This whole issue of "cheap" HD DVD players is nothing more than BS. . . Price Envy and nothing more.

The A2 was selling for $399 at the beginning of the year. Everyone thought it was a good entry level player. Now that you can buy one for $99 - it stinks? It degrades the HD DVD format? Gimme a freakin break!

So if GM decided to lower the price of a Malibu from $20,000 to $5000 - WHO wouldn't stand in line to buy one?:rolleyes:

The context of the original post that started all this was wondering *if* Toshiba's blowout pricing would prevent other CE's from entering the HD DVD market.

ie: Can a CE other than Toshiba make enough margin to make it worth their while.

Obviously, Toshiba can recover margin through licensing fees, but others can not. Much like Sony can recover $$ through PS3 games that other BD CE's cannot.

The context of the original post that started all this was wondering *if* Toshiba's blowout pricing would prevent other CE's from entering the HD DVD market.

ie: Can a CE other than Toshiba make enough margin to make it worth their while.

Obviously, Toshiba can recover margin through licensing fees, but others can not. Much like Sony can recover $$ through PS3 games that other BD CE's cannot.

Who cares? Is there something wrong with a single CEM? Pioneer did it with LD for many years.

And the high end is still open. Not everyone wants the low model. But it has to offer more than an XA2 - much more.

Venturer is going to be the brand to buy in Canada. Plenty of people have heard of them - their home base.

So please explain how 8 CEM's (is that the number we are up to now?) making BD SAL's . . . and only have about 8% of the BD player market . . . is a positive.:confused:

I for one care if theres only one ce.

Funny you mention Pioneer. I'm a big fan!

I love their products. Never had a bad thing to say about them.
I cant buy a Pioneer HD DVD player and probably never will be able to.

I'm in Dental Insurance customer service. They pride themselves on our company's customer service. If our customers are not satisfied with us, during next open season they can opt for a new insurance.

Not saying TS is a bad company. but if I decide I want choices I have none.
No JVC, Hitachi, Denon, HK, Pioneer, Panasonic, Marantz, Sherwood, Sharp, Phillips, Yamaha, Onkyo... I dont think you'll ever see an affordable hd player come from one of these vendors. Not at a price to compete with TS. Don't be suprised if a few that said they were going to make a player back out now.

I for one care if theres only one ce.

Funny you mention Pioneer. I'm a big fan!

I love their products. Never had a bad thing to say about them.
I cant buy a Pioneer HD DVD player and probably never will be able to.

I'm in Dental Insurance customer service. They pride themselves on our company's customer service. If our customers are not satisfied with us, during next open season they can opt for a new insurance.

Not saying TS is a bad company. but if I decide I want choices I have none.
No JVC, Hitachi, Denon, HK, Pioneer, Panasonic, Marantz, Sherwood, Sharp, Phillips, Yamaha, Onkyo... I dont think you'll ever see an affordable hd player come from one of these vendors. Not at a price to compete with TS. Don't be suprised if a few that said they were going to make a player back out now.

Do any of the current BD CEM's truly have a different product? And of course you are speaking as an EA . . . or else you wouldn't be here at AVS. Mass adoption is the key to the success of HDM . . . not the number of CEM's making players. That only works when there is no format war.

Do any of the current BD CEM's truly have a different product? And of course you are speaking as an EA . . . or else you wouldn't be here at AVS. Mass adoption is the key to the success of HDM . . . not the number of CEM's making players. That only works when there is no format war.

Lee , I'd say they do.

You have sharp's player which is a fast gun loading, designed from the ground up.
The new panny definitely stand's out and the Samsung stuff has its merits alhough they've needed a few firmware updates to get things working right.
(Thank god mine is now, I dont mind complaining about that) and the new Sony's have a premium style but a higher price. But some people are into their styling.

I had a Sony ES555 (reciever) and LOVED that thing. I was definitely a fan of the es line and getting a matching player would have been nice. But I abandoned Sony ES recievers when they went all digital.

But regardless of that, somebody could be turned off by bad CS.(not saying TS has it) , or maybe just didnt like the aesthetics of the player and want to try something new. Just for me personally having choices is crucial.

Maybe evryone else will feel differently but there is no way I will ever buy an hd dvd player if my choices are only TS and Venturer. Speaking only for myself.

Never.

Lee , I'd say they do.

You have sharp's player which is a fast gun loading, designed from the ground up.
The new panny definitely stand's out and the Samsung stuff has its merits alhough they've needed a few firmware updates to get things working right.
(Thank god mine is now, I dont mind complaining about that) and the new Sony's have a premium style but a higher price. But some people are into their styling.

I had a Sony ES555 (reciever) and LOVED that thing. I was definitely a fan of the es line and getting a matching player would have been nice. But I abandoned Sony ES recievers when they went all digital.

But regardless of that, somebody could be turned off by bad CS.(not saying TS has it) , or maybe just didnt like the aesthetics of the player and want to try something new. Just for me personally having choices is crucial.

Maybe evryone else will feel differently but there is no way I will ever buy an hd dvd player if my choices are only TS and Venturer. Speaking only for myself.

Never.

Is there something wrong with TS's CS? I for one have talked to them a number of times - solved any issues I had (FW UP's) and gave me great service.

So - OK you have spoken your opinion as it applies to you. That is the extreme Micro look. I was discussing it from a Macro look. We are not on the same page.

Is there something wrong with TS's CS? I for one have talked to them a number of times - solved any issues I had (FW UP's) and gave me great service.

So - OK you have spoken your opinion as it applies to you. That is the extreme Micro look. I was discussing it from a Macro look. We are not on the same page.

I think I said I wasnt implying that there is. But why would they NEED to have great customer service? Its not like someone will buy a Panasonic next time.

I tried to make that clear its just my opinion.

But why is mine "micro".

Arent you assuming everyone will think like you? If we have millions of Lee clones (Like Mr Smith in the Matrix?) then of course its a "Macro" view.

We can only assume both our opinions are micro my friend lol!

To argue people who spend more on a player will spend more on titles is circular logic.



It deals with marketing and perceived value. Going back to the automobile example, people will spend more money on options (and higher priced options) on an expensive auto than a cheap auto. Their are a few exception to the rule like a razor where the razor is cheap but the company makes its money on the blades. Unfortunately people do not equate a HD-DVD player with a razor , they see their investment in HD-DVD discs as a long term investment and many people cannot equate a long term investment with a cheap player.
Another reason is a variety of players from different manufacturers. Many people see that a a commitment for long term support. So psychology plays an important role on the purchasing of high definition discs, and perhaps that is a one reason Blu-ray has outsold HD-DVD.

I'd say that between the 3 A3x series Toshiba and the XA-2, we have greater 'real' diversity and price/feature choice than on the BD side. IMO.

Isn't that something!

The Sony, the Sammy, the Panny and the Sharp all cost the same. Right? for that the Panny and the Sony don't decode adcanced codecs, the Panny is something called final standard version. Which means?

The Sammy and the Sharp have the same specs. Right? Also, same price. Right?

Just curious. So, it's mainly that BD offers aesthetic choice? Interesting....

Who cares? Is there something wrong with a single CEM? Pioneer did it with LD for many years.Well if HD DVD is aiming to be the next Laserdisc that would be a good rebuttal but Blu-ray and HD DVD are aiming to replace DVD in the long term. The problem is of course that as long as Toshiba subsidizes the stand alone HD DVD players market the only players we are likely to see are Toshiba designed HD DVD players. That may result in cheaper players but it has also caused most of the major CE companies to be Blu-ray exclusive.


And the high end is still open. Not everyone wants the low model. But it has to offer more than an XA2 - much more.And how well has that gone? For instance how many high end stand alone HD DVD players have been designed by other CE companies and how well did they sell?


Do any of the current BD CEM's truly have a different product?Last I checked there a wide variety of difference Blu-ray players with different capabilities and features. One examples is that Panasonic actually made their own SoC for Blu-ray players/recorders which is something I have never heard any non-Toshiba CE company doing for HD DVD. It is called the Panasonic UniPhier and is used in the Panasonic DMP-BD30.


And of course you are speaking as an EA . . . or else you wouldn't be here at AVS.Just curious but what is an EA?


Mass adoption is the key to the success of HDM . . . not the number of CEM's making players.Note though that many of the Blu-ray CE companies are well known and respected brand names that have more money to spend on promotion and advertising than smaller CE brands. As such Blu-ray having more major CE support means more than just greater player diversity it also means there will be more CE companies that will actively promote Blu-ray.

I'd say that between the 3 A3x series Toshiba and the XA-2, we have greater 'real' diversity and price/feature choice than on the BD side. IMO.

Isn't that something!

The Sony, the Sammy, the Panny and the Sharp all cost the same. Right? for that the Panny and the Sony don't decode advanced codecs, the Panny is something called final standard version. Which means?

The Sammy and the Sharp have the same specs. Right? Also, same price. Right?

Just curious. So, it's mainly that BD offers aesthetic choice? Interesting....

Why do things have to have different prices to be different?

I am not understanding this?
Where did I say Blu Ray offers only aesthetic choice?
I mentioned the different drive in the sharp (not even to mention its nice price!) The panny's awesome combination of bitsreaming dts ma and did we forget to mention the one thing they all have in common? 1080p 24.
Oh yeah that doesnt really do anything, its funny TS offers it on some models. Or is that part of that diversity?

For all the hooting and hollering about DD+ being good enough, I hope you wouldnt take anything away from the players that dont do MA?

I want to stay respectful, but please try to keep up.

Well if HD DVD is aiming to be the next Laserdisc that would be a good rebuttal but Blu-ray and HD DVD are aiming to replace DVD in the long term. .

