Sony Blames Blu-ray for "Bag of Hurt" - Page 31 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 87Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #901 of 1363 Old 05-18-2014, 12:30 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bladerunner6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,455
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Liked: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by size14d View Post

Who said Blu-ray is dying? What was said is that after 8 years since intro it has nowhere near the market penetration that DVD had into the VHS market. You didn't have to buy a new tv with DVD. and I'm pretty sure that combo packs are counted as Blu-ray sales.

And no, it's not all kid movies. It's about the same number of kids movies as Blu-ray sells. Here's the top DVD sales last year by title. http://www.the-numbers.com/home-market/dvd-sales/2013. And here are the Blu-ray. http://www.the-numbers.com/home-market/bluray-sales/2013. You can see over double the number of titles on DVD sold over 1 million copies than Blu-ray.

But when you look at individual titles, the story is much different than what you present.

Despicable Me 2 sold almost identically in BD and DVD.

The Hobbit 2 was about an 11% difference.

Man of Steel had way better BD sales than DVD.

Now admittedly, there are other titles that go the other way. For example, the Twilight Saga, Breaking Dawn, Part 2, the DVD vastly outsold the BD.

But in any case for the first 100 titles on each list:

BD= 74,443,317 units $1,728,193,073
DVD=121,273,575 units $1,956,330,095

That certainly doesn't look like any of the figures that people have been quoting so far.
bladerunner6 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #902 of 1363 Old 05-18-2014, 12:35 PM
Senior Member
 
size14d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 397
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aarghon View Post

Just watched the Bluray list... What amazes me if that the 2012 list had 13 titles over 1 million copies sold... 2013? 22.

Which makes me think that people buy more great titles at release, but are more selective because of the still prohibitive cost vs dvd... But the fact top sellers increased their sales tell me there IS room for bluray, and that the cycle of Blu-Ray is coming slowly to maturity.... Lower the cost, and up the sales, simple as that.

Well, that is part of it. But ~70% of sales are DVDs most every week. That lead is so big I think most titles are being played on 480i CRT tvs.







Aarghon likes this.
size14d is offline  
post #903 of 1363 Old 05-18-2014, 12:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,756
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 641 Post(s)
Liked: 404
Part of it is the sh!tty way Best Buy and other retailers sell Blu-ray and even HD. For one thing, the discs are all mixed together. Another... the retail sales clerks are underpaid high schoolers or college kids with no formal tech training in what they're selling. The first rule of Best Buy is never, ever ask them a question other than where an item is located. The next thing is that their average Blu-ray prices are many times that of DVD and only a few select titles are ever on sale. You can see why Amazon kills them in the disc arena.

That's pretty damn pathetic and retailers have not improved the situation one iota. And now the industry wants 4k to succeed? Good luck with that!

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #904 of 1363 Old 05-18-2014, 01:19 PM
Senior Member
 
size14d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 397
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Nielson needs to do another study. In 2010 they reported that 56% of households had at least 1 HDTV. They did say that most programming watched was SD. For years before 2010 you could only buy HDTVs. You want to give your kid a tv, that is all that was sold. Your tv died, all that is sold. So they need to determine what the HDTV is used for, ie main tv, secondary, etc. and if hooked to a Blu-ray or DVD player or pay SD or HD TV source (cable/sat/Netflix).
size14d is offline  
post #905 of 1363 Old 05-18-2014, 01:39 PM
Advanced Member
 
Aarghon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 813
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 28 Post(s)
Liked: 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by bladerunner6 View Post

But when you look at individual titles, the story is much different than what you present.

Despicable Me 2 sold almost identically in BD and DVD.

The Hobbit 2 was about an 11% difference.

Man of Steel had way better BD sales than DVD.

Now admittedly, there are other titles that go the other way. For example, the Twilight Saga, Breaking Dawn, Part 2, the DVD vastly outsold the BD.

But in any case for the first 100 titles on each list:

BD= 74,443,317 units $1,728,193,073
DVD=121,273,575 units $1,956,330,095

That certainly doesn't look like any of the figures that people have been quoting so far.

These figures show one thing clearly though : Blu ray is way more profitable, being almost outsold twice , yet it still only 228 millions down on sales... Mostly because of the bluray pricing, but those numbers should tempt the studios to concentrate more on the Blu Ray market... There is indeed a future for Blu ray , but it has to come fast to reap money while 4k isn't that much ready!

