CES 2008: Warner did not violate HD DVD contract

According to BetaNews, after the Blu-ray press conference at Consumer Electronics Show (CES) Warner Bros. President Ron Sanders answered a question everyone has been wondering, whether Warner violated their contract to support HD DVD or not. The answer was, "We did not violate any contract."

We recently reported that one of the six big movie studios, Warner Bros., has abandoned the HD DVD high-definition format, and shifted towards Sony's Blu-ray. Shortly after the whole HD DVD camp expressed their disappointments and Toshiba even hinted that Warner broke the contract. Warner's Ron Sanders however isn't concerned about the situation, responding that Toshiba might be upset and could even file a lawsuit, but wouldn't have anything to accuse Warner of.

"Clearly, [Toshiba and the HD DVD Promotional Group] have reason to be upset... But we fulfilled our obligations to them. That's why we will continue to provide movies in the HD DVD format through May rather than stopping now. They very well could file a lawsuit, but we have done everything that was required of us. We did not violate any contract," said Sanders.

Source:
BetaNews
http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/12418.cfm

This implies that they are only remaining neutral through may because they have to, not because they want to. I wonder what this might mean for other studios.

No surprise, and I think that Toshiba might just have been trying to insure that Warner continues releasing HD DVD movies until May by implying that they would sue if Warner doesn't do that. There was probably no need for that though since Warner had clearly stated that they would support HD DVD until May.

Releasing until May is great and all but doesn't this guy think that maybe Warner sabotaged there contract with Toshiba announcing this before there contract expired?

Well first of all, the President of a company is not going to say "Yes, we violated the contract."

Secondly, this part about releasing movies through May is especially interesting:

That's why we will continue to provide movies in the HD DVD format through May rather than stopping now

I am really curious about exactly what is written. They could EASILY be violating the contract (and if the person that wrote it was even adequate they would be). They are clearly skirting the contract as much as possible. I will be interested to see how it plays out.

Glad this one got cleared up..

Oh please people. Did anybody REALLY think they broke their contract? If anything, this quote from the announcement:
Warner Home Video will continue to release its titles in standard DVD format and Blu-ray. After a short window following their standard DVD and Blu-ray releases, all new titles will continue to be released in HD DVD until the end of May 2008.

shows they will reluctantly fullfill their commitment.
J

If Toshiba did try to sue WB, would the contract terms become public knowledge? That'd be very interesting. My guess is they had some kind of deal until May which would be the 2nd anniversary of their first release IIRC. Clearly there was nothing in it about exclusivity nor a requirement to release simultaneously with the BD versions.

Could Universal have a similar (but exclusive) contract? As they are exclusive it's not really in their interests to announce it 5 months in advance, they'd kill sales of their HD DVD releases without having anything in place as an alternative. The next few months could see Universal release a lot of content before they jump ship and make money on double dips.

Oh please people. Did anybody REALLY think they broke their contract? If anything, this quote from the announcement:


shows they will reluctantly fullfill their commitment.
J

Hopefully this is not New Line's definition of "release them later." (scratch that!)

Will there be any incentive for dual format owners to wait for the HD-DVD? Will there be any effort to use the accessible additional features on those titles to make them any different than the ones in the blu cases?

Of course they knew what they were doing. I'm still digesting the ripples from all of this retailers, studio releases, BOGO, CE's, new players... gives me tired head. Wow, what a mess.

Warner could also be trying to force Toshiba to relieve them of the contractual requirements (if any). Toshiba could, for "nominal" concessions, make things a lot easier for Blu-ray by reworking (i.e. removing) any existing obligations for HD DVD support from Warner, Paramount, Dreamworks, and Universal. In return, they might be able to negotiate for a piece of the BDA royalty pie and concessions on producing Blu-ray players. IMHO, this is the best way for Toshiba to retrieve something out of a bad situation.

Releasing until May is great and all but doesn't this guy think that maybe Warner sabotaged there contract with Toshiba announcing this before there contract expired?

It scares me to think that people assume Warner would have done *anything* without an army of lawyers first looking over their existing agreements and determining without doubt (from Warner's view at least) that they were in full compliance with the terms of their contract. This decision may have been made overnight - which I personally doubt - but its viability would have been vetted over months as Warner considered their options.

Will there be any incentive for dual format owners to wait for the HD-DVD?
That's kind of the point. I get the impression that its not really a friendly parting.
J

Oh please people. Did anybody REALLY think they broke their contract?Judging by a lot of posts in the last 4 days, apparently they did.