No no no!

Search Plazman's posts.

HD DVD isnt aiming to replace dvd!
It's just serving as a niche cushion until downloadable hd arrives!
A "premium" compliment to dvd.

I didn't say it! He did!

Look for yourself.

Saved you the trouble!

" HD DVD was created to be a complement of DVD with the mix between SD and HD DVD to be determined based on demand. So, for the DVD Forum, having HD DVD as a niche product for a period of time is fine. The royalty stream will be preserved."

Who cares? Is there something wrong with a single CEM? Pioneer did it with LD for many years.

And the high end is still open. Not everyone wants the low model. But it has to offer more than an XA2 - much more.

Venturer is going to be the brand to buy in Canada. Plenty of people have heard of them - their home base.

So please explain how 8 CEM's (is that the number we are up to now?) making BD SAL's . . . and only have about 8% of the BD player market . . . is a positive.:confused:

I don't think they even have 8% if you exclude Sony. It looks like the S300 is the highest selling SA, no?

I think I said I wasnt implying that there is. But why would they NEED to have great customer service? Its not like someone will buy a Panasonic next time.

I tried to make that clear its just my opinion.

But why is mine "micro".

Arent you assuming everyone will think like you? If we have millions of Lee clones (Like Mr Smith in the Matrix?) then of course its a "Macro" view.

We can only assume both our opinions are micro my friend lol!No - a Micro look at the extreme is I . . . Me . . . Myself.

A Macro look takes the entire marketplace into account. A very broad view. Did this get lost on you?

Why would they have to have a good CS? Why not? Pride? They make more than HD DVD players you know. Whole host of CE products.

I don't think they even have 8% if you exclude Sony. It looks like the S300 is the highest selling SA, no?

Actual sales talk isnt appropriate here according to rules.

For ex I could point out that the reason to dwell on that 8% would go away if I were to point out that the reason it's such a low number is that PS3 sales are in the millions and then we open another can of why hd dvd qoutes ps3 as blu ray player sales sometimes and not others....and then we get in this big off topic mess and that old circle ....

Lets just zip it right now and dont make me have to rebutt player sales BS becasue it will only get the thread locked.

Lee and I were having a pleasant debate.
We dont always agree but we can stay on topic with no drama ;).

lets get back on track.

It deals with marketing and perceived value. Going back to the automobile example, people will spend more money on options (and higher priced options) on an expensive auto than a cheap auto. Their are a few exception to the rule like a razor where the razor is cheap but the company makes its money on the blades. Unfortunately people do not equate a HD-DVD player with a razor , they see their investment in HD-DVD discs as a long term investment and many people cannot equate a long term investment with a cheap player.
Another reason is a variety of players from different manufacturers. Many people see that a a commitment for long term support. So psychology plays an important role on the purchasing of high definition discs, and perhaps that is a one reason Blu-ray has outsold HD-DVD.

You do realize that when all things are put into perspective - the cost of the player is FAR outweighed by the cost to build a collection of movies. $1000's versus $100's.

No - a Micro look at the extreme is I . . . Me . . . Myself.

A Macro look takes the entire marketplace into account. A very broad view. Did this get lost on you?

Why would they have to have a good CS? Why not? Pride? They make more than HD DVD players you know. Whole host of CE products.

No, honestly it didnt.

I just don't agree with you that one ce is ok by j6p and that that you think that is a "broader" way of thinking. I think its ok for you to believe that but don't see that as broader.

I know lots of "Lay" people thattook notice that the only players advertised were Toshibas ...so I have some faith in that some of the masses we speak of will not be "ok" with it either.

But perhaps I give people too much credit?

So ... does this pretty much sum up the last few pages:

(1) Blu-ray has hard coating making it more durable yet causes issues with max capacity and yields.
(2) Blu-ray has more CE vendors which have collectively sold a miniscule amount of players that have very similar features (The Toshiba A2 has outsold all of them combined). None of these players can match what HD DVD players can do today, and have been able to do since day 1.
(3) Sony branded players are responsible for some 97%+ of the Blu-ray market. Toshiba Branded players are responsible for some 99%+ of the HD DVD market.
(4) Talk guesses that if you spend more money on a player, you'll also buy more discs for said player.

Is that what we're down to now? :confused:

It must be slow news season.

Actual sales talk isnt appropriate here according to rules.

For ex I could point out that the reason to dwell on that 8% would go away if I were to point out that the reason it's such a low number is that PS3 sales are in the millions and then we open another can of why hd dvd qoutes ps3 as blu ray player sales sometimes and not others....and then we get in this big off topic mess and that old circle ....

Lets just zip it right now and dont make me have to rebutt player sales BS becasue it will only get the thread locked.

Lee and I were having a pleasant debate.
We dont always agree but we can stay on topic with no drama ;).

lets get back on track.

It's not really sales talk, it was regarding market share. Talk has used numbers in that range when referring to Profile 1.1 support. I was just querying Lee's statement, on the same topic.

I understand you likely don't want to see such a small number brought up though, because you were debating for multiple CE vendors being a benefit. *shrug*

In the end, it seems that:

You feel Multiple CE vendors are a significant benefit and you'll never buy a Toshiba player (unless others start making HD DVD players) -- which is logic I don't understand. If a bunch of other people start making HD DVD units, why would it then be okay to buy Toshiba? :confused: Or did I misunderstand you here? What don't you like about the Toshiba players? Aesthetics? You mentioned no experience with their customer service.

Lee feels that having a smaller subset of CE's is a benefit.

We don't know for sure what the average consumer sees as beneficial.

Me, I think that the smaller CE subset has been a help to maintaining compatibility with titles on HD DVD. With the complexity of these new formats and the fact that many consumers still feel that DVD is just fine, it hurts more when titles won't play on a player. Having all those different designs, hardware components, performance specs, etc on Blu-ray players just makes it tougher on Studios. They have to either focus on the Lowest Common Denominator or risk upsetting users. In some cases, the latter happens anyways.

No, honestly it didnt.

I just don't agree with you that one ce is ok by j6p and that that you think that is a "broader" way of thinking. I think its ok for you to believe that but don't see that as broader.

I know lots of "Lay" people thattook notice that the only players advertised were Toshibas ...so I have some faith in that some of the masses we speak of will not be "ok" with it either.

But perhaps I give people too much credit?

But Toshiba has 4 current models in their line up. That isn't enough of a choice?

You do realize that when all things are put into perspective - the cost of the player is FAR outweighed by the cost to build a collection of movies. $1000's versus $100's.

I don't know, seeing how my massive dvd collections is now worth next to nothing now, I find that does make an impact on my buying.

I now rent more and buy only the titles I really want.
With Blu I tend to rent the things I think I'll only watch once.

If I were an hd dvd collecter I'd be even more wary becasue they tend to be more expensive. Maybe that will change, I dunno.

But I think you just made a very good argument for buying a BD player though! lol

(just breaking b#%s here)

Does it bother you that DVD's are worth so litle now?

I guess at the time I was just like "It beats spending X at the theater" but now looking at my bookshelf at those disc that are worth only a dollar...its tough to swallow.

If something went wrong with either format right now, those hdm discs would be worth even less maybe...or maybe you'd have a lot of people trying to scoop them up? Who knows.

Hey guys lets drop the player sales data talk...

It will lead to nothing good.

This is insider tracking.
I'm worried that some things I shouldnt have said at this particular place but that...that sales data, numbers etc. Is definitely off limits.

I wont complain to anyone, but the mods def wont like it.

I don't know, seeing how my massive dvd collections is now worth next to nothing now, I find that does make an impact on my buying.

I now rent more and buy only the titles I really want.
With Blu I tend to rent the things I think I'll only watch once.

If I were an hd dvd collecter I'd be even more wary becasue they tend to be more expensive. Maybe that will change, I dunno.

But I think you just made a very good argument for buying a BD player though! lol

(just breaking b#%s here)

Does it bother you that DVD's are worth so litle now?

I guess at the time I was just like "It beats spending X at the theater" but now looking at my bookshelf at those disc that are worth only a dollar...its tough to swallow.

If something went wrong with either format right now, those hdm discs would be worth even less maybe...or maybe you'd have a lot of people trying to scoop them up? Who knows.

The value of my DVD collection (over 400+ titles) is not something I look at and say "Well it cost me $8000 to build that collection and now it's only worth $1000."

Each DVD I bought - I wanted that movie or TV show. I covet them all. 10 years of building. They provide EXACTLY what I want - the ability to see that movie or that TV show when ever I choose to.

Do you stare at you couch and ask yourself - "well now it's only worth 1/3 what I paid for it?" How about a new car? The day you drive it off the dealers lot - it is worth less than you paid for it . . with 1 mile on the odometer.

Yeah, I guess I shouldnt worry so much.

But some of these I wish i could sell!!!!

Anyone want "The in laws"? lol

It deals with marketing and perceived value. Going back to the automobile example, people will spend more money on options (and higher priced options) on an expensive auto than a cheap auto. Their are a few exception to the rule like a razor where the razor is cheap but the company makes its money on the blades. Unfortunately people do not equate a HD-DVD player with a razor , they see their investment in HD-DVD discs as a long term investment and many people cannot equate a long term investment with a cheap player.
Another reason is a variety of players from different manufacturers. Many people see that a a commitment for long term support. So psychology plays an important role on the purchasing of high definition discs, and perhaps that is a one reason Blu-ray has outsold HD-DVD.

Just curious but do you really see HDM as an Investment? :confused:

jdg345

The reason I dont like that 8% figure is because its based on the ps3 which hd dvd faithful don't always include. Its not that I dont like a small number its that I'm afraid someone will freak out if I give the BIG number what is it 5 mil? what's the latest? Or you could just use that theres at least 450,000 blu sas (Or whats the latest is it more?) and if thats what that 8% represents then whoa.

