Long interview with Universal's president Craig Kornblau about HD DVD and format war

[ClearVision]

Originally Posted by nfinity

I don't really want to interfere in this discussion because I know what your task is and it is pointless to point out the error of your ways, I just wanted to address what you wrote under #1.

1.) those who choose the wrong format will have to eat all their hardware and software

So why are we pointing the blame over to HD DVD for this.

And please don't tell me that they pay you for YOUR opinion, I'm very much aware that anything you post or gets on that site has to be approved by the trio of your bosses.

Cheers.

Actually, the main point of the blog I wrote is that Universal president Craig Kornblau himself is saying Universal is keeping the format war alive; I did not say that.
I also did not say that HD DVD will be responsible for people having to eat all their hardware and software. Whichever format wins, consumers of the other format will have to eat all their hardware and software.

Your last comment is just not true -- nothing I write HAS to be approved by a trio of anyone. I have complete independence to post whatever I want, which I have done with most of my blogs. I have, in fact, run a few of my blogs past a couple of studio execs and a couple of different Blu-ray hardware manufacturers before I post them to check on facts I may not be privvy to and insider perspective they may be able to provide that may enhance my comments. It's up to me whether I incorporate any or all of their feedback. Also, I run some blogs past some legal people if there are any potential problematic legal issues I raise. That's a far cry from the way you are trying to characterize the situation.

[jugganutz]

Originally Posted by ClearVision

Well, first of all he didn't say those things to me a week ago -- it was about 48 hours before I posted it late last night.
Secondly, I have no idea when or where he said the comments in today's AP story -- you seem to think it was at a press conference today?
Third, I have no idea why people choose to say things and where and when they choose to say them -- you'd have to ask them. I can only tell you what he said to me and let you know that he thanked me this morning for my blog, so obviously he is not upset about anything I wrote concerning his comments, including his use of the word "fragile" -- his word, not mine.
I don't need to ask him to issue a press release to satisfy you about the veracity of his comments to me so that you are satisfied that I am not full of ****.

Cool sorry if I seemed to attack you, thanks for clearning that up with me i belive you and will go now.

[JayCT-34WX15]

Originally Posted by ClearVision

As I have stated many times in this thread today, a blog is not a news story and is not expected to be a "complete story." That is for the news or feature section. I am not passing myself or this story as anything other than a conveyance of a conversation, with my take on the comments made during that conversation. Anyone writing a blog is absolutely presenting that information as an opinion since that is the definition of a blog. Actually, in my view, I prefer hearing an opinion in response to comments made by an authority like Kornblau in the same blog rather than just random opinions such as "I love Blu-ray because the beautiful case color," which can be anyone's opinion about anything that has no bearing on anything in particular. At least you are also hearing information -- hopefully new or interesting information -- from an interesting credible source in the process. I have a feeling if I just said I think Blu-ray will win the war, this blog would not have engaged you and the thousands of others today, like it has since I shared my conversation with someone notable.

Apparently, the only way you and others would be satisifed (and probably not even then) would be to have a complete transcript of the conversation. That is for another venue -- that is not a blog and that approach is not what any journalist for any paper -- NY Times or Wall Street Journal included -- ever takes when writing even a news story, but especically not an editorial, which is what a blog is.
But I know you have read my comments saying this repeatedly today, so I will assume you choose to just keep remaking the same arguments as if you never heard this response.
I am certainly open to criticism and even encourage it -- doesn't mean I have to agree with every criticism served up. If you look at my response to constructive criticsim on my blogs on the site from Day One, you will see that I have indeed accepted many criticisms as valid and made changes to my blog and the web site accordingly. Also accepted quickly early this morning someone pointing out that I had an error in my blog suggesting that "Blades of Glory" would be Blu-ray exclusive.

You are certainly free to express your perceptions of my work and positions, but please also be open to my challenge of those perceptions if I feel they are not based in fact and I have evidence to the contrary.

Anyway, glad to hear you aren't angry -- really.

Well, you are entitled to your opinion - as am I and everyone else. It is obvious that our views differ. Even still, I have voiced my objections with what/how you presented your commentary even though as you point out, much of it is opinion. So I suppose we should leave it at that.

No point in beating a dead horse.

Best of luck to you, and for the record, I truly hope (both for my sake and the rest of the HD consumers out there) your prediction proves wrong.

[nfinity]

Originally Posted by ClearVision

Actually, the main point of the blog I wrote is that Universal president Craig Kornblau himself is saying Universal is keeping the format war alive; I did not say that.
I also did not say that HD DVD will be responsible for people having to eat all their hardware and software. Whichever format wins, consumers of the other format will have to eat all their hardware and software.

Your last comment is just not true -- nothing I write HAS to be approved by a trio of anyone. I have complete independence to post whatever I want, which I have done with most of my blogs. I have, in fact, run a few of my blogs past a couple of studio execs and a couple of different Blu-ray hardware manufacturers before I post them to check on facts I may not be privvy to and insider perspective they may be able to provide that may enhance my comments. It's up to me whether I incorporate any or all of their feedback. Also, I run some blogs past some legal people if there are any potential problematic legal issues I raise. That's a far cry from the way you are trying to characterize the situation.

Okay, well I was under impression that you need to run all your articles and content by the studios. My mistake if this is not the case.

However I find it interesting that again you cut out responses conveniently. You did not address the previous well know history of Sony's unsuccessful formats and their track record of screwing customers over.