Energy Rc-70 fronts, Energy Rc-70 surrounds, Energy veritas 5.2c, Energy rc-mini heights
Dual Reaction-Audio BPS212
Pioneer Elite sc-61 AVR
Pioneer Elite n50 network player
Marantz CD6004 cd player
Marantz UD5007 Blu ray player
Panasonic Tcl55dt60 led tv , Playstation 3 and a lot of old consoles
Aarghon is offline  
post #906 of 1363 Old 05-18-2014, 02:00 PM
Senior Member
 
size14d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 397
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aarghon View Post

These figures show one thing clearly though : Blu ray is way more profitable, being almost outsold twice , yet it still only 228 millions down on sales... Mostly because of the bluray pricing, but those numbers should tempt the studios to concentrate more on the Blu Ray market... There is indeed a future for Blu ray , but it has to come fast to reap money while 4k isn't that much ready!

It shows Blu-ray titles are priced higher per unit. They drop the price, they have to sell more to make the same amount. So the studios make less on DVDs? Monies for both formats goes to the studios.
size14d is offline  
post #907 of 1363 Old 05-18-2014, 02:34 PM
Advanced Member
 
swarm87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 893
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Hitchman View Post

Part of it is the sh!tty way Best Buy and other retailers sell Blu-ray and even HD. For one thing, the discs are all mixed together. Another... the retail sales clerks are underpaid high schoolers or college kids with no formal tech training in what they're selling. The first rule of Best Buy is never, ever ask them a question other than where an item is located. The next thing is that their average Blu-ray prices are many times that of DVD and only a few select titles are ever on sale. You can see why Amazon kills them in the disc arena.

That's pretty damn pathetic and retailers have not improved the situation one iota. And now the industry wants 4k to succeed? Good luck with that!

i was told by a best buy employee that they are reducing their media floor-space on purpose because the company wants to push streaming(he even said, though i dont think its true, that they are being paid by studios to do so)

pcm=potato
bitstream=patato
swarm87 is offline  
post #908 of 1363 Old 05-18-2014, 02:55 PM
Senior Member
 
size14d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 397
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by swarm87 View Post

i was told by a best buy employee that they are reducing their media floor-space on purpose because the company wants to push streaming(he even said, though i dont think its true, that they are being paid by studios to do so)

They own CinemaNow which can be linked to your Ultraviolet account so it could be true. http://www.cinemanow.com/

I pretty much buy 100% from Amazon.
size14d is offline  
post #909 of 1363 Old 05-18-2014, 05:09 PM
AVS Special Member
 
chitchatjf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Lawrence MA
Posts: 3,315
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked: 12

I usually split my purchases between Amazon and Target. They will and have price matched Amazon

 

i have purchased a few Vudu titles and have gotten Vudu digital copes of many of my favorite older films.

chitchatjf is offline  
post #910 of 1363 Old 05-18-2014, 05:19 PM
Senior Member
 
size14d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 397
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 22
I've gotten HD or HDX Vudu titles via disc to digital of titles not on Blu-ray like




I've never bought a digital movie, it's come as part of the Blu-ray package.
size14d is offline  
post #911 of 1363 Old 05-18-2014, 07:21 PM
Member
 
kimg1453's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 118
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Liked: 59
To expound on what swarm87 said:

This does not surprise me in the least about the Studios and chicken s--- Best Buy. This is all about money and control. They opened Pandora's box when physical media became available for purchase by consumers. The courts have backed the ownership model ever since, even after they tried everything they could to get it stopped. The Studios hate the fact that anyone can own regardless of which format.

The streaming approach is exactly what they want to gain complete control again and circumvent the laws and rights which are in place. This way they can charge what they want, only give you what they want, pull it all when they feel like it. I'm telling everyone, this is the wake up call. We all need to fully support physical media and not downloads/streaming. The nightmare will surely come if not. The constant price increases will definitely follow as well.
kimg1453 is offline  
post #912 of 1363 Old 05-18-2014, 07:40 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,756
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 641 Post(s)
Liked: 404
What he said ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #913 of 1363 Old 05-18-2014, 08:07 PM
Senior Member
 
catonic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 204
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 54
^^^^^^ I agree that there is a lot of truth in what kimg1453 says here but just because the Hollywood studios are/maybe opposed to 4k blu-ray does not mean that it won't eventuate.
The BDA is composed of many companies and blu-ray sales (as the sales figures show) are profitable for many companies, including large powerful ones such as Amazon.
If the Hollywood studios refuse to allow their product to be available on the 4k blu-ray format other companies will step in and use it as a means of getting content to consumers.
Companies such as Criterion are very small but they depend on dvd / blu-ray sales and the BDA does not need every member of it's association to support 4k blu-ray for it to go ahead with it.
Failure to support 4k blu-ray by the Hollywood studios would just leave a major market opportunity for other content providers to reach new customers and make more money.
catonic is offline  
post #914 of 1363 Old 05-18-2014, 08:56 PM
Advanced Member
 
nrc2112's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 546
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 39
Just watched Home Theater Geeks. The episode, The Trouble with 4k. Bottom line they said that BDA is working toward a standard by 2020. And the only reliable way to get 4k until then is via physical disk. Since Sony and Panasonic only have commercial 4k disk in the pipeline, not consumer disk applications, to me 4k is a tech that will not survive. They spoke about the human eye and other considerations as well. Great episode.