Thats why I dont like it. It forces me to rebutt in ways I dont think are in the spirit of the new rules. Becasue someone will bring up attachment and I'll bring up obvious bad attachment for $98 players....

See what I'm getting at?

The player sales debate is a complex mess and I dont think we should get into here. You dont even have to refute my examples. You can say i'm wrong or stupid or whatever. I dont even want us to debate it. I just dont want to be pulled off track.

make sense?

Just curious but do you really see HDM as an Investment? :confused:

Not so much as an investment in terms of dollars but an investment in something I value. I choose not to buy DVD's any more since I put more value in HDM. Anyway Blu-ray must be doing something right or their media would not be outselling HD-DVD media week in and week out. You may can call it superior marketing or people feeling more comfortable in purchasing Blu-ray, but somehow the Blu-ray marketers have done a better job of convincing the Blu-ray buyers that buying Blu-ray discs are good value.

Not so much as an investment in terms of dollars but an investment in something I value. I choose not to buy DVD's any more since I put more value in HDM. Anyway Blu-ray must be doing something right or their media would not be outselling HD-DVD media week in and week out. You may can call it superior marketing or people feeling more comfortable in purchasing Blu-ray, but somehow the Blu-ray marketers have done a better job of convincing the Blu-ray buyers that buying Blu-ray discs are good value.

Paul - this is pure format war talk - no longer allowed here at AVS. Best to do a "time" here and now.

Paul - this is pure format war talk - no longer allowed here at AVS. Best to do a "time" here and now.

My post really and sincerely was not done in that spirit. I was just trying to analyze the dynamics of this HD-DVD vs Blu-ray sales strategy.

The whole CE discussion is another recurring theme. Here are my two cents. Toshiba dominates HD DVD, and Sony dominates BD. Second place goes to Microsoft for HD DVD and Samsung for BD.

Ultimately both formats are dominated by the major backer in that format. This happens to be the company with the most to gain/loose if their format wins/looses. This should come as no surprise.

For every other CE out there, the competition is difficult (granted most difficult in HD DVD, but very difficult in the BD market as well). I believe the easiest way to differentiate and maintain a good profit margin, is universal players. LG is already there, Samsung should be there by January 15th and Denon has made comments recently about interest in a BD/HD DVD/SACD/DVD-A/DVD/CD player. I expect to see a couple of more CEs go this route in the next 12 months (this is just my own gut feeling).

Let me put it another way, which of these three players would you expect to generate the most profit for its company?

Venturer HD DVD - $199 (street price)
Panasonic DMP-BD30 - $420 (street price)
Samsung BD-UP5000 - $780 (street price)

The CE's will follow the money. I believe the profit is in universal players, but if I'm wrong, the CEs will stay away from them.

The whole CE discussion is another recurring theme. Here are my two cents. Toshiba dominates HD DVD, and Sony dominates BD. Second place goes to Microsoft for HD DVD and Samsung for BD.

Ultimately both formats are dominated by the major backer in that format. This happens to be the company with the most to gain/loose if their format wins/looses. This should come as no surprise.

For every other CE out there, the competition is difficult (granted most difficult in HD DVD, but very difficult in the BD market as well). I believe the easiest way to differentiate and maintain a good profit margin, is universal players. LG is already there, Samsung should be there by January 15th and Denon has made comments recently about interest in a BD/HD DVD/SACD/DVD-A/DVD/CD player. I expect to see a couple of more CEs go this route in the next 12 months (this is just my own gut feeling).

Let me put it another way, which of these three players would you expect to generate the most profit for its company?

Venturer HD DVD - $199 (street price)
Panasonic DMP-BD30 - $420 (street price)
Samsung BD-UP5000 - $780 (street price)

The CE's will follow the money. I believe the profit is in universal players, but if I'm wrong, the CEs will stay away from them.

You forgot to add quantity. price means nothing without quantity. You are going to sell X times more lower priced players then you ever will high priced players. We have the facts for this already.

You forgot to add quantity. price means nothing without quantity. You are going to sell X times more lower priced players then you ever will high priced players. We have the facts for this already.

I'm factoring that in. I'm looking at the total profit that each of those players will generate for their respective company. I would expect the Venturer to sell the most units, but with a much smaller profit than the Samsung universal player.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I believe the Samsung will generate the most overall profit, even though it may sell the least number of units of all three players.

None of these players can match what HD DVD players can do today, and have been able to do since day 1.The opposite is true as well: None of the current HD DVD players can match what Blu-ray players can do today, and have been able to do since day 1.


(3) Sony branded players are responsible for some 97%+ of the Blu-ray market. Toshiba Branded players are responsible for some 99%+ of the HD DVD market.jdg345, you are including the PS3 in the first sentence and excluding the HD DVD add-on in the second sentence. Also what would you guess is the percentage of stand alone players for Blu-ray/HD DVD specifically in terms of Sony/Toshiba designed players compared to stand alone players designed by other CE companies? Willing to take a guess at that?

I'm factoring that in. I'm looking at the total profit that each of those players will generate for their respective company. I would expect the Venturer to sell the most units, but with a much smaller profit than the Samsung universal player.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I believe the Samsung will generate the most overall profit, even though it may sell the least number of units of all three players.

Well in that case Pioneer must be rolling in money. Their player is $999:rolleyes:

Let me put it another way, which of these three players would you expect to generate the most profit for its company?

Venturer HD DVD - $199 (street price)
Panasonic DMP-BD30 - $420 (street price)
Samsung BD-UP5000 - $780 (street price)Panasonic DMP-BD30 would be my first choice because it is the first Bonus View player, a well known CE brand, and a good price for a current stand alone Blu-ray player and should sell well because of that combination. My second choice would be the Venturer because it should sell a good amount at that price and the fact that it is rebadged HD-A3 which significantly reduced the costs to the company. The Samsung would be my third guess since it looks likely to miss the Christmas shopping season and even at the reduced price of $800 it would still be cheaper for a consumer to buy two separate Blu-ray and HD DVD players. Just a few personal guesses and only time will tell how well those three players will do in the long term.

Well in that case Pioneer must be rolling in money. Their player is $999:rolleyes:

The problem with the Pioneer is that it's expensive for a single format player. Too much competition from the PS3 as well as other lower cost players. The Samsung universal player on the other hand is priced aggressivley for a universal player. Not as much competition. The biggest competition is buying two seperate single format players which is still a bit cheaper than buying one universal. I find two players less convenient though, and I think there is a market for this player even with the price premium. For universal players to really take off they need to be equal or slightly cheaper than buying the entry level single format models from both sides.

I'm assuming, of course, that there is a market for universal players, and people will want to have access to all HD titles.

Panasonic DMP-BD30 would be my first choice because it is the first Bonus View player, a well known CE brand, and a good price for a current stand alone Blu-ray player and should sell well because of that combination. My second choice would be the Venturer because it should sell a good amount at that price and the fact that it is rebadged HD-A3 which significantly reduced the costs to the company. The Samsung would be my third guess since it looks likely to miss the Christmas shopping season and even at the reduced price of $800 it would still be cheaper for a consumer to buy two separate Blu-ray and HD DVD players. Just a few personal guesses and only time will tell how well those three players will do in the long term.

Keep in mind that this is all just a big swag because I don't know any of the actual margins and we'll likely never know any of the actual sales volume for any of these units.

Very good point about the Christmas shopping season, but I didn't really put an end date on this. I'm considering the full sales life of all three devices. I would expect that the Venturer will sell the most units, but have much slimmer margins than the much higher priced universal player. The Panasonic is a bit of a wild card. I suspect that the cost to build this player is rather high because Panasonic developed their own ASIC instead of using Broadcom or Sigma. I'm not sure how they amortize the development costs of that chip and how much is carried by this player. I do know that developing your own ASIC gives you a market differentiator, but deffinitely costs more than using merchant silicon to build a product.

Very good point about the Christmas shopping season, but I didn't really put an end date on this. I'm considering the full sales life of all three devices.With a product like the Samsung BD-UP5000 missing a Christmas shopping season can mean a big difference in terms of sales even for the entire sales life of the product (which is probably going to be less than 18 months). Once again though just a guess on what might happen and only time will tell what will happen.


The Panasonic is a bit of a wild card. I suspect that the cost to build this player is rather high because Panasonic developed their own ASIC instead of using Broadcom or Sigma.Possible, and that is an extra expense that Panasonic has for their Blu-ray player that is an unknown variable.

hi guys wondering if there is a dolby insider or perhaps someone else can assist. sanjay as per below brought to my attention in regards coax spdif output of the current hi-def players.

~
For the S/P-DIF output, the player decodes (uncompresses) the DD+ soundtrack to PCM. It then uses a DTS live-encoder to compress the PCM signal in real time into a DTS bitstream that can be transmitted via toslink or coax connection. So DD+ is indeed being transcoded to DTS.

Sanjay

I am still trying to get my head around this. why on earth would players go through all this effort of transcoding to dts and de-compression, compression. surely you'd think with a sound track in DD, DD+ or trueHD, dolby would have some means and mechanism to just output high upto 1.5mbps bitrate from the players via coax decoding to dolby in avrs and av pre-pros ? why dts and all the strange mechanism that seems to have to me employed by players to output via spdif ?