This is relevant because HD DVD people have less to lose. First of all love it or hate it we have combos. These disk WILL in fact play as regular DVDs even on upscaling Blu-Ray players if by some miracle Blu-Ray wins. This means that at least piece of our investment is usable, something that no Blu-Ray owner can say. Actually I'm not even sure that my existing Blu-Ray titles won't develop rot issue where I will have to re-buy my stuff anyways. Or is rot issue covered by studios who support Blu-ray so i can get a replacement?

Second the amount of investment that HD DVD people have is at least 2-3 times less then if they went Blu-Ray. So the fact is, that by saying CONSUMERS will lose, actually affects more people who went Blu-Ray only as opposed to people who went HD DVD.

Another thing I can't wrap my head around is that you guys never address the issues that non of the Blu-Ray players now with the exception of new Denons have Profile 1.1 certification and hardware requirements.

How can you recommend a format in your blogs that will eventually cost a customer $500+ to start off and will pretty much only play movies. How is this BETTER for consumer.

I mean with HD DVD at least I know..if it goes down, I made a mistake and that's it. But with Blu-Ray even a person who SUPPORTS Blu-Ray will have to pay again for the Profile 1.1 or even 2.0 players. Or do you consider this collateral damage among early adopters.

I'm sorry if we are off topic, I'm just trying to wrap my head around the whole idea how by supporting HD DVD, consumers are losing approach and that Blu-Ray will give consumers a piece of mind and is overall better.

[darinp2]

Originally Posted by nfinity

Second the amount of investment that HD DVD people have is at least 2-3 times less then if they went Blu-Ray.

If they only rent or don't buy many discs. I just checked on Amazon and it shows the HD-A2 at $249.82, while it has the BDP-S300 at $499 and the PS3 at $499.99. Not even counting the premium for those combos you were talking about buying, for somebody who buys 20 discs at $20 each the total difference would be basically $650 vs $900. Or 38% more for the Blu-ray total. Throw in a Blu-ray remote for the PS3 at $25 and it goes up to 42% more.

--Darin

[The Doctor]

Originally Posted by ClearVision

Yep, you have to judge me based on my credibility of 20 years of covering this industry. I'll happily stand on that reputation, which I assume is at least in part why Universal president Craig Kornblau decided to talk to me at length for a blog even though he knew it was going to be posted on a pro-Blu-ray site. Doubt he would do that if he didn't trust and respect my fairness.
For the 10oth time today -- it's unrealistic to expect any journalist to provide a complete transcript of every interview they conduct for every story or blog or column they write. You would never read it or watch it on TV because it would be dozens of pages long or hours long on TV. That's why almost every story everywhere paraphrases and characterizes comments made from many different people they talked to for the story.
If the subject of my blog has no problem with what I wrote, I would suggest that the reader should be satisfied that it is a fair representation of what he said. But you are certainly welcome to judge without evidence that the blog is an inaccurate or incomplete summary of his comments even if the person himself doesn't feel that way.





As for presenting every

We were also given the intent of EMA Vegas 2007, thankfully there was a video transcript to verify.
We're talking specifics and you generalizing. Specifically the whole conversation wasn't 12 or 24 hours. Half hour or an hour at the most.
Your intent and tone are crystal clear, you begin with a premise then repeat it and confirm it, then repeat it again.
You're not without skill. Skillfully crafted words do not disguise their intent. Plenty of other propagandist have made their cases too. I could name some but it seems too trite to bring up.

To come here claiming only the purest journalistic of intentions and integrity is all but laughable. "We report you decide." is the catch phrase I believe you're looking for You were editorializing by interjecting your beliefs.
We can't be happy with your "report" because it was an editorial endorsing a candidate not a unbiased report. The criticism for the lack of Kornblau's acutal quoutes is a well taken one.
For instance: Question: Do you still beat your wife?
Answer: What??! No!
The write up of the intention: He indicated he is no longer beating his current spouse. However his former wife could not be reached at the time of this publication to confirm when he stopped beating her.

Bottom line you editorialized and thumped the blu bible pushing the blu agenda.

In closing Jeff Gannon was(/is?) a journalist too.

Blu-ray backers launch deceptive "Hi-Def News" site
There is a new web site focused on unbiased coverage of high-definition entertainment. The only problem: it's a Blu-Ray promotional campaign -- exclusively covering Blu-Ray -- created by its backers: Sony Pictures, Twentieth Century Fox, Walt Disney Studios, and others. Hi-def fans spotted the campaign immediately and are decrying the site as propaganda.

The site's blogger, Scott Hettrick, has been proactively responding. He edited his first blog post that, ironically, attempted to dispel the rumors and propaganda surrounding the hi-def format war ("...there's an awful lot of propaganda and posturing out there by both the companies releasing the product and the so-called "fanboys" of the Internet.") with a disclaimer ("As we note clearly in "About Us," this site is supported on many different levels by many of the more than 170 companies that support Blu-ray, most primarily Disney, Fox and Sony, but no single organization or group.") But Hettrick's "honesty" does little to alter the "propaganda and posturing" of this advertising campaign. The deception is sure to backfire, the site shuttered as has happened in the past.