So no 4k for me until at least 2020. I think Sony just killed their company by betting the farm on 4k and making it proprietary.
nrc2112 is offline  
post #915 of 1363 Old 05-18-2014, 09:04 PM - Thread Starter
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,609
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1074 Post(s)
Liked: 2238
Quote:
Originally Posted by nrc2112 View Post

Just watched Home Theater Geeks. The episode, The Trouble with 4k. Bottom line they said that BDA is working toward a standard by 2020. And the only reliable way to get 4k until then is via physical disk. Since Sony and Panasonic only have commercial 4k disk in the pipeline, not consumer disk applications, to me 4k is a tech that will not survive. They spoke about the human eye and other considerations as well. Great episode.

So no 4k for me until at least 2020. I think Sony just killed their company by betting the farm on 4k and making it proprietary.

 

For some people, that is. While it's true that not everyone can stream UHD/4K content, enough people will have the capability (in their new TV) and the bandwidth (especially city-dwellers). 1080p Blu-ray may be popular, but it's hardly ubiquitous. If it takes six years for a new UHD disc-based format to come out, then discs (in general) truly are toast.  

 

I saw a statistic at CEDIA last year... 50% of all AV spending comes from millionaires—who can afford broadband. Once Apple goes UHD—it won't take them six years—I seriously question whether any company would sign up for a Blu-ray successor.


Find out more about Mark Henninger at
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
imagic is online now  
post #916 of 1363 Old 05-18-2014, 09:08 PM
Advanced Member
 
nrc2112's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 546
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 39
So this leaves the Bluray disk as the last optical media format. Since it is Sony's baby the future looks bad for Sony and Bluray. For the next 5 years the battle will be between the Isp's and the consumer. The consumer wants speed and convenience in content delivery and the ISP's want to squeeze as much profit it can from them. I see the whole shebang collapsing soon as consumers just get tired of bandwidth caps and rising costs. Net neutrality rules will come back to bite Comcast and Verizon when there is a mass exodus of consumers tired of playing their games.

Maybe it's a good thing, family will start to go out and play and drop tv all together.
TeflonSoul likes this.
nrc2112 is offline  
post #917 of 1363 Old 05-18-2014, 10:28 PM
Senior Member
 
size14d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 397
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 22
As long as physical medial is doing $90-180 million a week in the U.S. alone, it's not going anywhere.
size14d is offline  
post #918 of 1363 Old 05-18-2014, 10:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dan Hitchman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Northern Colorado
Posts: 8,756
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 641 Post(s)
Liked: 404
2020 is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too long to establish the next physical "4k" medium. If they think they can only sell to millionaires from now on who can afford the internet connections and hardware needed for download only UHD, they're delusional dinosaurs and I hope they go out of business and clear the way for right minded tech companies.

Listen up, studios! Just say "NO" to DNR and EE!!
Dan Hitchman is offline  
post #919 of 1363 Old 05-19-2014, 02:18 AM
Member
 
bobafetthotmail's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 39

FYI, streaming is not so much cheaper for the seller as some of you think.

 

Their servers have to be able to send content around at relatively large bandwidths for any decent resolution, and they pay for the bandwidth. An average HD movie needs around 3 Mb/s or so of transfer speed (megabytes not megabits) per person watching it. 4k needs more but I don't know how much. They are not end-users and they should be able to stream content to hundreds if not tens of thousands of customers at once (or much much more if they want to replace the physical media).

 

Selling files does not seem to have a lot of traction because it is either easy to pirate them or disliked by customers as they are locked to a specific software and account, that means they are not really "theirs".

 

Also, there are A LOT of first world countries and even places inside the US that don't have a decent internet connection, and even places where the speed is available now are not 100% guaranteed to be able to keep it if more people start using so large amounts of band-with (ISPs routinely overbook their lines, assuming that everyone won't be needing the full bandwith at the same time, this leads already to lag spikes and speed issues at the evenings on mobile internet like say 3-4G) so moving to streaming-only or even mostly-streaming is not a so smart move until the network infrastructure in most of the world catches up.