I am still trying to get my head around this. why on earth would players go through all this effort of transcoding to dts and de-compression, compression. surely you'd think with a sound track in DD, DD+ or trueHD, dolby would have some means and mechanism to just output high upto 1.5mbps bitrate from the players via coax decoding to dolby in avrs and av pre-pros ? why dts and all the strange mechanism that seems to have to me employed by players to output via spdif ?
SPDIF only supports a number of very specific formats. DD+ is not supported by SPDIF. So if you want the player to transport a DD+ track through SPDIF, DD+ must be converted to a format which is supported by SPDIF. You could convert DD+ to DD or to DTS. The advantage of DD is that there's a way to transform DD+ to DD without having to fully decode it (a partial decode is still necessary, though). The advantage of DTS is that it supports a much higher bitrate (1536kbps) than DD (640kbps). So there are good arguments for both DD and DTS. In any case there's no way around at least partially decoding DD+ and reencoding it to another format.

Of course many of us consumers are wondering why the industry didn't add support for DD+ transport over SPDIF. Don't ask me why. Probably they wanted to push HDMI.

Since there are no AV amps/receivers out there able to decode DD+ from spdif it is just a waist of time and effort to implement it.

DTS is already supported in most AV amps/receivers. With the transcode you get the highest quality from TrueHD and DD+ possible by using the DTS carrier at max bitrate.

Of course many of us consumers are wondering why the industry didn't add support for DD+ transport over SPDIF. Don't ask me why. Probably they wanted to push HDMI.Probably because the vast majority would bring their player back to the store asking why it doesn't output any sound from it.

It's not really SPDIF that doesn't support DD+ (or any HD audio format for that matter) but all AVR from the pre-HDMI era that wouldn't know what to do with all these new audio codecs.

Probably because the vast majority would bring their player back to the store asking why it doesn't output any sound from it.
The players could convert DD+ to DD/DTS and output that via SPDIF as default - just as they do today. That doesn't necessarily mean that DD+ couldn't be supported as an option over SPDIF, too. It's the same with 1080p24: Many displays don't understand it. So the players by default output 1080i60. But still you have the option to switch some players to 1080p24, if you want to. The same solution could have been used for DD+ over SPDIF.

It's not really SPDIF that doesn't support DD+ (or any HD audio format for that matter) but all AVR from the pre-HDMI era that wouldn't know what to do with all these new audio codecs.
No. It *is* SPDIF that doesn't support DD+. Period.

Sure, all AVRs from the pre-HDMI era can't handle DD+, either. But some newer AVRs can handle DD+, but still they can't handle it through SPDIF. Why? Because there's simply no specification for DD+ over SPDIF.

It deals with marketing and perceived value. Going back to the automobile example, people will spend more money on options (and higher priced options) on an expensive auto than a cheap auto. Their are a few exception to the rule like a razor where the razor is cheap but the company makes its money on the blades. Unfortunately people do not equate a HD-DVD player with a razor , they see their investment in HD-DVD discs as a long term investment and many people cannot equate a long term investment with a cheap player.
Another reason is a variety of players from different manufacturers. Many people see that a a commitment for long term support. So psychology plays an important role on the purchasing of high definition discs, and perhaps that is a one reason Blu-ray has outsold HD-DVD.

HD DVD has only been "cheap" for a few months. You have to remember people are comparing HDM to DVD. a $400 HD DVD player is still "luxury". and BR has had a strong lead in software sales well before HD DVD became "cheap". I think it's a general consensus that the PS3 is what did this considering there are 2 million out there now and the sales spiked to their current ratios shortly after it's release.

Your car analogy is pretty flawed. Sure people who spend money on luxury cars get more options. Because people who spend more on cars have more money. Not to mention the fact you don't buy a car for the options. You do buy a player for the movies though. You have to remember these companies are going for mass adoption. Not niche' status. Luxury cars are niche'. SD DVD didn't explode into the market because of inflated player costs. The econonmic principles you are reffering to are great for niche' or luxury products. But not for mass adoption.

It deals with marketing and perceived value. Going back to the automobile example, people will spend more money on options (and higher priced options) on an expensive auto than a cheap auto. Their are a few exception to the rule like a razor where the razor is cheap but the company makes its money on the blades. Unfortunately people do not equate a HD-DVD player with a razor , they see their investment in HD-DVD discs as a long term investment and many people cannot equate a long term investment with a cheap player.
Another reason is a variety of players from different manufacturers. Many people see that a a commitment for long term support. So psychology plays an important role on the purchasing of high definition discs, and perhaps that is a one reason Blu-ray has outsold HD-DVD.

I see 10 reasons why Blu-ray movies are outselling HD DVD movies

1) 2 million plus PS3 owners who bought PS3 primarily to play games
2) see #1
3) see #2
4) see #3
5) see #4
6) see #5
7) see #6
8) see #7
9) see #8
10) see #9

I don't see much merit in any of your reasons.

The players could convert DD+ to DD/DTS and output that via SPDIF as default - just as they do today. That doesn't necessarily mean that DD+ couldn't be supported as an option over SPDIF, too. It's the same with 1080p24: Many displays don't understand it. So the players by default output 1080i60. But still you have the option to switch some players to 1080p24, if you want to. The same solution could have been used for DD+ over SPDIF.IIRC, 24p has been enabled under consumer's pressure. It wasn't part of initial release.


No. It *is* SPDIF that doesn't support DD+. Period.

Sure, all AVRs from the pre-HDMI era can't handle DD+, either. But some newer AVRs can handle DD+, but still they can't handle it through SPDIF. Why? Because there's simply no specification for DD+ over SPDIF.SPDIF doesn't support DD+ because they didn't rev the specs for it. But it could have if they wanted to...

What I meant is that if SPDIF is just a bunch of specs that can be revised, AVRs cannot so what's the use ?

For example, AVC was used on Transformers not because it produced the best fidelity/transparency, but the best look in the eye of the “creative” making the call.Amir, why is it that you always have to make these negative comments against MPEG-4 AVC? Isn't there a rule against insiders using the insiders thread to attack their competitors? I know a lot of MPEG-4 AVC haters will jump on me for this post but I don't understand why Amir is allowed to disparage MPEG-4 AVC on the insiders thread when that is not supposed to be allowed. Also I dislike how anyone who prefers MPEG-4 AVC must think that "VC-1 sucks" which is something that Amir implies/says about anyone who has ever chosen MPEG-4 AVC for their encodings. I don't mind the VC-1 promotion by Amir but it gets old how MPEG-4 AVC becomes a target for him even in posts that never even mentioned it.

Amir, why is it that you always have to make these negative comments against MPEG-4 AVC?
Well, if you take it out of context like this, it may look this way. The claim was that Mr. Bay was after ultimate fidelity. Two encoders were made for transformers. One with VC-1 and the other with AVC. It was shown to the creative decision maker with the recommendation by the compressionist/post house that the VC-1 was the better choice. But the creative picked the AVC for the look that it had. That's all. If that is something negative about AVC, well, it is just the history of the events which cannot be changed. Lest you want to censor data like this.

We respect the decision being made and congratulate the company making the AVC encoder which produced the good quality behind the title.

Isn't there a rule against insiders using the insiders thread to attack their competitors?
Well, we are a patent holder in AVC and chaired the group that created it. We also ship it in some of our products from Zune to Xbox (my team did the implementation by the way). That I think entitles us to at least have an opinion on the two technologies and be able to share it.

By the way, did you ping Talk the same way? I seem to recall him saying a few words once in a while about HD DVD, HDi, etc. Just kidding!

I don't mind the VC-1 promotion by Amir but it gets old how MPEG-4 AVC becomes a target for him even in posts that never even mentioned it.
Richard, for two+ years you have sang the praises of AVC before you saw one movie encoded in it and argued with me till I quit on multiple times from my fingers hurting. Talking about things getting old....

Amir,

Correct me if I'm wrong, but, isn't the AVC encoder that is used by Paramount's post house made by Toshiba?

Thanks,

David

Besides from having a smoother less processed look I have often wondered if they did use a VC1 encode which is slightly more efficient and dropped the English DD+ track, if they would have had room for a True HD track.

Well, if you take it out of context like this, it may look this way. The claim was that Mr. Bay was after ultimate fidelity.Which in the case of human eyesight is a subjective opinion but I don't understand how him preferring MPEG-4 AVC for that encoding equates with "VC-1 sucks". To me that just isn't logical since a person may prefer French cuisine but might still consider Italian cuisine to be delicious.


Lest you want to censor data like this.I have no issue with facts what I have issue with is negative comments such as implying that someone believes "VC-1 sucks" simply because they think a MPEG-4 AVC encoding looked better.


Richard, for two+ years you have sang the praises of AVC before you saw one movie encoded in it and argued with me till I quit on multiple times from my fingers hurting. Talking about things getting old....I only defended MPEG-4 AVC because I disagreed with your opinions of it. Also I have seen reference quality Blu-ray encodings using both MPEG-4 AVC and VC-1 and have no horse in terms of video codecs. As long as a video encoding looks great it doesn't really matter to me which video codec is used.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but, isn't the AVC encoder that is used by Paramount's post house made by Toshiba?


Yes, but it's not the best...
AVC can do same quality than VC1 encoder with less bitrate ;) ( :p Amirm)

MSU team (university laboratory so video expert) really want to make a comparison between
your VC1 codec (the best codec with PeP encoder for Amirm) and AVC codec (which can not
be compared with VC1 for all industry and lot of professional).

Michael Bay give a good opinion about the politic of some companies.

Well I like the idea that we have different codecs to chose by.

That really keeps things going in the right direction and pushing the limits.

What I think of AVC is that we havnt tested it enough on real world titles in the HD DVD realm.

VC1 has an advantage because we have seen such excellent result in movies like 300 (the grain isnt noise ;) ) And my first HDM movie I watched was KissKissBangBang and it was encoded on a HD15 and was I blown away with it. Never wanted to watch DVD again.