In fact, everyone involved, particularly Sony, should have known better. Sony has been caught creating a fake blog promoting the PSP last December and fake critics for its movies six years ago. And we thought Sony had learned with the PSP fiasco: "Guess we were trying to be just a little too clever. From this point forward, we will just stick to making cool products, and use this site to give you nothing but the facts..." Yes, please.

[ClearVision]

Originally Posted by nfinity

Okay, well I was under impression that you need to run all your articles and content by the studios. My mistake if this is not the case.

However I find it interesting that again you cut out responses conveniently. You did not address the previous well know history of Sony's unsuccessful formats and their track record of screwing customers over.

This is relevant because HD DVD people have less to lose. First of all love it or hate it we have combos. These disk WILL in fact play as regular DVDs even on upscaling Blu-Ray players if by some miracle Blu-Ray wins. This means that at least piece of our investment is usable, something that no Blu-Ray owner can say. Actually I'm not even sure that my existing Blu-Ray titles won't develop rot issue where I will have to re-buy my stuff anyways. Or is rot issue covered by studios who support Blu-ray so i can get a replacement?

Second the amount of investment that HD DVD people have is at least 2-3 times less then if they went Blu-Ray. So the fact is, that by saying CONSUMERS will lose, actually affects more people who went Blu-Ray only as opposed to people who went HD DVD.

Another thing I can't wrap my head around is that you guys never address the issues that non of the Blu-Ray players now with the exception of new Denons have Profile 1.1 certification and hardware requirements.

How can you recommend a format in your blogs that will eventually cost a customer $500+ to start off and will pretty much only play movies. How is this BETTER for consumer.

I mean with HD DVD at least I know..if it goes down, I made a mistake and that's it. But with Blu-Ray even a person who SUPPORTS Blu-Ray will have to pay again for the Profile 1.1 or even 2.0 players. Or do you consider this collateral damage among early adopters.

I'm sorry if we are off topic, I'm just trying to wrap my head around the whole idea how by supporting HD DVD, consumers are losing approach and that Blu-Ray will give consumers a piece of mind and is overall better.

No need to apologize -- I appreciate you taking the time to dialogue.
First, the rot issue has been fully addressed here and in other threads -- it is a non-issue, a one-time anomaly, so no worries about that.

Second, you're right that I did not address your point relative to previous Sony products. I intended to but forgot -- hard to remember to cover every point made in every comment. My feeling is that your concerns about Sony's history of products and screwing customers may be warranted to a certain extent -- though they have also created some of the most revolutionary and successful products in history (I wonder if any other company has had as many successes -- I guess you have to expect a certain ratio of failure with so many successes and attempts at new products). Still, even if you say they have had a horrible track record, I think we have to look at this product and this situation. If it's good enough to get many favorable reviews as both a stand-alone Blu-ray player and as the underlying format in PS3, and if it generates sufficient consumer sales (jury still out), then I think you have to accept that or at least deal with that reality, despite your distrust of their historical track record. Chrysler made an awful lot of crap cars in the 1970s (the "K" car and others), but then came back with the minivan and other revolutionary vehicles that changed the auto industry and were quite successful. So, while you can be and should be skeptical about a new product from a company with a poor recent track record, you can't dismiss them out of hand.

As for HD DVD customers feeling like their products will still be use-able, can't you say the same thing about Blu-ray players, which also play DVDs?
But your point is well taken that in terms of hardware, HD DVD customers stand to lose less -- at the moment -- than Blu-ray customers if their format folds.

As for recommending product, I agree and have said that I think HD DVD has been ahead and remains ahead of Blu-ray in terms of players offering higher levels of interactviity and connectivity, though there hasn't been a ton of that by the HD DVD people yet, and Blu-ray promises there's is coming this fall and will be better than HD DVD (we'll see). So, yes, personally I am not strongly recommending anyone buy Blu-ray players today since they are not all web-capable (primarily just the PS3). Nonetheless, I think Blu-ray will catch up quickly and surpass HD DVD and provide a more inherently robust infrastructure for the long-term, which will mean consumers won't be forced to buy the next-genertation format quite as quickly as they might have to with HD DVD.

Thanks for your thoughtful comments and questions.

[ClearVision]

Originally Posted by JayCT-34WX15

Well, you are entitled to your opinion - as am I and everyone else. It is obvious that our views differ. Even still, I have voiced my objections with what/how you presented your commentary even though as you point out, much of it is opinion. So I suppose we should leave it at that.

No point in beating a dead horse.

Best of luck to you, and for the record, I truly hope (both for my sake and the rest of the HD consumers out there) your prediction proves wrong.

Best to you as well. Appreciate the chat.

[ClearVision]

Originally Posted by darinp2

If they only rent or don't buy many discs. I just checked on Amazon and it shows the HD-A2 at $249.82, while it has the BDP-S300 at $499 and the PS3 at $499.99. Not even counting the premium for those combos you were talking about buying, for somebody who buys 20 discs at $20 each the total difference would be basically $650 vs $900. Or 38% more for the Blu-ray total. Throw in a Blu-ray remote for the PS3 at $25 and it goes up to 42% more.

--Darin

Yep, that's certainly the truth today. I wish Blu-ray machines were $250. The problem for consumers is that companies have to treat this as a business. I have heard some very credible people say that Toshiba is already subsidizing their machines at that low price because they are that desperate to get into the market. That doesn't make for a very sustainable business and, as I stated in my Thursday blog, is counter to the reason consumer electronics companies pushed the high-def disc platform in the first place -- they were tired of losing money on DVD players. Right now, thanks to PS3, Blu-ray manufacturers can hold the line on their prices at about $500, but I imagine you will soon see hardware companies like Samsung and maybe even Sony start lowering the price on their Blu-ray stand-alone players to compete not only with HD DVD's $250 price but also with each other. If not, they may lose critical ground to Toshiba and HD DVD.