Oh please people. Did anybody REALLY think they broke their contract? If anything, this quote from the announcement:

<snip>
shows they will reluctantly fullfill their commitment.
J
Well, it shows that they will reluctantly fulfill what their lawyers think is their commitments. They are not willfully violating it. However, I will bet that other lawyers might interpret it differently, and it may end up in court. That is why there are so many lawyers employed in the world. :rolleyes:

However, whether it goes to court and whether Warner wins or loses, the effect is the same. Court decisions take years. The effect of Warner's decision is happening rapidly. The worst outcome for Warner would be that some year in the future they have to pay a bunch of money to someone else.

To argue whether they did or didn't is really moot.

Bill Hunt brought up the possibility of having a goodwill program to exchange the HDDVD copy for a Blu Ray copy. Whether BDA or Warner foots the bill, at least pre-announcing the May 2008 shift as well as a delayed HDDVD release can minimize part of the costs associated with such offers...

It scares me to think that people assume Warner would have done *anything* without an army of lawyers first looking over their existing agreements and determining without doubt (from Warner's view at least) that they were in full compliance with the terms of their contract. This decision may have been made overnight - which I personally doubt - but its viability would have been vetted over months as Warner considered their options.

The blu-ray insiders, who so far have been entirely correct and spot on this past week, have indicated that talks have been going on since September and concluded officially last Wednesday.

In other words, WB would definitely know of any potential contractual problems.

It scares me to think that people assume Warner would have done *anything* without an army of lawyers first looking over their existing agreements and determining without doubt (from Warner's view at least) that they were in full compliance with the terms of their contract. This decision may have been made overnight - which I personally doubt - but its viability would have been vetted over months as Warner considered their options.

yes because you'd think sony would have had an army of lawyers look over their root kit issues .

You'd also think sony would have had an army of lawyers look over patents to see if thier vibration tech in the dual shock viloted immersons patents .

Doesn't allways work

yes because you'd think sony would have had an army of lawyers look over their root kit issues .




stop, it was funny the first 5 mins now pretty old. :rolleyes:

what i think will happen is that if a big hit like I am legend comes out.

they will first release it on dvd and bluray first and then release the hd-dvd 1 month later or something, like they did with blood diamond.

Why be scared, stupidity on this forum is a well stocked commodity. Its hard to keep track of all the motormouths posting with their brains still in park.

Are you calling me stupid?

It scares me to think that people assume Warner would have done *anything* without an army of lawyers first looking over their existing agreements and determining without doubt (from Warner's view at least) that they were in full compliance with the terms of their contract. This decision may have been made overnight - which I personally doubt - but its viability would have been vetted over months as Warner considered their options.

So you assume Warner won't get sued because you know there lawyers are perfect? I think anyone that doesn't think Warner has a good chance of getting sued over this is living in a fantasy land.

I wonder if it wasn't a release contract Toshiba was referring to but rather that the actions Warner took knowingly caused irreparable harm the format Warner itself is a major vested interest in, which in some way Warner contractually isn't able to do?

Namely, if Warner was involved with talks since September about doing this and while still maintaining neutrality and pushing for HD DVD support knowing full well they intended to drop support in the end, their ethics could be questioned.

Kind of like telling stockholders everything is fine while selling off your own stock in boatloads, only in the marketplace.

I'm not sure Toshiba will bother or that they would actually win, but a good lawyer could have a field day with this and at the very least, make it interesting. And I didn't get the since Toshiba was blowing smoke when they brought up the point since they knew the term of Warner's release contract and Warner mentioned that in the press release.

It scares me to think that people assume Warner would have done *anything* without an army of lawyers first looking over their existing agreements and determining without doubt (from Warner's view at least) that they were in full compliance with the terms of their contract. This decision may have been made overnight - which I personally doubt - but its viability would have been vetted over months as Warner considered their options.

But the thing is, laws are fickle things that are open to interpretation. While Warner's lawyers may look at their contract and say they are in the clear, Toshiba's lawyers could look at it and see grounds to sue, and then the courts would have to intervene.

Also:

At one point Ron Sanders was pointedly asked if Warner had accepted any kind of payoff to go Blu-ray exclusive. His answer was equally pointed: "No. Any payoff would pale compared to the financial effects of picking the wrong format."