IMHO attach rates are important and there is no really credible way to spin it otherwise. However I also believe people buying more expensive players are also more likely to buy more expensive discs.
- TomIt took a couple of days, but there is some evidence that suggests otherwise. :)

High-Def 2.0 Conference Focuses on Establishing High-Def Media (http://www.allthingshidef.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=3C644C50F0DA47FDA581C56C5FDF5FC7&nm=&type=news&mod=News&mid=9A02E3B96F2A415ABC72CB5F516B4C10&tier=3&nid=1CF3BB145BAD4578ACE874FBAEFED80A)

Research from Screen Digest shows spending on DVD has been static since 2004. While more home media product has been sold year after year, the price for a DVD is dropping year after year.

To counter this, high-def has emerged, but it’s been slow to catch on, Jayalth said. In 1998, the second year of DVD, those who owned a player were buying 8.9 DVDs each. In comparison, owners of Blu-ray and HD DVD set-top boxes are buying an average of 3.6 movies each. PlayStation 3 owners are buying only one movie.

So buyers of cheaper SAL players (HD DVD) are buying just as many "high priced movies" as buyers of more expensive (blu-ray) SAL players. Indeed, with all the BOGOs the BD side has had in the last couple of months, coupled with the higher priced HD DVD combo discs, might suggest that people who are buying cheaper players are buying more "expensive" discs.

Talkstr8t was pulling his assertion out of thin air.

It took a couple of days, but there is some evidence that suggests otherwise. :)

High-Def 2.0 Conference Focuses on Establishing High-Def Media (http://www.allthingshidef.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=3C644C50F0DA47FDA581C56C5FDF5FC7&nm=&type=news&mod=News&mid=9A02E3B96F2A415ABC72CB5F516B4C10&tier=3&nid=1CF3BB145BAD4578ACE874FBAEFED80A)



So buyers of cheaper SAL players (HD DVD) are buying just as many "high priced movies" as buyers of more expensive (blu-ray) SAL players. Indeed, with all the BOGOs the BD side has had in the last couple of months, coupled with the higher priced HD DVD combo discs, might suggest that people who are buying cheaper players are buying more "expensive" discs.

Talkstr8t was pulling his assertion out of thin air.


Very interesting. This is the point I was trying to drive home to Talk regarding profiles. The "90% of players will be 1.1 capable" assertion ignores the fact they likely account for the minority of disc viewings.

"Two encoders were made for transformers. One with VC-1 and the other with AVC. It was shown to the creative decision maker with the recommendation by the compressionist/post house that the VC-1 was the better choice. But the creative picked the AVC for the look that it had." --Amir

Amir,

You say the "creative decision maker" saw both the VC-1 and AVC transfers of "Transformers" and preferred the "look" of the AVC one. I know that all the Insiders here at AVS try to remain as unbiased and non-argumentative as possible, but, assuming that you either saw the two transfers yourself or you have heard from people you respect who saw what they looked like, would it be possible for you to describe, as objectively as possible, what the specific differences (for good or for bad) might have been that led the "creative decision maker" to choose one over the other?

Incidentally, I understand that you support both codecs and have seen excellent results from both, so I'm not suggesting that any variations in the two versions of "Transformers" implies that one is better than the other, just different.

John

Well I like the idea that we have different codecs to chose by.

That really keeps things going in the right direction and pushing the limits.

What I think of AVC is that we havnt tested it enough on real world titles in the HD DVD realm.

VC1 has an advantage because we have seen such excellent result in movies like 300 (the grain isnt noise ;) ) And my first HDM movie I watched was KissKissBangBang and it was encoded on a HD15 and was I blown away with it. Never wanted to watch DVD again.

That's an interesting point. If grainless video or animated movies were to use AVC/FGT they could gimmick it up such that grain was supplied only during decoding, without having to filter out any detail or expend any bit budget for encoding it the grain. I wonder if this has ever been tried?

- Tom

VC1 has an advantage because we have seen such excellent result in movies like 300 (the grain isnt noise ;) )

Put a video with grain, I will show you what AVC can do :D :D
And you can compare with VC1 version (from PSE) if you have the tool.

Now on Doom9, there is some optimization/video pre-processing for movie grain.


That's an interesting point. If grainless video or animated movies were to use AVC/FGT they could gimmick it up such that grain was supplied only during decoding, without having to filter out any detail or expend any bit budget for encoding it the grain. I wonder if this has ever been tried?

The FGT (Film Grain Technology) is a option from Thomson, on HDDVD. I know only Tiger AVC encoder
which can produce this stream. All other encoder use a FGM (Film Grain Modeling)
a process which can encode movie grain on H264 stream (like VC1 process).
Technicolor laboratory have Tiger AVC encoder (Thomson's encoder)...

Put a video with grain, I will show you what AVC can do :D :D
And you can compare with VC1 version (from PSE) if you have the tool.

Now on Doom9, there is some optimization/video pre-processing for movie grain.



Well I was refering to real titles that has been released. So far very few AVC titles is out on HD DVD.

Of course I always intrested in good encoding tools. But thats another question.

The Thomson solution is intresting because then I can add grain during the encoding instead of before.

A very simple question... and I'd love if insiders would care to comment...

Everybody keeps saying the future of home entertainment will be downloads. Downloading movies, downloading music... meaning that physical media (DVDs and CDs, mainly) will end up as a less and less important minority among other downloadable forms of distribution.

...Meaning that the success of the CD and (later) the DVD will never be repeated again.

So, if we agree that 5 or 10 years from now, all the above will be much more present and usual than it is today... and add the fact that HD media are getting a slow adoption pace... and add the fact that lots of people will go from one model of distribution to the other without ever going through HD/BD discs... is it possible that Blu-ray's biggest problem is the investment it needs on its replication side?

By not being DVD compatible, Blu-ray asks the Industry to build up a whole new parallel (to DVD) replication business... just when the whole replication business (in any format) seems to be fading before a future that will be downloadable. Meaning that Blu-ray's replication will try to bloom while physical media starts to retract.

If both formats already have their days numbered, HD DVD (by being DVD compatible) seems to have solved the question: minimum investment and your business will still be running profitable for these few more years until optical discs become vinyl. How does Blu-ray solve this problem, since (if) there's the risk of slow adoption (for whatever reason) killing its viability? - specially for replicating BD50.

Are studios sensitive to any of this?

Does this make sense?

Any comments?

Thanks.

A very simple question... and I'd love if insiders would care to comment...

Everybody keeps saying the future of home entertainment will be downloads. Downloading movies, downloading music... meaning that physical media (DVDs and CDs, mainly) will end up as a less and less important minority among other downloadable forms of distribution.

...Meaning that the success of the CD and (later) the DVD will never be repeated again.

So, if we agree that 5 or 10 years from now, all the above will be much more present and usual than it is today... and add the fact that HD media are getting a slow adoption pace... and add the fact that lots of people will go from one model of distribution to the other without ever going through HD/BD discs... is it possible that Blu-ray's biggest problem is the investment it needs on its replication side?

By not being DVD compatible, Blu-ray asks the Industry to build up a whole new parallel (to DVD) replication business... just when the whole replication business (in any format) seems to be fading before a future that will be downloadable. Meaning that Blu-ray's replication will try to bloom while physical media starts to retract.

If both formats already have their days numbered, HD DVD (by being DVD compatible) seems to have solved the question: minimum investment and your business will still be running profitable for these few more years until optical discs become vinyl. How does Blu-ray solve this problem, since (if) there's the risk of slow adoption (for whatever reason) killing its viability? - specially for replicating BD50.

Are studios sensitive to any of this?

Does this make sense?

Any comments?

Thanks.

I may be wrong, but I think I read that BDs can be replicated from modified DVD replication lines.

I may be wrong, but I think I read that BDs can be replicated from modified DVD replication lines.

You are right. We call that a "forklift upgrade." You bring the forklift in, haul away the entire line and put in a new BD line. :D

There is not a single step in BD production that is compatible with DVD. Everything from mastering to creating each layer of the disc is different and requires a new machine which costs $3 to $5M.

It is HD DVD which is compatible with DVD. Practically every line sold in the last two years can produce both HD DVD and DVD with a 10 minute or so switch over time. I supsect even new lines purchased by Sony for DVD can produce HD DVDs! :) The feature comes for free these days....

I see 10 reasons why Blu-ray movies are outselling HD DVD movies
1) 2 million plus PS3 owners who bought PS3 primarily to play games
2) see #1
3) see #2...

I'll just add that studio support has a lot to do with it. Its the reason BD sold 76% this week and HD DVD sold 49% (even with the first ever BD BOGO sale) another week. If all studios were neutral, the numbers would be a lot closer and not fluctuate so much.

You are right. We call that a "forklift upgrade." You bring the forklift in, haul away the entire line and put in a new BD line. :D


LOLOLOL


There is not a single step in BD production that is compatible with DVD. Everything from mastering to creating each layer of the disc is different and requires a new machine which costs $3 to $5M.

It is HD DVD which is compatible with DVD. Practically every line sold in the last two years can produce both HD DVD and DVD with a 10 minute or so switch over time. I supsect even new lines purchased by Sony for DVD can produce HD DVDs! :) The feature comes for free these days....

Therefore my final question: how sensitive are studios to this subject? How sensitive is Warn... err... any neutral studio in these times of rumors? :D

Therefore my final question: how sensitive are studios to this subject? How sensitive is Warn... err... any neutral studio in these times of rumors? :D
In general, the lion share of revenues comes from physical media. So you are not going to see the studios base their decisions on digital distribution strategy per-se.