[ClearVision]

Originally Posted by The Doctor

We were also given the intent of EMA Vegas 2007, thankfully there was a video transcript to verify.
We're talking specifics and you generalizing. Specifically the whole conversation wasn't 12 or 24 hours. Half hour or an hour at the most.
Your intent and tone are crystal clear, you begin with a premise then repeat it and confirm it, then repeat it again.
You're not without skill. Skillfully crafted words do not disguise their intent. Plenty of other propagandist have made their cases too. I could name some but it seems too trite to bring up.

To come here claiming only the purest journalistic of intentions and integrity is all but laughable. "We report you decide." is the catch phrase I believe you're looking for You were editorializing by interjecting your beliefs.
We can't be happy with your "report" because it was an editorial endorsing a candidate not a unbiased report. The criticism for the lack of Kornblau's acutal quoutes is a well taken one.
For instance: Question: Do you still beat your wife?
Answer: What??! No!
The write up of the intention: He indicated he is no longer beating his current spouse. However his former wife could not be reached at the time of this publication to confirm when he stopped beating her.

Bottom line you editorialized and thumped the blu bible pushing the blu agenda.

In closing Jeff Gannon was(/is?) a journalist too.

So no journalist in print, in blogs, or on TV is allowed to present an opinion or take a position or to present portions of an interview without presenting the entire transcript? Anything else does not meet with your approval and your standards for journalistic excellence?
Wow, I don't believe I have ever read any magazine, newspaper, seen any TV news program, or read any series of blogs that conform to that standard or meet your requirements. Actually, I don't think you have either, and I seriously doubt that you would like to read or watch that, and I know you would not have the time.

We report -- you decide? Who said I claimed to be reporting or trying to get you to decide anything? I was sharing a conversation I had with the president of Universal video and offering my opinion about his comments. That's it. My job is done at that point. What you think of it or do with it is entirely up to you.

Mr. Kornblau thanked me this morning for the blog -- he didn't seem to have any concerns about the nature of my questions, but you are certainly free to carry a flag he never wanted to wave if it makes you feel better.

[ColinH]

Originally Posted by ClearVision

My job is done at that point.

I think the main point of contention is the fact that your job entails writing a blog that is part of the "Blu-Ray promotional campaign", or do you disagree with Jeff Gannon's take on things?

[Xylon]

Originally Posted by DeathKnight

How does it feel to be a shill for the BDA?

You get BD releases a month early

[nfinity]

Originally Posted by darinp2

If they only rent or don't buy many discs. I just checked on Amazon and it shows the HD-A2 at $249.82, while it has the BDP-S300 at $499 and the PS3 at $499.99. Not even counting the premium for those combos you were talking about buying, for somebody who buys 20 discs at $20 each the total difference would be basically $650 vs $900. Or 38% more for the Blu-ray total. Throw in a Blu-ray remote for the PS3 at $25 and it goes up to 42% more.

--Darin

Darin, I understand what you are trying to say, however I strongly disagree for several reasons.

What exactly do I need in order to have HD DVD experience?

I pay $249 for a standalone HD DVD player with 5 free movies or even $160 or something like that with 5 movies. So I already have 5 movies I can watch on this.

I did some numbers as for what tittles are more expensive. You still lose more on Blu-Ray even if I buy all combos.

Here pure math based on calculator and hdvdstats.com and blu-raystats.com:

$26.82 HD15
$32.72 HD30

$34.05 BD25
$34.72 BD50

the average price for BD titles be it BD25 or BD50 (of course taking in consideration the number of each released, I didn't just sum up the two and divided by 2 to get average) is

BD average price: $34.5 same way HD average price is: $32

average price of combo disk is $34.95 on HD DVD

Now imagine I bought 10 combo movies on HD DVD and 10 BD movies.

I paid on average the same amount. Of course I might find them somewhat cheaper online but on average they will be approx. same price.


If you can show me, why I have to throw away my HD DVD combo discs even if the format fails? My investment is safe. I can use those combos as regular DVDs on any upconverting player or even Blu-Ray player if god forbid this format wins.

All I would have to throw away would be a $160 X360 HD DVD AO or $249 HD DVD standalone and possibly some non-combo HD discs, but if we know that 90+% of HD DVD discs will be combo by year's end. This is becomes a non-issue.

So consumer's loss is minimized as much as possible with HD DVD.

Can Blu-Ray say the same? On Blu-Ray you pay $500 for player, and then you have to throw away ALL your discs if HD DVD wins. Not only that, but come year end, I'm not even sure that people will be too happy if they have to replace their Blu-Ray players with some newer models for 2008 as the ones that are being sold this year will most definitely have serious limitations with features and so on.

How exactly is Blu-Ray good any way you look at this?

Hey you know what, I don't disagree that in 2 years Blu-Ray will be great. But you know what, don't come out and tell me that I will lose stuff equally on both sides because I will not. (I mean not you, but any Blu-Ray PR person).