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2704,2246777,00.asp

Bill Hunt brought up the possibility of having a goodwill program to exchange the HDDVD copy for a Blu Ray copy. Whether BDA or Warner foots the bill, at least pre-announcing the May 2008 shift as well as a delayed HDDVD release can minimize part of the costs associated with such offers...
With as much money as Warner got paid, I think they'd have no problem affording that. :D

Hopefully this is not New Line's definition of "release them later." Will there be any incentive for dual format owners to wait for the HD-DVD? Will there be any effort to use the accessible additional features on those titles to make them any different than the ones in the blu cases?


I assume your question is rhetorical.

So you assume Warner won't get sued because you know there lawyers are perfect? I think anyone that doesn't think Warner has a good chance of getting sued over this is living in a fantasy land.

...and if Warner does get sued over this (which is HIGHLY unlikely) I suppose it will have the same results like when Cisco sued Apple over the use of the name iPhone? :D Which means nothing to me, you, or J6P.

Also:

At one point Ron Sanders was pointedly asked if Warner had accepted any kind of payoff to go Blu-ray exclusive. His answer was equally pointed: "No. Any payoff would pale compared to the financial effects of picking the wrong format."

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2704,2246777,00.asp

Quoted for truth.

I wonder if it wasn't a release contract Toshiba was referring to but rather that the actions Warner took knowingly caused irreparable harm the format Warner itself is a major vested interest in, which in some way Warner contractually isn't able to do?

Namely, if Warner was involved with talks since September about doing this and while still maintaining neutrality and pushing for HD DVD support knowing full well they intended to drop support in the end, their ethics could be questioned.

Kind of like telling stockholders everything is fine while selling off your own stock in boatloads, only in the marketplace.

I'm not sure Toshiba will bother or that they would actually win, but a good lawyer could have a field day with this and at the very least, make it interesting. And I didn't get the since Toshiba was blowing smoke when they brought up the point since they knew the term of Warner's release contract and Warner mentioned that in the press release.


The thing is, we've known for months that this could happen. WB was not shy to state that they wanted only 1 format and that they would be looking at the overall Q4 to determine their next plan of action.

It wasn't as if they outright proclaimed, "We at WB will continue releasing titles for both formats for the next etc etc."
It was always the same, generic company spiel that we hear every day. Toshiba, unless they drew up one godly contract laden with pitfalls that WB just walked into....really don't have a case at all.

Unless someone here can post a copy of the contracts between Warner and HD DVD, we can only speculate whether or not they were violated.

Toshiba claims they were, Warner says they were not.

Sounds like some law firms are going to be collecting plenty of legal fees while this one is argued out.

Well, it shows that they will reluctantly fulfill what their lawyers think is their commitments. They are not willfully violating it. However, I will bet that other lawyers might interpret it differently, and it may end up in court. That is why there are so many lawyers employed in the world. :rolleyes:

However, whether it goes to court and whether Warner wins or loses, the effect is the same. Court decisions take years. The effect of Warner's decision is happening rapidly. The worst outcome for Warner would be that some year in the future they have to pay a bunch of money to someone else.

To argue whether they did or didn't is really moot.
If a judge thinks there are grounds for a suit, he might order Warner to continue given the possible consequence of not doing so.

Lawyers crack me up. They can't lose!

Sounds like some law firms are going to be collecting plenty of legal fees while this one is argued out.
:D The old lawyers motto -

you win some, you lose some........you get paid for them all

Unless someone here can post a copy of the contracts between Warner and HD DVD, we can only speculate whether or not they were violated.

Toshiba claims they were, Warner says they were not.

Sounds like some law firms are going to be collecting plenty of legal fees while this one is argued out.

Toshiba has not really said that. They have only said that contracts exist.

Well it's nice to know we have so many lawyers here at AVS:rolleyes:

But don't you have to physically look at the contract before you pass judgement?

Well it's nice to know we have so many lawyers here at AVS:rolleyes:

But don't you have to physically look at the contract before you pass judgement?

Gamers are like that in general.. mostly thinking they know everything..without reading a book or actually finishing schools, but such is life I guess..

Well it's nice to know we have so many lawyers here at AVS:rolleyes:

But don't you have to physically look at the contract before you pass judgement?

I was waiting to get to the bottom before I wrote this exact line.

My question is who is getting billed for all the hours all our lawyer friends spend on AVS? ( ;) )

i find it strange that some people think WB has no legal exposure here.