 

Compared to this truckload of unknowns and plain risks that can't be fixed by the streaming company, a physical disk/device easily wins by virtue of reliable costs and predictable risks alone.

 

I still hope that they stop using disks and move to flash memory, either SDHC cards or USB stuff. So much better than making yet another disk standard that is not backward-compatible with anything else.

TeflonSoul likes this.
bobafetthotmail is offline  
post #920 of 1363 Old 05-19-2014, 05:03 AM
AVS Special Member
 
StinDaWg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,610
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 262 Post(s)
Liked: 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by TSHA222 View Post

Well technically it's not streaming. Downloads at true blu ray quality would be easy today to get legitimately but streaming at true blu ray quality is another story.
You can stream torrents the same way as if you were using any other service like itunes or Vudu. You don't have to wait until the download is finished to watch.
StinDaWg is offline  
post #921 of 1363 Old 05-19-2014, 05:08 AM
Member
 
antoniobiz1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 135
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Liked: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobafetthotmail View Post

FYI, streaming is not so much cheaper for the seller as some of you think.

Their servers have to be able to send content around at relatively large bandwidths for any decent resolution, and they pay for the bandwidth. An average HD movie needs around 3 Mb/s or so of transfer speed (megabytes not megabits) per person watching it. 4k needs more but I don't know how much. They are not end-users and they should be able to stream content to hundreds if not tens of thousands of customers at once (or much much more if they want to replace the physical media).

Selling files does not seem to have a lot of traction because it is either easy to pirate them or disliked by customers as they are locked to a specific software and account, that means they are not really "theirs".

This is SO not true it's scary. I can rent a personal server for 60 UK pounds a month (about 100$) with a 30TB/month bandwidth and 10Gbit/second speed. That means that if I, a private citizen, were to stream movies, it would cost ME 50 cents to stream a 6 GB movie. And that includes using THEIR server and THEIR hard disk, not mine. For big companies, that cost is probably down to 5 cents.

Wrong math! It's a lot worse. It's 5000 6Gb movies at 5 cent a piece. That means 0.5 cents for big companies!!!!

What's wrong with me today? It's 2 cents a piece. So, 0.2 cents for big companies blah blah...



Bulk bandwidth is cheap these days, in terms of very few cents per Megabit, lies of internet providers notwithstanding.
antoniobiz1 is online now  
post #922 of 1363 Old 05-19-2014, 05:13 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,609
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1074 Post(s)
Liked: 2238
Quote:
Originally Posted by antoniobiz1 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobafetthotmail View Post

FYI, streaming is not so much cheaper for the seller as some of you think.

Their servers have to be able to send content around at relatively large bandwidths for any decent resolution, and they pay for the bandwidth. An average HD movie needs around 3 Mb/s or so of transfer speed (megabytes not megabits) per person watching it. 4k needs more but I don't know how much. They are not end-users and they should be able to stream content to hundreds if not tens of thousands of customers at once (or much much more if they want to replace the physical media).

Selling files does not seem to have a lot of traction because it is either easy to pirate them or disliked by customers as they are locked to a specific software and account, that means they are not really "theirs".

This is SO not true it's scary. I can rent a personal server for 60 UK pounds a month (about 100$) with a 30TB/month bandwidth and 10Gbit/second speed. That means that if I, a private citizen, were to stream movies, it would cost ME 50 cents to stream a 6 GB movie. And that includes using THEIR server and THEIR hard disk, not mine. For big companies, that cost is probably down to 5 cents.

Bulk bandwidth is cheap these days, in terms of very few cents per Megabit, lies of internet providers notwithstanding.

 

Indeed, the costs associated with package design, manufacturing, warehousing, distribution, and in-store display are formidable. Wal-mart, Target, Best Buy, Amazon—these retailers are not pushovers, they pay as little as possible for wholesale merchandise. 

 

Plus, Wal-mart owns Vudu—arguably the best and most successful service outside of iTunes. If Wal-mart is long on streaming and downloads—to the point where it offers the best product out there quality-wise... that tells you a lot.

antoniobiz1 likes this.

Find out more about Mark Henninger at
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
imagic is online now  
post #923 of 1363 Old 05-19-2014, 06:24 AM
AVS Special Member
 
TSHA222's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: barely within my means
Posts: 1,165
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by imagic View Post

If Wal-mart is long on streaming and downloads—to the point where it offers the best product out there quality-wise... that tells you a lot.