This is misleading and plain lie. This is why HD DVD was made the way it was to protect consumers and allow backwards compatibility to maximize consumers bang-for-the-buck.

The only thing that Blu-Ray is doing is cause problems for combos not to go down in price as studios are split. And this is MOSTLY Sony's, Fox's and Disney's fault.

Shame on BDA for screwing consumers like this.

Very dissapointing.

[theone2]

Originally Posted by Xylon

You get BD releases a month early

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA ...good one

[ClearVision]

Originally Posted by ColinH

I think the main point of contention is the fact that your job entails writing a blog that is part of the "Blu-Ray promotional campaign", or do you disagree with Jeff Gannon's take on things?

Yes, I disagree with Jeff Gannon's take on things but I allow for the fact that he made those comments about a month ago when we initially launched the site. He predicted the site would be shut down. It's been more than a month and we are growing stronger every day with more breaking news tips, exclusives, reviews from more and more writers from many credible sites and videos from events and interviews and trailers and traffic and coverage and pick-ups.
Initial skepticism was understandable; now it's just uninformed and ignorant of the evidence.

[darinp2]

Originally Posted by nfinity

What exactly do I need in order to have HD DVD experience?

I pay $249 for a standalone HD DVD player with 5 free movies or even $160 or something like that with 5 movies. So I already have 5 movies I can watch on this.

It took something like 5 months for my movies to come. They came yesterday.

Originally Posted by nfinity

Here pure math based on calculator and hdvdstats.com and blu-raystats.com:

$26.82 HD15
$32.72 HD30

$34.05 BD25
$34.72 BD50

What titles did you use for this?

Originally Posted by nfinity

Now imagine I bought 10 combo movies on HD DVD and 10 BD movies.

How many HD DVDs do you own? Do you think 15 total is about right for enthusiasts?

Originally Posted by nfinity

If you can show me, why I have to throw away my HD DVD combo discs even if the format fails? My investment is safe.

It is only safe if your standards are so low that you consider DVD equal to high definition. If a stock I bought goes to 1/3rd its original value I wouldn't say my investment was safe because there was something left. If you value DVD quality so much, why are you buying HD DVDs?

Originally Posted by nfinity

All I would have to throw away would be a $160 X360 HD DVD AO or $249 HD DVD standalone and possibly some non-combo HD discs, but if we know that 90+% of HD DVD discs will be combo by year's end. This is becomes a non-issue.

You don't have to throw away anything with either side if you just keep using that player. But seriously, are you telling me that if you have a movie you really like on HD DVD and HD DVD loses and you don't have a player, that you won't get the movie on Blu-ray? If it isn't worth that much to you, then why are you spending the premium for HD now? The amount I spent for my display makes $250 a piddly amount of difference and I'm not going back to DVD to save a few bucks. I could dig through the $5 bin at Wal-mart or buy DVDs off ebay if I cared little about image quality.

Originally Posted by nfinity

Can Blu-Ray say the same? On Blu-Ray you pay $500 for player, and then you have to throw away ALL your discs if HD DVD wins.

You don't have to throw away anything as I said, but using your logic you have to throw away some of your HD DVDs and the rest I would consider crap anyway.

I'm taking it you don't agree with Amir's statement along the lines of people not being happy with SD after they have gotten used to HD. Is that true?

Originally Posted by nfinity

How exactly is Blu-Ray good any way you look at this?

If you would be content with DVD quality, then I doubt there is much way your eyes could see how it is worth it. There is also the factor of how likely it is for the format to go away and while around last November I might have put the odds at 50/50, now I think anybody realistic laying odds would have to say the odds of Blu-ray going away are getting pretty small, while the odds of HD DVD going away have risen with recent events (and if the Weinsteins really are going neutral the odds go up even more).

Originally Posted by nfinity

This is why HD DVD was made the way it was to protect consumers and allow backwards compatibility to maximize consumers bang-for-the-buck.

HD DVD was made the way it was largely for Toshiba and Warner's patents. Not that I'm saying there is anything wrong with that, but you have to be happy enough with standard definition to think that you have enough value that if your chosen format dies you would rather watch the SD version than get the thing in HD on the other format. And most of these DVDs get real cheap, so a person that was happy with DVD could go buy most of them for not a whole lot of money in the case where their chosen format dies.

If you want to argue about still having value, if HD DVD loses the movie war an HD DVD player is unlikely to be worth much at all for resale. Even if Blu-ray loses the movie war a PS3 can still be sold to somebody for games. Not for the original price of course, but likely more than an old HD DVD player would sell for.

Honestly, I can understand Amir making this claim about protecting your investment if the format loses as he is pushing the format for his job, but I find it quite incredible that an enthusiast on an enthusiast site would push that people can just watch the standard definition version as some great benefit. What are we all doing here if standard definition is good enough? You think Amir would spend $8k on a projector and way more than that on his audio and then watch his content from the DVD side of a combo disc if HD DVD died and the movie was available on Blu-ray? I am curious as to what kind of display you use.

--Darin

[nfinity]

Originally Posted by darinp2

It took something like 5 months for my movies to come. They came yesterday.
What titles did you use for this?
How many HD DVDs do you own? Do you think 15 total is about right for enthusiasts?
It is only safe if your standards are so low that you consider DVD equal to high definition. If a stock I bought goes to 1/3rd its original value I wouldn't say my investment was safe because there was something left. If you value DVD quality so much, why are you buying HD DVDs?