Did this premature announcement (while under contract, about 5 months before anything was set to happen) materially (financially) harm the HD DVD side? Without a doubt. Was that the intended consequence of the timing of the announcement? Probably. So, if the announcement was malicious (or even if it wasn't, yeah right) then WB is should still be on the hook for the financial harm they did to HD DVD with their premature announcement. i kind of doubt that this is within the spirit of the contract, the highly unethical thing WB did. The wronged parties include Toshiba, Universal, Paramount, Microsoft (VC-1, HDi), and probably a few other companies. i seriously doubt that Toshiba has the guts to do this (they may not have anything to lose challenging a misbehaving studio), but i doubt they would lose (probability of settlement = fairly high, and i'm sure WB wouldn't want the details of their deal with the devil to emerge). If it can be shown Sony leaked the information, they may have some liability also.

i would find nothing more satisfying than for WB to cease as a going concern in 2 or less years (unfortunately not going to happen - the company hasn't really been good since the AOL fiasco, and they are lucky they have the Turner stuff).

Gamers are like that in general.. mostly thinking they know everything..without reading a book or actually finishing schools, but such is life I guess..Just curious but what exactly do you have against gamers to make such a negative statement against them? Also aren't you the same poster that in the last few days has said that Blu-ray players would not sell for under $300 MSRP either this year or next year and that we will not see Chinese made Blu-ray players because the BDA will not allow them to be made?

Gamers are like that in general.. mostly thinking they know everything..without reading a book or actually finishing schools, but such is life I guess..

And you yourself are pure class:D

If anything Warner did Toshiba and many consumers a favor by telling them now which gives them time to react instead of just cutting them off in May with no notice.

I assume your question is rhetorical.

:D

I am evolving from sarcasm.

But the thing is, laws are fickle things that are open to interpretation. While Warner's lawyers may look at their contract and say they are in the clear, Toshiba's lawyers could look at it and see grounds to sue, and then the courts would have to intervene.

The point is, that Warner's actions come from a position they feel is one of strength. This is not some random act or not thought out. And frankly, I'd be happy to wager that Toshiba won't be bringing suit over the issue; what language would Warner ever have agreed to that would have constrained them in doing what they just did?

PS - And though 26hl67newbie makes a point with regard to "bad faith" that would apply in most other generic contracts, I truly believe that before Warner ever signed anything they would have included provisions allowing them this freedom of action from a legal perspective; Toshiba always needed Warner much more than Warner needed Toshiba, and the contract IMO should have reflected that disparity in bargaining position. But all of that aside, the bottom line is that the legal vagaries of the deal aside - as they are completely unknown to us - the fact is that Warner is doing much better by HD DVD consumers by giving them five months advance than Paramount gave Blu-ray consumers with a rash of canceled pre-orders.

A favor would be supporting both and letting the consumers decide.

A favor would be letting us know in early December rather than conveniently after HP and Christmas buying.

This statements is the best correlation I have seen so far:
"Kind of like telling stockholders everything is fine while selling off your own stock in boatloads, only in the marketplace."

That my friends is exactly what they did. Not sure what Paramount was promising or stating prior to them going HD DVD, but if they made the same types of statements then they are equally as wrong.

While I also agree that we are highly unlikely to see any legal action (unless its consumer/Studio rather than CE/Studio) I doubt that if given the chance that any lawyer would pass up the chance to litigate anything unless they have an "only pay if we win clause". I can just see it. Hey you group of lawyers, take a look at this contract and let me know if Warner violated anything or if by their actions we can claim any grounds for litigation. Be sure though, cause if we do litigate we are going to have to pay to millions and millions.... DOH

Cheers,

Richard

Good grief give it a rest before they lock the thread. Take it off line please!

If a judge thinks there are grounds for a suit, he might order Warner to continue given the possible consequence of not doing so.

Lawyers crack me up. They can't lose!
Well, unless they have grounds for a near term injunction, by the time this is settled, the format war will be long over, and it will all be down to damages at most.

The problem is, even if they could get an injunction (something I suspect would be unlikely) the damage is done. The momentum is now solidly in BD's favor, and it will be hard to recover from that given that HD DVD was already somewhat in the hole.

(Again - I should say I only own HD DVD and had hoped it would win - but I believe this is end game times and am prepared to move on.)

Will there be any incentive for dual format owners to wait for the HD-DVD? Will there be any effort to use the accessible additional features on those titles to make them any different than the ones in the blu cases?

