don't know if any of them have bought a PS3 since Jan or so....in fact, I've taken to simply borrowing BD disks :)

JMHO, the PS3 hasn't sold as well as people expected overall, but I think it's done better as a BD Player than people expected. The ranking of the remote says it all. OTOH, the xbox drive has probably not sold well as many expected. I for one thought it would sell around 50% of PS3, but it's more like 10% -15%. Plus the Toshiba Players have sold less than expected - but that is balanced with almost a disastrous sales of BD Standalone players. In this case, I think NPD may not be accurate. JMHO.

So, overall, the PS3 is still 800lb gorilla....

I'll definitely be listening in on Sonys earnings call this Q. It should be broadcast on Yahoo! They'll talk about their BD and console strategy for sure.

Darin, since you're so well informed. Has any company announced a change in their HD strategy since the 2 formats launched? I can't think of any HD DVD exclusive on April 18th saying they will support BD and vise versa....Warner promised greater neutrality and catching up. Any indication on the catching up yet?

OTOH, the xbox drive has probably not sold well as many expected. I for one thought it would sell around 50% of PS3, but it's more like 10% -15%. Plus the Toshiba Players have sold less than expected -

I'm surprised about the Xbox HD DVD drive as well. I though it would be doing better by now. It's not doing bad but right now it's not selling like gangbusters (Top 25). Perhaps the problem is truly the content issue. HD DVD is going to have to match "the sizzle" of Blu-ray for the rest of the year. The Matrix helps and there is word of some other big announcements. Bring'em on...HD DVD users are waiting for more titles.

IMO the PS3 has been a big factor. Everyone I know who owns a PS3 uses it mostly for movies now. In fact I don't know if any of them have bought a PS3 since Jan or so....in fact, I've taken to simply borrowing BD disks :)

JMHO, the PS3 hasn't sold as well as people expected overall, but I think it's done better as a BD Player than people expected. The ranking of the remote says it all. OTOH, the xbox drive has probably not sold well as many expected. I for one thought it would sell around 50% of PS3, but it's more like 10% -15%. Plus the Toshiba Players have sold less than expected - but that is balanced with almost a disastrous sales of BD Standalone players. In this case, I think NPD may not be accurate. JMHO.

So, overall, the PS3 is still 800lb gorilla....

I'll definitely be listening in on Sonys earnings call this Q. It should be broadcast on Yahoo! They'll talk about their BD and console strategy for sure.



My guess is that investors expect sony to have a relatively good quarter despite slow ps3 sales. Sony ADRs are trading about 25% more than they were when the ps3 launched in late november. So, i guess we'll have to see. It will also be interesting to see how sony's #s compare to 3/31/06FYE.

I know anticipation of buying a ps3 or having bought one spurred many people to get hdtvs (myself being one of them), and sony's known for making a decent tv. My worthless guess, but I'd say they're losing a lot of money on the ps3 side, which will be offset by greater sales of tv & electronics & ps2 sales.

I believe they'll make their 6 mil ps3 ship goal, but the amount sold will probably be far less.

Darin, what were the respective titles released on both formats in the week you are mentioning....Were they similar types of titles?I provided links and examples. Just go to Grubert's 2007 release list and you can see the titles for January 16th on each format.
Darin, since you're so well informed. Has any company announced a change in their HD strategy since the 2 formats launched? I can't think of any HD DVD exclusive on April 18th saying they will support BD and vise versa....Warner promised greater neutrality and catching up. Any indication on the catching up yet?I'm not sure why April 18th would be important to them (a 1 year anniversary doesn't seem like much reason to change decisions) and I haven't heard of any studios really changing. I think Warner is probably more neutral than they were a year ago despite this Matrix announcement (I think the BD group is to blame for not providing what Warner would need to release on both with PiP). As far as catching up, Warner has announced some titles that don't matter much ("Enter the Dragon" being one). Here again I think the PiP is partly what is holding them up. It doesn't look to me like the Blu-ray camp is going to get "Batman Begins" without functionality like IME and I think that is their responsibility, much more than Warner's.

--Darin

Well, lets get real....already about 2 million sold worldwide counting the European launch.

It appears to be following the same path as the 360...slow out of the gate and then within 6-12 months, picks up steam.

You simply can not deny (no matter what camp you are in) the power the PS3 will have in deciding this war...

Conservatively estimate 4 Million in HH's by year end...

Hate Sony or not...even if the PS3 never sells the quantity of the 360, its still going to be millions and millions of systems...and thats all its going to take to end this war.

We still don't know how much influence the add-on will have. Especially if there is a price drop around the corner. Think about it......add-ons (for those who have xbox's already or those who buy one after price drop) for 139.99? Hmmmm.

We still don't know how much influence the add-on will have. Especially if there is a price drop around the corner. Think about it......add-ons (for those who have xbox's already or those who buy one after price drop) for 139.99? Hmmmm.

For those 360'ers that were interested in HD movies -- and perhaps more importantly, have the short-term spending power (given that the $60 differential was a dis-incentive to purchase before) to buy hundreds and hundreds of dollars for additional HD DVD content, they've already done it ... that's my opinion anyways, and I'm sticking to it ... do I need to do a vgcharts.org search to show the dismal 360 HD DVD add-on sales since XMAS/launch?

OTOH, since it appears that HD DVD can only compete based on price (for limited content), maybe $139.99 is too expensive?

That's an interesting issue, considering the potential interaction of downloadable hd video from the Live service. It's possible that their own downloading feature may kill the add-on, or vice versa, or maybe they render each other impotent.

That's an interesting issue, considering the potential interaction of downloadable hd video from the Live service. It's possible that their own downloading feature may kill the add-on, or vice versa, or maybe they render each other impotent.

The market is big enough for both.

http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6427144.html?nid=2840

Panelist Alfred Amaroso, president and CEO of Macrovision Corp., added, “One of the fallacies is that we are a giant homogenous country, where everyone does everything. But 40% of people don’t go to the movies. One-third don’t buy CDs anymore.”

This Posting is a joke , right ...
I didn't read it in Nostradamus prophesys..

For those 360'ers that were interested in HD movies -- and perhaps more importantly, have the short-term spending power (given that the $60 differential was a dis-incentive to purchase before) to buy hundreds and hundreds of dollars for additional HD DVD content, they've already done it ... that's my opinion anyways, and I'm sticking to it ... do I need to do a vgcharts.org search to show the dismal 360 HD DVD add-on sales since XMAS/launch?

OTOH, since it appears that HD DVD can only compete based on price (for limited content), maybe $139.99 is too expensive?


While you're at it, can you show us the PS3 sales charts after XMAS release as well? I am curious to see the trend of the HDDVD add-on and the PS3.

This thread is as pathetic as the constant Universal flipping threads. Again Universal affirming its support for HD DVD recently in Europe:http://www.itnews.com.au/newsstory.aspx?CIaNID=48344&r=hstory

Retailers may abandon normal HD DVD and only stock HD DVD/DVD combo.

This Posting is a joke , right ...
I didn't read it in Nostradamus prophesys..

This is his interpretation of ...

In the year of 2008 after Christ traders will prefer large ships with fat women over small ships with svelte ladies. They will keep the fat women and throw the ladies overboard.