You don't have to throw away anything with either side if you just keep using that player. But seriously, are you telling me that if you have a movie you really like on HD DVD and HD DVD loses and you don't have a player, that you won't get the movie on Blu-ray? If it isn't worth that much to you, then why are you spending the premium for HD now? The amount I spent for my display makes $250 a piddly amount of difference and I'm not going back to DVD to save a few bucks. I could dig through the $5 bin at Wal-mart or buy DVDs off ebay if I cared little about image quality.
You don't have to throw away anything as I said, but using your logic you have to throw away some of your HD DVDs and the rest I would consider crap anyway.

I'm taking it you don't agree with Amir's statement along the lines of people not being happy with SD after they have gotten used to HD. Is that true?
If you would be content with DVD quality, then I doubt there is much way your eyes could see how it is worth it. There is also the factor of how likely it is for the format to go away and while around last November I might have put the odds at 50/50, now I think anybody realistic laying odds would have to say the odds of Blu-ray going away are getting pretty small, while the odds of HD DVD going away have risen with recent events (and if the Weinsteins really are going neutral the odds go up even more).
HD DVD was made the way it was largely for Toshiba and Warner's patents. Not that I'm saying there is anything wrong with that, but you have to be happy enough with standard definition to think that you have enough value that if your chosen format dies you would rather watch the SD version than get the thing in HD on the other format. And most of these DVDs get real cheap, so a person that was happy with DVD could go buy most of them for not a whole lot of money in the case where their chosen format dies.

If you want to argue about still having value, if HD DVD loses the movie war an HD DVD player is unlikely to be worth much at all for resale. Even if Blu-ray loses the movie war a PS3 can still be sold to somebody for games. Not for the original price of course, but likely more than an old HD DVD player would sell for.

Honestly, I can understand Amir making this claim about protecting your investment if the format loses as he is pushing the format for his job, but I find it quite incredible that an enthusiast on an enthusiast site would push that people can just watch the standard definition version as some great benefit. What are we all doing here if standard definition is good enough? You think Amir would spend $8k on a projector and way more than that on his audio and then watch his content from the DVD side of a combo disc if HD DVD died and the movie was available on Blu-ray? I am curious as to what kind of display you use.

--Darin

Darin you are twisting my words.

I am not defending SD. I am just saying that IF anyone chooses they can STILL keep, give away or whatever they want, their HDDVD combo collection and use it.

You see the problem with what you are saying is thinking that EVERYONE will just drop SD overnight and switch to whatever format wins. How funny is this.

You do realize that there will be millions of homes that will have 1 hi-def player and several $30 DVD players, including cars, mobile electronics and players etc etc.

To say that regular SD doesn't have place at all and to hint that it is ok rebuy everything to accomodate forced hi-def format is wrong and pretty much irresponsible. And this is certainly not what HD DVD stands for.

I have over 50+ HD DVD titles for example, but I'm not in question here. I can afford several more Blu-Ray or HD DVD players. this is not what we are talking about. I said 10 HD DVD and 10 Blu-Ray just so it's easier to understand my point.

I am talking about a regular person who doesn't make $60-100k+ a year salary and can't drop $1500-$2000 on a movie collection in like 2 months as I did.

I am comparing reality, while you are citing imaginary scenarios.

The fact is, someone who even has hard time spending $200 on a hi-def player and waits until they can get 5 free discs with their purchase (which is most people by the way) will not have a collection of movies as you and I will have. It's a fact..they will have a few movies in the beginning, they will rent the rest and it will take years for them to accumulate the amount of titles I have collected in just a month. This is why the TRUE next format standard needs to accomodate this transition in the least painful way for consumer.

This is the fundimental difference between a down-to-earth HD DVD supporting individual and Sony-BD dreamer that thinks that everyone is shi*ting money.

For this reason, I said, HD DVD will ALWAYS be better for consumer, not only does it have better features and is more universal (what a true format standard should be) but it gives users a great value as they can make a transition to all hi-def over a longer period of time while still utilizing their existing equipment while using those combo discs.

As it was said many times, and a fact that many Blu-Ray zealots just jump over. The fact that a regular person can buy an HD DVD, then watch it in their car video player, an airplane on their small video player, take it to their bedroom in the same house without the need to buy another $500+ player as they already have a $40 dvd player, or give that movie to grandparents or parents that still don't have hi-def is extermely pro-consumer.

The approach that Sony is doing with Blu-Ray is completely opposite, They are literally saying..you know what in order for you to use all this new stuff to the fullest you need to buy ALL new equipment. I ask you why? Why do you have to replace all of your DVD players in your house with Blu-Ray players in order to use your existing movie collection.

I'm sorry I have problems recommending this to anyone, at least not until we see $50 Blu-Ray players which I think will take about 2-3 more years to at least start thinking about, while HD DVD might hit this price as early as next year.

I'm taking it you don't agree with Amir's statement along the lines of people not being happy with SD after they have gotten used to HD. Is that true?

I completely agree with Amir. The person is very objective regardless of his insider position. But what I'm addressing here has nothing to do with how cool hi-def is and it has everything to do with an overall value for the consumer. So I don't keep repeating myself you can read above again if you're unclear on what I'm talking about.

If you want to argue about still having value, if HD DVD loses the movie war an HD DVD player is unlikely to be worth much at all for resale. Even if Blu-ray loses the movie war a PS3 can still be sold to somebody for games. Not for the original price of course, but likely more than an old HD DVD player would sell for.