Yes, they are called special features which are not supported by Blu-Ray. (If you haven't seen & used HD-DVD special features you won't have any idea what I'm talking about) Of course if I were a Blu only studio, I wouldn't bother with too many special features nor hype them for a while because there still aren't enough players to warrant the extra developement cost.

I guess if you don't have to develop special features that are unique to HDM, all you really have to do is add the standard def "extras" to the Blu-Ray burn and you're still going to make a nice premium over the SD-DVD.

If a judge thinks there are grounds for a suit, he might order Warner to continue given the possible consequence of not doing so.

Lawyers crack me up. They can't lose!

Any lawyer who tells you they can't lose hasn't been around very long.

:D The old lawyers motto -

you win some, you lose some........you get paid for them all

Or is this what you meant Wayne?

;)

A favor would be supporting both and letting the consumers decide.

A favor would be letting us know in early December rather than conveniently after HP and Christmas buying.



If Warner made the announcement in early December, you would have complained about how unfair it was that they didn't at least wait to see how well the HD DVD players and software sold the rest of that month!

Edit: by the way, the "favor" was for Warner to make the announcement now, rather than wait until late May (when they will completely stop supporting HD DVD).

They absolutely violated the good faith of their contract, but it takes a court to really decide what is and isn't contractual once the parties involved disagree. A lawsuit won't matter in the battle between formats, though.

A favor would be supporting both and letting the consumers decide.

Blu-ray sold more hardware NOT including th PS3 and more movies in the last year. Can the HD-DVD side stop pretending Blu-ray was not the choice, albeit barely, of customers?

Regarding possible legal action...

Any legal action would require Warner to fight... that costs money. Even if they lose, it costs money. Sometimes a business strategy to make your competition spend money is a sound one even if you know you are likely to lose.

Also... legal action could result in lots of under-the-table stuff becoming public. The public might get a better understanding of these rumored payoffs from BOTH sides. This could actually damage HD DVD as well as Blu ray if it is true and became known that under-the-table payoffs are determining the format rather than actual consumer choice.

Positives and negatives on both sides for legal action.

Not saying I support or don't support... but lots of nastiness can come from legal actions like this... and also legal action could hogtie Warner in the meantime either forcing HD DVD releases OR preventing Blu ray releases for the duration of the proceedings.

They absolutely violated the good faith of their contract, but it takes a court to really decide what is and isn't contractual once the parties involved disagree. A lawsuit won't matter in the battle between formats, though.

They "absolutely violated the good faith of their contract"? How do you know this?

Have the terms of the contract been released? :confused:

They "absolutely violated the good faith of their contract"? How do you know this?

Have the terms of the contract been released? :confused:

Don't need to see it. If Warner still has a contract it violated the good faith that is normally associated with contracts. It won't hurt you to admit that, and it won't cost you a dime.

i find it strange that some people think WB has no legal exposure here.

Did this premature announcement (while under contract, about 5 months before anything was set to happen) materially (financially) harm the HD DVD side? Without a doubt. Was that the intended consequence of the timing of the announcement? Probably. So, if the announcement was malicious (or even if it wasn't, yeah right) then WB is should still be on the hook for the financial harm they did to HD DVD with their premature announcement. i kind of doubt that this is within the spirit of the contract, the highly unethical thing WB did. The wronged parties include Toshiba, Universal, Paramount, Microsoft (VC-1, HDi), and probably a few other companies. i seriously doubt that Toshiba has the guts to do this (they may not have anything to lose challenging a misbehaving studio), but i doubt they would lose (probability of settlement = fairly high, and i'm sure WB wouldn't want the details of their deal with the devil to emerge). If it can be shown Sony leaked the information, they may have some liability also.

i would find nothing more satisfying than for WB to cease as a going concern in 2 or less years (unfortunately not going to happen - the company hasn't really been good since the AOL fiasco, and they are lucky they have the Turner stuff).

This is completely true. Certain types of malicious act against a person or company can be taken to court without a contract. Everyone knows that the timing of the Warner announcement had a devastating effect to the HD DVD camp. Given the circumstances, it was deliberately crafted and timed event to kill HD DVD. They should have waited until after CES and close to May to make this announcement, but now they are responsible for any damages to the HD DVD PG. If they drags out longer than it should, it means HD DVD can claim more damages. They should take them to court just to make sure companies are ethically responsible.

Gamers are like that in general.. mostly thinking they know everything..without reading a book or actually finishing schools, but such is life I guess..