Your point in general though, is an excellent one. It will cost nearly $2B to replace the DVD infrastructure with BD format. Question is, whether that money could be put to another use, if we know this technology is not forever, or that demand for it is modest.

Thanks Amirm
this puts things very clearly where HDDVD has a huge benifit.I didnt realise the production lines from dvd to hddvd could be done so quickly and easily.It means a plant can switch between the the 2 formats at any time.I can see where paramount see the advantage too.I guess this system is able to pick up on demand very fast if hddvd numbers started to jump rapidly.On a side note can the BD lines produce normal dvd's.I ask this because if BD did fail would they be a total waste.
Thanks again for letting us here be informed.
Very happy to see you still drop in.

In general, the lion share of revenues comes from physical media. So you are not going to see the studios base their decisions on digital distribution strategy per-se.

Your point in general though, is an excellent one. It will cost nearly $2B to replace the DVD infrastructure with BD format. Question is, whether that money could be put to another use, if we know this technology is not forever, or that demand for it is modest.

Is this to say that HDM is something you consider will have modest demand? And that studios should be basing their HDM support decision based based on the idea that the either format will not last long and have modest demand?

In other words is this how you would describe either format as "not forever" and "modest demand"?

On a side note can the BD lines produce normal dvd's.I ask this because if BD did fail would they be a total waste.
Unfortunately not. If the format fails a couple of years from now, it will create the biggest doorstops known to man....

Thanks again for letting us here be informed.
Very happy to see you still drop in.
My pleasure :).

Is this to say that HDM is something you consider will have modest demand? And that studios should be basing their HDM support decision based based on the idea that the either format will not last long and have modest demand?

In other words is this how you would describe either format as "not forever" and "modest demand"?
I am not predicting HDM to have modest demand. I am predicting the possibility that it might have modest demand :).

Having watched CD take over LP, it took the record labels discontinuing LP to make the switch over happen. They had good motivation: CD prices were a lot higher than LPs. If the same thing happens here, and player prices keep going down, then we could have high demand. If not, just like any premium product, we will capture the “top of the pyramid” and that would be it.

Is this to say that HDM is something you consider will have modest demand? And that studios should be basing their HDM support decision based based on the idea that the either format will not last long and have modest demand?

In other words is this how you would describe either format as "not forever" and "modest demand"?

It would be interesting to understand how the DVD production/supply chain works today. Does Sony Pictures exclusively use DADC for DVD production? Do any other studios own their own production lines, or does everyone farm it out? If they do farm it out to third parties, do any of those third parties do their own BD-25 and BD-50 production?

It would be interesting to understand how the DVD production/supply chain works today. Does Sony Pictures exclusively use DADC for DVD production? Do any other studios own their own production lines, or does everyone farm it out? If they do farm it out to third parties, do any of those third parties do their own BD-25 and BD-50 production?

Does Warner still have WAM? That was their own pressing company.

I do not believe any other studio has their own.

Is this to say that HDM is something you consider will have modest demand? And that studios should be basing their HDM support decision based based on the idea that the either format will not last long and have modest demand?

In other words is this how you would describe either format as "not forever" and "modest demand"?

Not Suprising, From AVS:


A question to him from my alter ego hope it doesn't get me banned:

Any comment on Amir's subtle hint that for MS HDM is about modest demand and not a long run endevour?

looks like true colors shining thru

I hear Paramount collectively saying DOH!
You know, I am happy to answer either version of your question. You don't need post a different version elsewhere.

Answering your alter ego now :), as you noticed, my comment was not format specific. Microsoft hopes and wishes that HD formats become very popular. Hopefully we all share that hope. But hoping does not guarantee success. A lot of things need to happen before we can match DVD in volume.

Does Warner still have WAM? That was their own pressing company.

I do not believe any other studio has their own.

Warner sold of WAM to Cinram a couple of year ago. I believe Sony is the only studio that is linked directly to a plant, i.e. DADC in Terra Haute, In.

fitprod

Warner sold of WAM to Cinram a couple of year ago. I believe Sony is the only studio that is linked directly to a plant, i.e. DADC in Terra Haute, In.

fitprod

Cinram is also Warner's first choice when it comes to replication, although Sony DADC has been making most of their BD50's, but not all of them.

You know, I am happy to answer either version of your question. You don't need post a different version elsewhere.

Answering your alter ego now :), as you noticed, my comment was not format specific. Microsoft hopes and wishes that HD formats become very popular. Hopefully we all share that hope. But hoping does not guarantee success. A lot of things need to happen before we can match DVD in volume.

Thanks and I acknowledge I was being a bit inauthentic. Maybe it was post holiday party foolishness that contributed to whatever kept me from expressing my thoughts as straitforward as possible.

What I think is an interesting discussion point is the levels of confidence diferent camps and studios have in HDM, not just the specific formats, but HDM as a whole. I have read often that Microsoft does have an interest in seeing HD media primarily consumed via download. So I do find it interesting how that may or may not affect different parties' commitment/confidence to either format. And also how that might affect their business strategies.

As an early adopter / consumer without a limitless budget - the stand that one takes behind their product does affect my buying decisions as I would be less inclined to buy into a product that one is not fully confident of. Not saying that this is the case with you - and thank you for expanding on your thoughts around this.

Thanks and I acknowledge I was being a bit inauthentic. Maybe it was post holiday party foolishness that contributed to whatever kept me from expressing my thoughts as straitforward as possible.
No problem :).

What I think is an interesting discussion point is the levels of confidence diferent camps and studios have in HDM, not just the specific formats, but HDM as a whole. I have read often that Microsoft does have an interest in seeing HD media primarily consumed via download.
First, let's be clear about something. I am officially retired from HD DVD business. So please don't take anything I say as official position for Microsoft. Instead, just take it as someone who has been around some 30 years in this business. I have seen many technologies come and go. I remember spending so much of my youth allowance on Sony ELCASET audio tape format ($1000 in 1976!). It was superior to cassette tape in every respect but it died. There are many other examples. So what you see is my personal view that says there is nothing certain in this business. Consumers are fickle and don’t go in some direction because you chant it is the right one for them.

Back to your point then with regards to Microsoft, we don't know which distribution format is going to really succeed and to what extent. So instead of taking sides and betting against the other, and hence the consumers who are in favor of that form of distribution, we invest in both. Here is a good analogy. CPUs in your computer have what is called speculative execution. They look ahead and execute code in alternative paths until such time it becomes clear that one of the paths is correct and they then discard the data from the incorrect paths. You gain speed because instead of waiting to execute on something that has just succeeded, you are already there when the time comes. Likewise, by having parallel execution on multiple strategies, we are able to reduce the time to adoption of new technology so that we don't fall behind.

Now some companies have no interest in seeing one of the paths succeed. For example, if you are not strong in computer technology and services (e.g. your business is mostly about optical discs rather than hard disks and computers), you may want to do everything in your power to make alternative form of distribution fail. We are not in that boat. We have an optical drive in every Xbox 360 so we are very interested in the proper replacement for that technology one day. Likewise, every PC has hard disk and internet connectivity so we have an interest in delivering content to that platform (and Xbox 360).
So I do find it interesting how that may or may not affect different parties' commitment/confidence to either format. And also how that might affect their business strategies.
Microsoft “commitment” to HD DVD is unrivaled by 80% of the companies in this business. Just compare what we have done on product development and marketing to that of most companies on the board of BDA and you see that this is absolutely not an issue. Take Philips who is a core BDA company yet did not design their own BD player and instead, marketed another design at very low volumes. Shall we then read into that they think BD format is doomed? How about the fact that LG and Samsung make dual format player? Do they lack “confidence” in BD format then?

How about Apple? They are a board member of BDA so are privy to everything discussed from technology to how they have “already won.” How come they stay 100% on digital distribution? Do they strike you as a company that doesn’t know what it is doing in audio/video? When was the last time you heard them defend BD format by the way? What commitment/confidence do they have? Are they not closest to us as far as business strategy? Yet look at their investment relative to ours.

As an early adopter / consumer without a limitless budget - the stand that one takes behind their product does affect my buying decisions as I would be less inclined to buy into a product that one is not fully confident of. Not saying that this is the case with you - and thank you for expanding on your thoughts around this.
Confidence is a tricky thing. Too much of it and you look like you have no connection to reality. If conceding the reality that these formats may capture say, 20% of the DVD market and stay there due to higher prices of titles and technology, makes you think we don’t believe in something, well then you are drawing the wrong conclusion. Fortunately, I am not alone in being a realist. Here is Sony CEO on the same matter: http://www.tvpredictions.com/stringer121107.htm

The chief executive of Sony, the top supporter of the Blu-ray high-def DVD format, tells the Associated Press that he doesn't know whether Blu-ray or HD DVD will win the format war.

Stringer said he believes Blu-ray is winning, but suggested that his company's format fave is hardly running away with the race.

"We have momentum," he told the wire service this week. "But that's all we have at the moment."
Surely you don’t read that and go and sell your BD player. Do you ? Howard is being a realist. I reckon that his status has gone up in the eyes of many with such talk, not down.

Besides, if budget is a concern, then HD DVD is a better choice anyway. The players are much cheaper and you can opt to rent discs and with it, essentially have little to no risk.

No problem :).


First, let's be clear about something. I am officially retired from HD DVD business. So please don't take anything I say as official position for Microsoft. Instead, just take it as someone who has been around some 30 years in this business. I have seen many technologies come and go. I remember spending so much of my youth allowance on Sony ELCASET audio tape format ($1000 in 1976!). It was superior to cassette tape in every respect but it died. There are many other examples. So what you see is my personal view that says there is nothing certain in this business. Consumers are fickle and don’t go in some direction because you chant it is the right one for them.