True, that's why I said, if my player breaks down or whatever, I can still use my HD DVD combos to watch them at my gradparents house, I can borrow it to uncle who doesn't have hi-def, I can carry it with me on the plane when I travel to Europe to watch it on that portable video player... can you do that with Blu-Ray?

The answer is NO.

Sure PS3 will always be able to be used as games, and I never said Blu-Ray will seize to exist, but that's the problem. Today when you say Blu-Ray you say PS3. So what exactly is the point here? Should all users then buy a gaming consoles to watch Blu-Ray movies? If not, then that Blu-Ray standalone will have the same faith if BD loses.

This is a BIG problem for all CE companies that are in BD camp as they have to lose profit to match up with PS3 and even then they are simply not being sold in enough quantities as PS3 is too much of a deal. Can you sense how wrong this is?

I'm betting that most of these CE companies are under contractual obligations and it is the ONLY reason why they are still not coming out with HD DVD only players. But that's just a hunch. Let's not go there.


The whole point is:

Blu-Ray -> ZERO consumer value if it loses and actually forces people to rebuy expensive equipment

HD DVD -> at least some return even if the format loses and allows us consumer to "GROW" into hi-def with less expense or at least expense stretched out until the mass productions takes charge.


That's it.

[The Doctor]

Originally Posted by ClearVision

So no journalist in print, in blogs, or on TV is allowed to present an opinion or take a position or to present portions of an interview without presenting the entire transcript? Anything else does not meet with your approval and your standards for journalistic excellence?
Wow, I don't believe I have ever read any magazine, newspaper, seen any TV news program, or read any series of blogs that conform to that standard or meet your requirements. Actually, I don't think you have either, and I seriously doubt that you would like to read or watch that, and I know you would not have the time.

We report -- you decide? Who said I claimed to be reporting or trying to get you to decide anything? I was sharing a conversation I had with the president of Universal video and offering my opinion about his comments. That's it. My job is done at that point. What you think of it or do with it is entirely up to you.

Mr. Kornblau thanked me this morning for the blog -- he didn't seem to have any concerns about the nature of my questions, but you are certainly free to carry a flag he never wanted to wave if it makes you feel better.

Mr. Kornblau has his own agenda and you probably did exactly what he wanted you to do. He may have no compliant to voice publicly. But lack of his admonishment doesn't declare you did a good job. Plenty of public figures are cordial with reporters/interviewers/whoever, doesn't mean they approve of how it was relayed to the public.

Bill Hunt, Richard Doherty, and you are in the same journalistic boat .

You act like I'm asking for C-span coverage, I'm not, I am asking for un-subjective reporting, which is what you claimed to be doing. You weren't sharing a conversation, you were sharing your point of view, "my opinion" as you said, which happened to coincide with a conversation.

You don't deny you were editorializing, subjective comments and incorporation of blu doctrine are apparent. The introjection of opinion is in no way journalistic.

Mr. Kornblau is probably please to get half of his points across, and probably has his own reasons to be pleased with it. He had his agenda as you have yours.

"Mr. Kornblau thanked me this morning for the blog" Wasn't this moring was it?

[tteich]

@nfinity

Very good post.

[ColinH]

Originally Posted by ClearVision

Yes, I disagree with Jeff Gannon's take on things but I allow for the fact that he made those comments about a month ago when we initially launched the site. He predicted the site would be shut down. It's been more than a month and we are growing stronger every day with more breaking news tips, exclusives, reviews from more and more writers from many credible sites and videos from events and interviews and trailers and traffic and coverage and pick-ups.
Initial skepticism was understandable; now it's just uninformed and ignorant of the evidence.

So you're saying the site isn't run by and for Blu Ray supporters????

Er.. OK we believe you, although I kind of thought the banner proclaiming the site to be "Built for Blu-ray" and "Powered by Blu-ray supporters" was slightly indicative of the general bias of the site.

And there I was thinking your job was to promote Blu-ray on a Blu-ray site funded by Blu-ray supporters - whatever was I thinking.

[cybereality]

Originally Posted by ClearVision

Yes, I disagree with Jeff Gannon's take on things but I allow for the fact that he made those comments about a month ago when we initially launched the site.

I really hope you're not talking about political-reporter-cum-Washington-call-boy Jeff Gannon...

[Vmk2]

excellent post nfinity +1

[SpecialBlend]

Its hard to resist the Battlestar/Heroes combo this fall.

[cadbury8]

Originally Posted by ClearVision

I actually wasn't looking for this because I don't regularly troll these sites and threads

Thanks.. you stated it better then i could. This thread is done.

[Deja Vu]

Bottom line is simply this - if you want Universal titles in HD then buy an HD DVD player and get on with your life! If not, then don't! Besides that - who really cares?

Cheers,

Grant

[David F]

Originally Posted by The Doctor

You act like I'm asking for C-span coverage, I'm not, I am asking for un-subjective reporting, which is what you claimed to be doing. You weren't sharing a conversation, you were sharing your point of view, "my opinion" as you said, which happened to coincide with a conversation.

You don't deny you were editorializing, subjective comments and incorporation of blu doctrine are apparent. The introjection of opinion is in no way journalistic.