I actually finished multiple schools, like in multiple universities, I have an MA, what about you, pal. And guess what, champ, I had to read books and everything, stuff like numerical analysis, math theory, etc. What's the last book you read, I'm currently reading Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged. Any other comments you want to throw out there about gamers in general, there, chief, so we can all have an even better laugh at your expense.

This is completely true. Certain types of malicious act against a person or company can be taken to court without a contract. Everyone knows that the timing of the Warner announcement had a devastating effect to the HD DVD camp. Given the circumstances, it was deliberately crafted and timed event. They should have waited until after CES and close to May to make this announcement, but now they are responsible for any damages to the HD DVD PG. If they drags out longer than it should, it means HD DVD can claim more damages.


How dare Warner announce something that has to do with consumer electronics at CES.

So you think Warner should hvae waited until MORE people bought in HD-DVD and then pulled the plug instead of letting people know now it's a dead format? Seems that would be more malicious.

Don't need to see it. If Warner still has a contract it violated the good faith that is normally associated with contracts. It won't hurt you to admit that, and it won't cost you a dime.

Sorry, this shows a gross misunderstanding of contract law.

It's a shame on Warner bros to make an announcement at a stage where there are 1 million people owning an HD DVD player. Warner is the only studio to have consistently utilized the full potential of HD DVD (Live Community Screening, Web-enabled features, IME etc) optimizing their encodes for HD DVD and porting them to Blu-ray. Having such rich experience in authoring specialized contents for HD DVD it's a really bad move to switch sides. Had they shifted sides on Jan-2007 people wouldn't have bothered much. At first they felt comfortable with HD DVD unleashing it's full potential and all of a sudden becoming BD exclusive is a shameful act. Can anyone name 1 Warner Blu-ray title that has the basic bookmark feature ? Shame on you Warner. The worst Studio of the lot is New Line releasing just 1 title where the HD DVD version had more features and finally following the tail of Warner. Sicko..........

How dare Warner announce something that has to do with consumer electronics at CES.

So you think Warner should hvae waited until MORE people bought in HD-DVD and then pulled the plug instead of letting people know now it's a dead format? Seems that would be more malicious.

What they could have done to be in the clear is give Toshiba advance warning, or at least some indication that a possible turn of events would happen before CES. This would have prevented Toshiba embarrassment and the cancellation of their PC. Obviously Toshiba was completely caught of guard without warning. So this indicated that Toshiba was mislead in someway. This just makes the situation messy. If they announced it in May, at least Toshiba would been somewhat prepared for something.

Paramount/Dreamworks announcement didn't occur at CES nor did it have the same impact as Warner.

Says the Smurf King.

Wow.. Nice comeback. Reminds me of elementary school.. Can your Dad beat up Rob's Dad too?

Its really simple

If Toshiba feels that they have a case and that the pay off from the case would be worth it then they can go to court and it will be up for the judge to decided.

Some things that may come of taking them to court is that if Toshiba can prove that what Warner did was fatal to the lively hood of hd dvd they can get an injunction from warner releasing titles on bluray for the duration of the case.

The outcome of the case if toshiba wins it could be that warner would be forced to continue supporting both formats or that Warner would have to pay x amount to toshiba for basicly killing their format.


Now is there a case ? No clue

Says the Smurf King.

Ah yes, nothing like an ad hominem attack when you don't have a valid argument, is there Slim?

:rolleyes:

As I've been saying, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. If they did state that they didn't break the contract, why imply that they'd be trying to fix anything? They said what their commitments were, but if it is broke, and requires fixing, we would know it almost immediately.

Ah yes, nothing like an ad hominem attack when you don't have a valid argument, is there Slim?

:rolleyes:

Bah, it's either that or downloads. The problem is no one on that side of the fence has any constructive argument any longer.

It's all venting and sour grapes.

Why are so many concerned about Toshiba and Warner's legal departments and how many i and t are in the contracts? It will have no relative effect (other that slightly raise prices as all legal costs do in our society) on the consumer level and at the end of any proceedings Warner will still be BD and HD DVD dead.

Why would they have announced 5 months in advance before they were going to back out?

If they are supporting through May, then why didn't they at least wait until the end of Q1 to make and announce a decision. They knew many of those 80K A2's were X-mas gifts. Give people 3 mos to buy some flippin' movies. Maybe the pendulum swings the other way.