Back to your point then with regards to Microsoft, we don't know which distribution format is going to really succeed and to what extent. So instead of taking sides and betting against the other, and hence the consumers who are in favor of that form of distribution, we invest in both. Here is a good analogy. CPUs in your computer have what is called speculative execution. They look ahead and execute code in alternative paths until such time it becomes clear that one of the paths is correct and they then discard the data from the incorrect paths. You gain speed because instead of waiting to execute on something that has just succeeded, you are already there when the time comes. Likewise, by having parallel execution on multiple strategies, we are able to reduce the time to adoption of new technology so that we don't fall behind.

Now some companies have no interest in seeing one of the paths succeed. For example, if you are not strong in computer technology and services (e.g. your business is mostly about optical discs rather than hard disks and computers), you may want to do everything in your power to make alternative form of distribution fail. We are not in that boat. We have an optical drive in every Xbox 360 so we are very interested in the proper replacement for that technology one day. Likewise, every PC has hard disk and internet connectivity so we have an interest in delivering content to that platform (and Xbox 360).

Microsoft “commitment” to HD DVD is unrivaled by 80% of the companies in this business. Just compare what we have done on product development and marketing to that of most companies on the board of BDA and you see that this is absolutely not an issue. Take Philips who is a core BDA company yet did not design their own BD player and instead, marketed another design at very low volumes. Shall we then read into that they think BD format is doomed? How about the fact that LG and Samsung make dual format player? Do they lack “confidence” in BD format then?

How about Apple? They are a board member of BDA so are privy to everything discussed from technology to how they have “already won.” How come they stay 100% on digital distribution? Do they strike you as a company that doesn’t know what it is doing in audio/video? When was the last time you heard them defend BD format by the way? What commitment/confidence do they have? Are they not closest to us as far as business strategy? Yet look at their investment relative to ours.


Confidence is a tricky thing. Too much of it and you look like you have no connection to reality. If conceding the reality that these formats may capture say, 20% of the DVD market and stay there due to higher prices of titles and technology, makes you think we don’t believe in something, well then you are drawing the wrong conclusion. Fortunately, I am not alone in being a realist. Here is Sony CEO on the same matter: http://www.tvpredictions.com/stringer121107.htm


Surely you don’t read that and go and sell your BD player. Do you ? Howard is being a realist. I reckon that his status has gone up in the eyes of many with such talk, not down.

Besides, if budget is a concern, then HD DVD is a better choice anyway. The players are much cheaper and you can opt to rent discs and with it, essentially have little to no risk.

Excellent post!! Applauso :)

It seems that *everyone* acknowledges that digital distribution is the way of the future, *including* Sony (look at what they are doing on PS3...which I've said before is their trojan horse alright, but more so for digital distribution...boy the bd members will be surprised when that trojan is unleashed)...

given this, let's say premise, wouldn't it be wise to get to mainstream adoption as quickly as possible...i.e., mainstream pricing on hardware *and* software...faced with making a smaller profit or none, i would expect most would take the smaller profit...

so taking a position against the race to the bottom for hardware pricing seems to go against wanting HDM to succeed in the optical media distribution realm...

i'm blabbering...

Cinram is also Warner's first choice when it comes to replication, although Sony DADC has been making most of their BD50's, but not all of them.

Is Cinram also making BD-50's? Do you know how many replication houses are producing their own BD-50s instead of farming them out to DADC?

Is Cinram also making BD-50's? Do you know how many replication houses are producing their own BD-50s instead of farming them out to DADC?

I was under the impression that Sony DADC was responsible for something like 95% of BD50 replication? Or was that all BD replication?

Back to your point then with regards to Microsoft, we don't know which distribution format is going to really succeed and to what extent. So instead of taking sides and betting against the other, and hence the consumers who are in favor of that form of distribution, we invest in both
...

Answering your alter ego now :), as you noticed, my comment was not format specific. Microsoft hopes and wishes that HD formats become very popular. Hopefully we all share that hope.
...
Confidence is a tricky thing. Too much of it and you look like you have no connection to reality.



Is it fair to infer then that given the reality MS may be shifting back toward a more neutral position going into CES 2008?

Is it fair to infer then that given the reality MS may be shifting back toward a more neutral position going into CES 2008?

Again, please don't read my posts as official position of Microsoft.

With that said, no, there is nothing going on this minute to predict that Microsoft position would be any different in CES 2008 than it is now. We are a patient company and invest for the long term.

Again, please don't read my posts as official position of Microsoft.


I'd never want to do that, at least not until you disclose more about your new project. :)

Thanks.

....

Besides, if budget is a concern, then HD DVD is a better choice anyway. The players are much cheaper and you can opt to rent discs and with it, essentially have little to no risk.

Really?

These are the prices at Best Buy:

Sony BDP-S300 Blu-ray player: $299
Samsung BD-P1400 Blu-ray player: $299
Toshiba HD-A3 HD DVD player: $249
Toshiba HD-A30 HD DVD player: $299
Toshiba HD-A35 HD DVD player: $399

Really?

These are the prices at Best Buy:

Sony BDP-S300 Blu-ray player: $299
Samsung BD-P1400 Blu-ray player: $299
Toshiba HD-A3 HD DVD player: $249
Toshiba HD-A30 HD DVD player: $299
Toshiba HD-A35 HD DVD player: $399

Yes, To any insiders, now that Blu Ray Hardware prices have become extremely close in price, in fact similarly speced 1080P players are equally priced, how does Toshiba plan to change its marketing away from being a better value? Highly discounted discontinued players withstanding.

Really?

These are the prices at Best Buy:

Sony BDP-S300 Blu-ray player: $299
Samsung BD-P1400 Blu-ray player: $299
Toshiba HD-A3 HD DVD player: $249
Toshiba HD-A30 HD DVD player: $299
Toshiba HD-A35 HD DVD player: $399
Yeh, really :). Here is Venturer for $189 at Wal-Mart: http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product_id=7942216

Claims to be in-stock too.

Had it not been too big, I would say it makes a GREAT stocking stuffer at that price :D.

Yes, To any insiders, now that Blu Ray Hardware prices have become extremely close in price, in fact similarly speced 1080P players are equally priced, how does Toshiba plan to change its marketing away from being a better value? Highly discounted discontinued players withstanding.
Remember, those HD DVD players are full featured with dual audio and video decoders, networking, persistent storage, etc. So you have to wait for profile 2 BD players to make proper price comparison. Still, see my previous post where the price gap is still there. HD DVD also has more price elasticity as we have seen with $199 sales.

I will say that BD companies are getting more aggressive on pricing, after saying earlier it was beneath them to do so. Market dynamics rule as always in this kind of thing.....

Yeh, really :). Here is Venturer for $189 at Wal-Mart: http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product_id=7942216

Claims to be in-stock too.

Had it not been too big, I would say it makes a GREAT stocking stuffer at that price :D.


Here is the Samsung BD-P1400 for $279: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B000TME35W/?tag2=slickdeals&tag=slickdeals

It does 1080p/24 output. Does the Venturer?

Do you think that 90 bucks less makes the Venturer a "much cheaper" purchase than the Samsung 1400 Blu-ray player?

I guess if you follow the sales ranking for 1400 and the A3 you'll get an idea of how the Venturer will compare against the 1400 in terms of perceived value.

Here is the Samsung BD-P1400 for $279: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B000TME35W/?tag2=slickdeals&tag=slickdeals

It does 1080p/24 output. Does the Venturer?
No, but the Venturer has dual video decoders, networking to enjoy the Harry Potter community experience, and persistent storage :). I think far more people are able to enjoy those capabilities than "1080p/24." Folks who care about 1080p/24 are likely to be less concerned about budget than OP was and can opt for other units.

Do you think that 90 bucks less makes the Venturer a "much cheaper" purchase than the Samsung 1400 Blu-ray player?
Well, I could say it is the price of a few movies and that would bring some enjoyment. And that it gets us closer to DVD prices which is were we need to be for a real market here. Or some other argument like that. But really, it is the weekend. Let's find better things to do than argue about the meaning of the word "much." :) I am pretty sure no one would be convinced of an argument here regardless of whether you or or I win on the definition of this word.

Let me ask you an unrelated question instead. Is there a thread where the sampling rate for various BD is kept? Trying to find something that has more than 48Khz. I have some HD DVD titles from Japan with this but I am looking for more. The audio thread on AVS only talks about the audio format, not its sampling rate. Thanks.

No, but the Venturer has dual video decoders, networking to enjoy the Harry Potter community experience, and persistent storage :). I think far more people are able to enjoy those capabilities than "1080p/24." Folks who care about 1080p/24 are likely to be less concerned about budget than OP was and can opt for other units.

It all comes down to priorities. Personally I have very little interest in "networking" to enjoy something like a HP "community experience". Matching a 1080p/24 output to my display would certainly have priority to me, but I realize that many people do not have displays that will take advantage of that output.

And while I agree that those who are concerned with 1080p/24 output are likely to be less concerned with budget, it also appears that the cost advantage/savings of HD DVD almost disappears entirely.


Well, I could say it is the price of a few movies and that would bring some enjoyment. And that it gets us closer to DVD prices which is were we need to be for a real market here. Or some other argument like that.

In all honestly, I am completely amazed that we are at this point already. I never thought that these players would be priced so inexpensively so soon. Regular DVD players still cost more than this at the same point in the launch of DVD. I paid $699.00 for my first progressive scan DVD player (a Toshiba that I still own) in 2000! :eek:

I really don't think there is much to complain about when it comes to the prices of these players.

But really, it is the weekend. Let's find better things to do than argue about the meaning of the word "much." :) I am pretty sure no one would be convinced of an argument here regardless of whether you or or I win on the definition of this word.