The comments in bold are contradictory. You're asking for something you admit he claims he is not providing? Why on earth then should you be upset with the blog? It is, by the author's own admission, an editorial. Expecting "un-subjective" reporting from an editorial is like expecting vanilla ice cream to taste like chocolate. You're destined to be disappointed.

[The Doctor]

Originally Posted by ClearVision

Yes, I disagree with Jeff Gannon's take on things but I allow for the fact that he made those comments about a month ago when we initially launched the site. He predicted the site would be shut down. It's been more than a month and we are growing stronger every day with more breaking news tips, exclusives, reviews from more and more writers from many credible sites and videos from events and interviews and trailers and traffic and coverage and pick-ups.
Initial skepticism was understandable; now it's just uninformed and ignorant of the evidence.

to clarify Jeff Gannon was a "White House reporter between 2003 and 2005 , representing the virtual organization Talon News." "Bobby Eberle has asserted that Talon News was a "straight news site," despite running prominent advertisements for conservative causes and links to GOPUSA.com, a conservative site also run by Eberle."

cybereality is right.

Jeff Gannon has nothing to do with the quote below.

Blu-ray backers launch deceptive "Hi-Def News" site
There is a new web site focused on unbiased coverage of high-definition entertainment. The only problem: it's a Blu-Ray promotional campaign -- exclusively covering Blu-Ray -- created by its backers: Sony Pictures, Twentieth Century Fox, Walt Disney Studios, and others. Hi-def fans spotted the campaign immediately and are decrying the site as propaganda.

The site's blogger, Scott Hettrick, has been proactively responding. He edited his first blog post that, ironically, attempted to dispel the rumors and propaganda surrounding the hi-def format war ("...there's an awful lot of propaganda and posturing out there by both the companies releasing the product and the so-called "fanboys" of the Internet.") with a disclaimer ("As we note clearly in "About Us," this site is supported on many different levels by many of the more than 170 companies that support Blu-ray, most primarily Disney, Fox and Sony, but no single organization or group.") But Hettrick's "honesty" does little to alter the "propaganda and posturing" of this advertising campaign. The deception is sure to backfire, the site shuttered as has happened in the past.

In fact, everyone involved, particularly Sony, should have known better. Sony has been caught creating a fake blog promoting the PSP last December and fake critics for its movies six years ago. And we thought Sony had learned with the PSP fiasco: "Guess we were trying to be just a little too clever. From this point forward, we will just stick to making cool products, and use this site to give you nothing but the facts..." Yes, please.

[AodhFFXI]

Originally Posted by ClearVision

So no journalist in print, in blogs, or on TV is allowed to present an opinion or take a position or to present portions of an interview without presenting the entire transcript? Anything else does not meet with your approval and your standards for journalistic excellence?

Blogging doesn't make you a journalist because you get to hide behind the protection of 'editorial comments' without being held accountable for libel or slander because you are not under the requirement of presenting facts, a blog is an opinion after all. Not any better that someone writing in a myspace about how much someone sucks. Journalists present articles in print or other mediums which are held up against journalistic integrity and are accountable to represent the truth of the situation otherwise they can be put up against legal risks.

This is from Wiki, but it's a summary of multiple organizations codes of ethics for journalistic integrity:
Wiki: Journalism and Ethics

Objectivity
* Unequivocal separation between news and opinion. In-house editorials and opinion (Op-Ed) pieces are clearly separated from news pieces. News reporters and editorial staff are distinct.
* Unequivocal separation between advertisements and news. All advertisements must be clearly identifiable as such.
* Reporter must avoid conflicts of interest — incentives to report a story with a given slant. This includes not taking bribes and not reporting on stories that affect the reporter's personal, economic or political interests. See envelope journalism.
* Competing points of view are balanced and fairly characterized.
* Persons who are the subject of adverse news stories are allowed a reasonable opportunity to respond to the adverse information before the story is published or broadcast.
* Interference with reporting by any entity, including censorship, must be disclosed.

[David F]

Originally Posted by AodhFFXI

Blogging doesn't make you a journalist because you get to hide behind the protection of 'editorial comments' without being held accountable for libel or slander because you are not under the requirement of presenting facts, a blog is an opinion after all. Not any better that someone writing in a myspace about how much someone sucks. Journalists present articles in print or other mediums which are held up against journalistic integrity and are accountable to represent the truth of the situation otherwise they can be put up against legal risks.

Considering that the subject interviewed in the blog has no trouble with its content, how responsible is it of you to talk about libel and slander?

There were direct and indirect quotes from Kornblau in the blog, so it hardly qualifies as someone writing in myspace about how much "someone sucks."

[AodhFFXI]

Originally Posted by David F

Considering that the subject interviewed in the blog has no trouble with its content, how responsible is it of you to talk about libel and slander?

There were direct and indirect quotes from Kornblau in the blog, so it hardly qualifies as someone writing in myspace about how much "someone sucks."

Assuming that the e-mail was sent from him and not from an assistant as a standard follow up to the interview, there's nothing he could do at that point and any attempt to attack the person could result in worst action the otherway. Next article...sorry, blog, might be along the lines of "Kornbleau's secret is out and not he's trying to hide it!" I'm not going to represent either the writer, nor the subject in my opinions, what I wrote was in response to the article...dammit, blog posting only and the claims made by the writer that professes that he's a journalist who doesn't follow the journalistic code of ethics and uses the medium, a blog, to protect his actions.