Sounds like Sony cash to me :D

Noone talking about how much new line was paid... They never had a contract and was open independent to warner yet went blu ray and stopped all movies planned other than Pans labyrinth.

Why would they have announced 5 months in advance before they were going to back out?

If they are supporting through May, then why didn't they at least wait until the end of Q1 to make and announce a decision. They knew many of those 80K A2's were X-mas gifts. Give people 3 mos to buy some flippin' movies. Maybe the pendulum swings the other way.

Sounds like Sony cash to me :D

Water (cash or no cash) under the bridge because the decision has been made. It's time to look towards the future and the future IS blue.

Water (cash or no cash) under the bridge because the decision has been made. It's time to look towards the future and the future IS blue.

Not really. The future is Red . . . laser that is . . . DVD.;)

Depends which format has better upconversion power for SD DVDs.

Why would they have announced 5 months in advance before they were going to back out?

If they are supporting through May, then why didn't they at least wait until the end of Q1 to make and announce a decision. They knew many of those 80K A2's were X-mas gifts. Give people 3 mos to buy some flippin' movies. Maybe the pendulum swings the other way.

Sounds like Sony cash to me :D

Half the Warner bashers complaining that Warner knew a couple months ago they were going BD but didn't say anything and let people keep buying HD-DVD movies....

The other half complaining that Warner should have kept quiet about their BD decision for a few more months into 2008 so as not to sabotage HD-DVD...

I am neutral regarding Warner, but some of this really ends up "damned if you do and damned if you don't" commentary....

As they say, business is business, nothing personal to the consumers. Mleh... Where did THAT analogy come from?!

Not really. The future is Red . . . laser that is . . . DVD.;)

Well you know that AVS has a regular dvd section you could post in if that's the way you are leaning. :)

Well you know that AVS has a regular dvd section you could post in if that's the way you are leaning. :)
Agreed. This is a HD software discussion forum. Not sure why Lee is discussing SD software here.

Well you know that AVS has a regular dvd section you could post in if that's the way you are leaning. :)

I am stating a fact . . . nothing more.

$42 Billion versus $300 million

That should do it:p

I am stating a fact . . . nothing more.

$42 Billion versus $300 million

That should do it:p

Lee, you need to learn a new dance!

I am stating a fact . . . nothing more.

$42 Billion versus $300 million

That should do it:p
Versus exactly how much for video downloads? :)

Your facts prove that physical media dominates the home video market.

At one point in time, DVD brought in less than 10% of VHS business as well.

Not sure why Lee is discussing SD software here.

Attention. To stir the pot and sit back and watch the turmoil. Continuation of the "scorched earth" policy. Habit.

Versus exactly how much for video downloads? :)

Your facts prove that physical media dominates the home video market.

At one point in time, DVD brought in less than 10% of VHS business as well.

You really should pick the major players in HD content/programming/delivery . . .

CBL/SAT/TELCO . . . their revenue is in the 100's of billions BTW.

But hey . . I see these discussions on how BD is going to replace DVD. Well there it is . . DVD.

Beating HD DVD wasn't difficult. Just have Sony throw $7 Billion at it.

Beating DVD? WHOLE nother story;)

I am stating a fact . . . nothing more.And that's exactly the problem. You provide no context, no historical data other than a cumulative number, and no other economic factors. It's quite possible that despite all the other increasing competition from other sources, Blu-ray is actually on par or better than DVD at the same point in its life-cycle. But instead, you just give us whatever makes the manipulation of the actual data to fit your agenda the easiest.

And that's exactly the problem. You provide no context, no historical data other than a cumulative number, and no other economic factors. It's quite possible that despite all the other increasing competition from other sources, Blu-ray is actually on par or better than DVD at the same point in its life-cycle. But instead, you just give us whatever makes the manipulation of the actual data to fit your agenda the easiest.

My agenda? What is my agenda? Please tell me.

PS: this is 2008 . . NOT 1999

You really should pick the major players in HD content/programming/delivery . . .

CBL/SAT/TELCO . . . their revenue is in the 100's of billions BTW.
I wasn't aware that paying my phone bill put the same amount of money in a studio's pocket as buying a movie at Best Buy.

Beating DVD? WHOLE nother story;)
Don't you realize the same companies behind DVD are also behind Blu-Ray? Why would they want to beat themselves?

Companies that make Blu-Ray players also make DVD players. Studios that release Blu-Ray movies also release DVD movies. They will market and sell both formats to maximize profits.