Come on Amir, you like to argue as much as I do.....even on the weekend! ;)

In any event, I think your prior statement sums this up pretty well for me anyway:


I will say that BD companies are getting more aggressive on pricing, after saying earlier it was beneath them to do so. Market dynamics rule as always in this kind of thing.....

No question about the market dynamics playing out here. And I am happy to see the BD companies prove you wrong on having more aggressive pricing, when you thought it was beneath them to do so. :)

I think we will continue to see prices go down, although probably at a slower pace than what we have seen recently.

Let me ask you an unrelated question instead. Is there a thread where the sampling rate for various BD is kept? Trying to find something that has more than 48Khz. I have some HD DVD titles from Japan with this but I am looking for more. The audio thread on AVS only talks about the audio format, not its sampling rate. Thanks.

Sorry, can't help you there.

Although this actually does raise a question that I have: do you think we will ever see a universal player that will play BD, HD DVD, SA-CD, DVD-A and CD?

Really?

These are the prices at Best Buy:

Sony BDP-S300 Blu-ray player: $299
Samsung BD-P1400 Blu-ray player: $299
Toshiba HD-A3 HD DVD player: $249
Toshiba HD-A30 HD DVD player: $299
Toshiba HD-A35 HD DVD player: $399

These are the prices at Amazon:

Sony BDP-S300 Blu-ray player: $294
Samsung BD-P1400 Blu-ray player: $280
Toshiba HD-A3 HD DVD player: $224
Toshiba HD-A30 HD DVD player: $233
Toshiba HD-A35 HD DVD player: $325

Of course it's important to consider that both Blu-ray players are profile 1.0 so they can't take advantage of the new PiP content coming in Blu-ray titles in Januray. That puts these players in more of a clearance category compared to the latest 3rd gen HD DVD players. On the HD DVD side you can go cheaper with either the Walmart deal Amir mentioned or the HD-A2 can be found on line for $150. With either of those low cost choices you don't sacrifice features as you do with a profile 1.0 player.

A more relevant comparison to the 3rd gen HD DVD players would be:

Panasonic DMP-BD30 (profile 1.1) $500*
Sony PS3 (upgradable to profile 1.1) $400*

*Pricing is the same at Amazon and Best Buy

No, but the Venturer has dual video decoders, networking to enjoy the Harry Potter community experience, and persistent storage :). I think far more people are able to enjoy those capabilities than "1080p/24." Folks who care about 1080p/24 are likely to be less concerned about budget than OP was and can opt for other units.


Well, I could say it is the price of a few movies and that would bring some enjoyment. And that it gets us closer to DVD prices which is were we need to be for a real market here. Or some other argument like that. But really, it is the weekend. Let's find better things to do than argue about the meaning of the word "much." :) I am pretty sure no one would be convinced of an argument here regardless of whether you or or I win on the definition of this word.

Let me ask you an unrelated question instead. Is there a thread where the sampling rate for various BD is kept? Trying to find something that has more than 48Khz. I have some HD DVD titles from Japan with this but I am looking for more. The audio thread on AVS only talks about the audio format, not its sampling rate. Thanks....far more people are able to enjoy those capabilities than "1080p/24...Well, I guess this (coming from the unofficial renderer of the "good enough" specs) means that 1080p/24 goes above and beyond the scope of "good enough"?

A Question to the Insiders:


Has anyone addressed the potential child abuse issues that could come up with this new "community screening option?"

A Question to the Insiders:


Has anyone addressed the potential child abuse issues that could come up with this new "community screening option?"And the legal civil liability issues that will be accruing to the content makers and the enabling CE manufacturers & software providers? Heads up to you nasty trial attorneys out there. Another industry to suck dry if anything untoward happens.

Well, I guess this (coming from the unofficial renderer of the "good enough" specs) means that 1080p/24 goes above and beyond the scope of "good enough"?

The HD-A30 provides 1080p24 and costs just $9 more ($233) than the HD-A3 on Amazon. You don't have to sacrifice one for the other.

A Question to the Insiders:


Has anyone addressed the potential child abuse issues that could come up with this new "community screening option?"And will meticulous electronic records be kept of keystrokes, times, IP addresses and other metadata so that should any pedophiles make illegal use of the "community screening option" to take advantage of juveniles they will be able to be tracked down. Such records should, of course, be kept in a manner that would make them sufficiently authoritative to be used in criminal and civil trials. These electronic records should also be retained for a significant time and placed under records management control. The ability to protect our children trumps so called privacy rights every time as far as I'm concerned.

Again, please don't read my posts as official position of Microsoft.

With that said, no, there is nothing going on this minute to predict that Microsoft position would be any different in CES 2008 than it is now. We are a patient company and invest for the long term.

Do you know why Microsoft hasn't dropped the price of the HDDVD Add-on?
It doesn't seem to make much sense at $179 given the low prices of standalone players.

Thanks in Advance.

And will meticulous electronic records be kept of keystrokes, times, IP addresses and other metadata so that should any pedophiles make illegal use of the "community screening option" to take advantage of juveniles they will be able to be tracked down. Such records should, of course, be kept in a manner that would make them sufficiently authoritative to be used in criminal and civil trials. These electronic records should also be retained for a significant time and placed under records management control. The ability to protect our children trumps so called privacy rights every time as far as I'm concerned.

actually thanks to a recently passed rule all metadata is now discoverable, meaning everything down to your ipod can be disected by an e-forensics expert for litigation discovery. A very expensive new situation, but all data about data needs to be accessible without being overly burdoensome, lest a party gets smacked with the ugly mark of spoliage.:cool:

EDIT: BTW if anyone bothers to read the fine print for Sony's PSN user agreement, its a little scary to know how closely they are watching you, but suffice it to say they've done much to cover thier bums in regards to avoiding a judgment of spoliation.

The ability to protect our children trumps so called privacy rights every time as far as I'm concerned.
I strongly disagree. It's the parent's responsibility to monitor their child's activities.


"Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither." - Benjamin Franklin

I strongly disagree. It's the parent's responsibility to monitor their child's activities.


"Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither." - Benjamin Franklin

I am sure the that legal departments at MS and Toshiba have already considered all this. I am interested to hear more of what there is to be said on this topic.

I strongly disagree. It's the parent's responsibility to monitor their child's activities.


"Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither." - Benjamin FranklinI guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

The problem with community screening right now is that the HD DVD players do not allow a usb key board. That would have been cool. Typing text messages using the remote was not optimal - to put it mildly. But this feature does take interactivity to the next level :)

A number of comments have been edited. Keep on topic or further action will be taken.

A number of comments have been edited. Keep on topic or further action will be taken.
I always wondered, as per your sig - why are you apologizing to Rogo?

Do you in fact also owe him a dinner as I do...... or did you just do a bad-ie ?

I always wondered, as per your sig - why are you apologizing to Rogo?

Do you in fact also owe him a dinner as I do...... or did you just do a bad-ie ?

I plagiarized his signature, Societe du 20K

I plagiarized his signature, Societe du 20K

Whatever happened to Marc? I think he was one of the earliers posters in high def thread and of course, always resident in flat panel sections...

Did he lose the addiction? If so, what medicine did he take! :D

Whatever happened to Marc? I think he was one of the earliers posters in high def thread and of course, always resident in flat panel sections...

Did he lose the addiction? If so, what medicine did he take! :D

I was wondering the same thing.

Where are you Rogo?

It is HD DVD which is compatible with DVD. Practically every line sold in the last two years can produce both HD DVD and DVD with a 10 minute or so switch over time.Amir, what will be required in the way of equipment upgrades to produce TL51 discs?

Amir, what will be required in the way of equipment upgrades to produce TL51 discs?

And how do any upgrades for TL51 compare, as far as cost and complexity, to a new installation of a BD25 or BD50 line?

Ah - the only people who could answer your questions are not here at AVS. They would have to be employees of TSS (Toshiba Storage) or Memory Tech - neither have representatives at AVS.

OBTW - who will be pressing the new HD-VMD discs? I believe they are TL discs - 5GB per layer.

Ah - the only people who could answer your questions are not here at AVS. They would have to be employees of TSS (Toshiba Storage) or Memory Tech - neither have representatives at AVS.It's certainly reasonable to expect that Amir or others who frequent DVD Forum circles would have some information regarding TL51 replication economics. Surely the feasibility of replication was discussed as part of the TL51 approval process.

It's certainly reasonable to expect that Amir or others who frequent DVD Forum circles would have some information regarding TL51 replication economics. Surely the feasibility of replication was discussed as part of the TL51 approval process.
On surface, that is a reasonable expectation (i.e. us knowing more about this than we do). But none of the Microsoft people (much less me), attend the physical format working groups. We are busy at logical format layers (e.g. latest efforts around electronic sell through or EST), and board meeting where you say "yes or no." It is quite resource intensive just to keep up with these few groups.

If TL-51 was a big deal to us, we would have maybe spent more time on it but it hasn't been the case as I have repeatedly mentioned on this forum. The few times I have probed, I have gotten the above answer (i.e. didn't attend any of the meetings so don't know the details).

Amir, do you know what the maximum AV bitrate and the maximum video bitrate for TL51 is?

It's certainly reasonable to expect that Amir or others who frequent DVD Forum circles would have some information regarding TL51 replication economics. Surely the feasibility of replication was discussed as part of the TL51 approval process.Talk - How much does BD50 replication really cost on a per disc basis? What are the yields? Cycle time? Downtime? How much does the "hard coat" cost? Surely it is reasonable to expect that you or others who frequent BDA meetings would have some information regarding BD50 replication economics. Surely the economics of replication was discussed formally or informally at BDA meetings.

time