Question:

Do studios Paramount and Universal actually own any HD DVD production lines, or is all production done by Toshiba? If not, do they have any vested interest in the equipment?

Do studios Disney or Fox actually own BD production lines, or is all production done by third parties? If not, do they have any vested interest in the equipment?

You're talking about the HD DVD or BD discs, right? If so, then I don't know if Toshiba owns any HD DVD replication lines, but if they do, they're not likely to be a significant percentage of capacity, as according to one 'Insider', virtually any DVD replication line sold in the last 2-3 years can be upgraded at minimal expense (think $100k not $1 million) to produce HD DVDs. In that context, whether or not Toshiba produces HD DVD is pretty inconsequential. The same cannot be said for BD, however. While non-Sony BD production capacity is growing, BD50 production (at least in terms of volume and yield) is still centered around Sony and a few other industry standard replicators. As far as I am aware, there aren't any studios that own their own BD or HD DVD replication lines at this point (other than Sony Pictures, of course), but I may be incorrect.

The only studio with replication lines is Sony. All others use third-parties, for HD DVD or blu-ray.

Note that they usually have their favorites for DVD production so that they can get the best terms for maximum volume. But in case of new formats, they may be using alternates until such time their favorite replicator can meet their production.

Blu-ray: http://www.emedialive.com/articles/readarticle.aspx?articleid=11425#ixl

HD DVD: http://www.emedialive.com/articles/readarticle.aspx?articleid=11638#ixi

The only studio with replication lines is Sony. All others use third-parties, for HD DVD or blu-ray.

Note that they usually have their favorites for DVD production so that they can get the best terms for maximum volume. But in case of new formats, they may be using alternates until such time their favorite replicator can meet their production.

That's a bit disingenuous, Sony happen to own both a studio and a disc manufacturer. They aren't primarily a media company or a disc replication company, both are basically sideline businesses compared to electronics, mobile phones and games...

Fox, TW and Disney will always be called media companies, and Sony will always be called a hardware company and to say that SPE own a disc replication company is not true in any sense. Sony corporation own DADC, yes, but not the studio itself.

Edit: A good analogy would be like saying NBC:U own GE Aviation, which of course isn't true, they are both subsidiaries of General Electric.

That's a bit disingenuous, Sony happen to own both a studio and a disc manufacturer. They aren't primarily a media company or a disc replication company, both are basically sideline businesses compared to electronics, mobile phones and games...

Fox, TW and Disney will always be called media companies, and Sony will always be called a hardware company and to say that SPE own a disc replication company is not true in any sense. Sony corporation own DADC, yes, but not the studio itself.

Edit: A good analogy would be like saying NBC:U own GE Aviation, which of course isn't true, they are both subsidiaries of General Electric.


I think, what is disingenuous is an analogy that takes NBC and GE Aviation which have no business relationship and compare that to the relationship between DADC and Sony (studio) which have a substantial business relationship.

Wanna' pick a better analogy?

I think, what is disingenuous is an analogy that takes NBC and GE Aviation which have no business relationship and compare that to the relationship between DADC and Sony (studio) which have a substantial business relationship.

Wanna' pick a better analogy?
better would probably be something along the lines of Cadillac/Fisher carriage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisher_Body).

As I recall, there were threads about the yields and relative scarcity of BD50s. But that was a while ago. Is there still some concern about these issues? As I see it from the view of a consumer, I'm hard pressed to see that this has had any impact at all on either cost or availability, at least recently.

As I recall, there were threads about the yields and relative scarcity of BD50s. But that was a while ago. Is there still some concern about these issues? As I see it from the view of a consumer, I'm hard pressed to see that this has had any impact at all on either cost or availability, at least recently.
This (yields) hasn't been put to rest, and Oerlikon bailing out of the business can't be good news.

This (yields) hasn't been put to rest, and Oerlikon bailing out of the business can't be good news.

Huh? Singulus just bought them out, and Singulus' stock just went up accordingly. Analysts say it is a good move because of the burgeoning Blu-ray market.

Now that we seem to be moving toward shutting down the format war, it is likely that independent replicators will invest more in Blu-ray equipment.

Huh? Singulus just bought them out, and Singulus' stock just went up accordingly. Analysts say it is a good move because of the burgeoning Blu-ray market.

Now that we seem to be moving toward shutting down the format war, it is likely that independent replicators will invest more in Blu-ray equipment.
Tell me again why Oerlikon sold out of a "burgeoning" market?

Tell me again why Oerlikon sold out of a "burgeoning" market?
Why does anyone sell a business? Because it's worth more to someone else than it is to them.

A quick search for Oerlikon and Singulus turns up the following article: Singulus Acquires Oerlikon's Blu-ray Activities (http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/News/Details.aspx?NewsId=22408). This makes it clear that Oerlikon is also shutting down its CD and DVD replication business so it's a consistent move across the board.

Whatever. The BD business should grow according to many around here, so why sell out now? CD and DVD are not growth areas, so packing them in isn't a big deal.

I don't know that this sale information relates much to my question, but it appears that there's no new information on the BD50 manufacturing front.

This (yields) hasn't been put to rest, and Oerlikon bailing out of the business can't be good news.

Do you (or anyone else) have links to the stats on BD yields. I have been searching for this and cant seem to find anything. I have heard people mention this in posts before, I am just wondering where they are getting the data and how viable it is.

Thanks in advance.

(I am not questioning the validity of your post (like I see others when they prompt someone for links), I actually would like to know more about BD yields and what manufacturing issues they have.)