If I was playing a game of chess against myself, I could choose the outcome 100% of the time.

Judging by a lot of posts in the last 4 days, apparently they did.

Which is why I take everything the supposed "insiders" around here say with a grain of salt.

I am stating a fact . . . nothing more.

$42 Billion versus $300 million

That should do it:p

And what, pray tell, were the DVD vs. VHS stats in the early days?

Vincent

Beating DVD? WHOLE nother story;)

DVD doesn't need to be "beat," it will naturally give way. Whether it be to BD or whatever else, who knows, but it will give way. Warner isn't anti DVD, are they? Are Sony and Fox and Disney against DVD sales? No. But it's about creating new growth opportunities in a market where the present lead medium has become mature and saturated. Folk who don't understand that, won't understand Warner's decision either, but there are very real reasons behind why these companies fear the format war will lead primarily to consumer confusion, apathy, and stunt an avenue for home video growth going forward.

To point to $300 million in sales in 2007 for HD media and call it bad seems to me a bit puzzling; frankly it seems quite good. And is there any question that the figure will be higher in 2008?

But there is a whole segment of the AVS populace deadset on keeping an anti-BD stance, and it has been openly stated by many before. How many polls have indicated the "never buy Blu-ray" views in the past? Plenty of them. And a lot of the threads and posts we're seeing these days are from the same folk that would rather see BD go down with HD DVD, even if it means the end of optical in the high-def space, rather than actually see it go on to be the HDM successor format.

DVD doesn't need to be "beat," it will naturally give way. Whether it be to BD or whatever else, who knows, but it will give way. Warner isn't anti DVD, are they? Are Sony and Fox and Disney against DVD sales? No. But it's about creating new growth opportunities in a market where the present lead medium has become mature and saturated. Folk who don't understand that, won't understand Warner's decision either, but there are very real reasons behind why these companies fear the format war will lead primarily to consumer confusion, apathy, and stunt an avenue for home video growth going forward.

To point to $300 million in sales in 2007 for HD media and call it bad seems to me a bit puzzling; frankly it seems quite good. And is there any question that the figure will be higher in 2008?

But there is a whole segment of the AVS populace deadset on keeping an anti-BD stance, and it has been openly stated by many before. How many polls have indicated the "never buy Blu-ray" views in the past? Plenty of them. And a lot of the threads and posts we're seeing these days are from the same folk that would rather see BD go down with HD DVD, even if it means the end of optical in the high-def space, rather than actually see it go on to be the HDM successor format.

Is my thread still on the board now?

"Retailers not impressed with HDM sales."

You should read it.

DVD doesn't need to be "beat," it will naturally give way. Whether it be to BD or whatever else, who knows, but it will give way. Warner isn't anti DVD, are they? Are Sony and Fox and Disney against DVD sales? No. But it's about creating new growth opportunities in a market where the present lead medium has become mature and saturated. Folk who don't understand that, won't understand Warner's decision either, but there are very real reasons behind why these companies fear the format war will lead primarily to consumer confusion, apathy, and stunt an avenue for home video growth going forward.

Or not . It can never gain more than a niche following while another format grows up and captures marketing share.

HD dvd can continue to stick around with universal and parmount thus allways keeping bluray down as to get every title in high def would require investment into two platforms.

Downloads can rise up and take a larger % of the market share. Currently everyone with an xbox 360 has acess to a great download service and lets not forget that there are more xbox 360s in the states than ps3s I believe its over 2:1 right now.

On demand through tv providers (Cable , sat , fios) can also take larger % of sales.

Also consumer confidence through this downturn in the econmey can keep buyer away from pricer blruay and in 3-4 years time a new format like hvd or something can come out that trumpts bluray in every regard 1tb discs will put an end to 50 gb discs in the pc sector and as hd cameras become cheaper and hardrives become bigger people will want larger capacity storage . If bluray doesn't take off in the next couple a years a combination of the above can certianly end blruays chances for ever taking over dvd's sales

Is my thread still on the board now?

"Retailers not impressed with HDM sales."

You should read it.

Fortunately I don't see it.

Fortunately I don't see it.

yea fortuantely there are only 80 parmount going blu threads and they delete Lee's thread with factual information

Not really. The future is Red . . . laser that is . . . DVD.I don't remember you going from thread to thread last year repeatedly making such thread craps so it looks like sour grapes to me.

closed

you guys want to bicker you will get infractions