Whatever.

Great counter.

Brandon

Taken from the article:

"Oerlikon is the world's biggest maker of spinning machines for textiles."

Maybe they just decided to concentrate their efforts on their primary strength. Regardless of how long into the future optical disc media (HDM, DVD or CD) manages to survive, it's a safe bet that it won't outlive the textile business.

Do you (or anyone else) have links to the stats on BD yields. I have been searching for this and cant seem to find anything. I have heard people mention this in posts before, I am just wondering where they are getting the data and how viable it is.

Thanks in advance.

(I am not questioning the validity of your post (like I see others when they prompt someone for links), I actually would like to know more about BD yields and what manufacturing issues they have.)


The biggest production issue with Bluray, is the time it takes to replicate the discs.

"One executive said that a Blu-ray replication line costs between €1.7 million and €1.8 million and is capable of churning out 10,000-15,000 discs per day, compared to 40,000 discs per day on an HD DVD line that cost less than half of that."

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070418-dedicated-hd-dvd-players-outsell-blu-ray-counterparts.html

Paying over 2x the cost per replication line to actually replicate 4x slower. Factor in all applicable normal day to day expenses and Bluray replication is much more expensive than HD DVD. That does not include the cost of the hardware upgrade.

That article is pretty dated.

That article is pretty dated.

The replication lines have not changed that much in 8 months. The HD DVD replication lines are the next evolution of the DVD replication lines. Which is why they run at near DVD replication speed. Where as, Bluray replication lines, are all new and have not had the benefit of years of tweaking and upgrading to speed them up.
Also, any upgrade in speed for any hardware will not come cheap, especially if its Bluray. If I buy a new machine for my shop, getting it fixed or upgraded in the first few years, costs me a bundle.

The cost of hardware and slow replication of Bluray. Does not favor the small or independant studios, nor does it favor any 3rd party replicators. Unless, of course, they receive "incentives" to produce Bluray. Perhaps a couple of Bluray replication machines free?

So my question is whether there is anyone with actual inside information (or any public information) about these supposed issues. I see plenty of Blu-Ray discs at the store and even some smaller outfits are releasing Blu-Rays, so it doesn't seem like there's much of an issue. And is it really true that they can't make manufacturing improvements in 9 months? This is the 21st century and it is a new product. One imagines that they'd be making lots of manufacturing improvements early in the process, as they figure out what works and what does not. Low yields directly impact the bottom line -- the incentive to improve them must be very significant. But I have no idea, so I'm asking for some expertise or some legitimate articles.

So my question is whether there is anyone with actual inside information (or any public information) about these supposed issues. I see plenty of Blu-Ray discs at the store and even some smaller outfits are releasing Blu-Rays, so it doesn't seem like there's much of an issue. And is it really true that they can't make manufacturing improvements in 9 months? This is the 21st century and it is a new product. One imagines that they'd be making lots of manufacturing improvements early in the process, as they figure out what works and what does not. Low yields directly impact the bottom line -- the incentive to improve them must be very significant. But I have no idea, so I'm asking for some expertise or some legitimate articles.


Here is a recent article on a brand new Bluray 25g single layer replication machine.

http://www.singulus.de/en/presse/pressemeldungen/pressemeldung/article/488/7.html?cHash=77a361755f

"After an extremely short installation period the BLULINE replication system from SINGULUS TECHNOLOGIES (SINGULUS) produced the first Blu-ray Disc with 25 GB capacity and passed the final acceptance test. The system operates with a cycle time of less than 4.0 seconds."

Just under 4 seconds for one 25gb Bluray disc. 10 hour day = 9000 discs (at 4 sec a disc). So I would guess replication is about 1000 discs per hour. Thats best case scenerio with no issues that may come up. (mechanical, software errors or failure, human error) I assume that the 50gb bluray discs take almost 2x the time to replicate.

Thanks.

The only studio with replication lines is Sony. All others use third-parties, for HD DVD or blu-ray.

Note that they usually have their favorites for DVD production so that they can get the best terms for maximum volume. But in case of new formats, they may be using alternates until such time their favorite replicator can meet their production.

Didn't Time Warner own DVD production lines in the past? What about JVC/Universal? Or was that latter just a label making music releases?
Regards,
D in Toronto

better would probably be something along the lines of Cadillac/Fisher carriage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisher_Body).

Yes, I would think so, but the reality is Maxpowers "point" is off point and argumentative.

Yes, I would think so, but the reality is Maxpowers "point" is off point and argumentative.

Pretty disappointed you are debating the analogy rather than the facts he put forward.

I don't know that this sale information relates much to my question, but it appears that there's no new information on the BD50 manufacturing front.
There's an AVSF sponsor who replicates both formats. Not surprised the BD is the more expensive of the two formats, by why should the cases/artwork be more expensive (by quite a bit) for BD?
http://www.ebinteractive.com/replication?gclid=CNnBiYbappECFRIUagod8SY4eQ

There's an AVSF sponsor who replicates both formats. Not surprised the BD is the more expensive of the two formats, by why should the cases/artwork be more expensive (by quite a bit) for BD?
http://www.ebinteractive.com/replication?gclid=CNnBiYbappECFRIUagod8SY4eQ

Most likely the replication plant is upping the price on all things Bluray to recoup money lost. Just the replication machine alone is over 2 million. Not to mention that a Bluray replication line takes 4x longer than a HD DVD line. So the cost must reflect that. The people running those machines, dont work for free.