If you are talking about the best product quality wise for streaming, I would agree that HDX is probably the best. I won't rehash the bluray vs streaming argument but anyone with good eyesight will know which of those two win out.
TSHA222 is offline  
post #924 of 1363 Old 05-19-2014, 06:26 AM
AVS Special Member
 
TSHA222's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: barely within my means
Posts: 1,165
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 54
Quote:
Originally Posted by StinDaWg View Post

You can stream torrents the same way as if you were using any other service like itunes or Vudu. You don't have to wait until the download is finished to watch.
I stand corrected ( or sit rather). I had no idea that was going on. However, the point to me is moot because streaming is compressing the file sizes on legit services so I would assume, maybe incorrectly, that the shady fringes are as well. When it comes to streaming, I'm blown away at what Netflix and VUDU, et al are doing from a technological standpoint but far from blown away by the image quality.
TSHA222 is offline  
post #925 of 1363 Old 05-19-2014, 06:59 AM
Member
 
atmusky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 172
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 39
I would say that Walmart is heavily invested into providing Movies any way we want them.

There stores are full of disks DVD & BRD many/most of which come with UV codes. Their web site shows over 40,000 titles available on DVD (maybe some duplicates do to having different versions of same movies widescreen, full screen etc plus it includes TV shows.), there web site also has over 9200 titles available on BRD. Add Vudu to that (which has over 17,000 digital movies available and close to 5000 in their TV section) and they pretty much cover it all. As far as price points go it is really interesting I looked at one movie "I, Frankenstein"
  1. $15 for: DVD + HD UV code
  2. $20 for: 3D Blu-ray + Blu-ray + DVD + HD UV Code
  3. $15 for: Digital only HD UV (HDX) Via Vudu
  4. $14 for: Digital only SD UV Via Vudu
  5. $6 for HDX rental Via Vudu
  6. $5 for HD rental Via Vudu
  7. $4 for SD rental Via Vudu
Plus my local Walmart has a RedBox and you could rent the DVD for $1.30 or the BRD for $1.50.

I really can not think of any other ways they could offer access.
imagic likes this.
atmusky is offline  
post #926 of 1363 Old 05-19-2014, 07:12 AM
Senior Member
 
TinnEars's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 259
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimg1453 View Post

To expound on what swarm87 said:

This does not surprise me in the least about the Studios and chicken s--- Best Buy. This is all about money and control. They opened Pandora's box when physical media became available for purchase by consumers. The courts have backed the ownership model ever since, even after they tried everything they could to get it stopped. The Studios hate the fact that anyone can own regardless of which format.

The streaming approach is exactly what they want to gain complete control again and circumvent the laws and rights which are in place. This way they can charge what they want, only give you what they want, pull it all when they feel like it. I'm telling everyone, this is the wake up call. We all need to fully support physical media and not downloads/streaming. The nightmare will surely come if not. The constant price increases will definitely follow as well.

I agree. Once we relinquish total control to those who "make things easier for us" then we've given them all the power to do to us whatever they want. Streaming and downloads and cloud storage are all fine but without a physical disc in hand... media ownership is a fading dream.

OT but related: What about the highways and roads we all paid our taxes for but Toll Roads continue to expand and take over?
Dan Hitchman and TeflonSoul like this.
TinnEars is offline  
post #927 of 1363 Old 05-19-2014, 08:20 AM
Member
 
bobafetthotmail's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 39
Quote:antoniobiz1
This is SO not true it's scary. I can rent a personal server for 60 UK pounds a month (about 100$) with a 30TB/month bandwidth and 10Gbit/second speed.

Congrats for your knowledge of google. The issue here is in the network infrastructure someone needs to pay for that theoretical 10 Gbit/second to actually hold true once it clears the servers. Providers overbook. They overbook their lines everywhere, and this leads to huge jams in case people starts really using that bandwitdh all together.  Example of 3G and 4G networks. They give large amount of theoretical bandwith, but since it's all overbooked at the moments most users are at home the connection is slower... guess why?

 

Unless a large amount of network infrastructure around (especially outside the US) gets a SERIOUS upgrade, you are looking at quite a few network slowdowns and significant lag at the moments of higher network activity (evenings, weekends).

 

Sorry but internet is a dynamic system, this is a significant risk. Selling physical media is not anywhere near the complexity of predicting how well networking will cope with your services.

 

Also, you are not addressing the major issue that a very large part of population (outside US for sure) is still not in a place served by decent broadband.
 

Quote:

 

Indeed, the costs associated with package design, manufacturing, warehousing, distribution, and in-store display are formidable.

This is irrelevant. These costs are very very easy to predict (fixed costs 99%) and for the most part are already taken care of since decades ago. What frightens a big company isn't big costs, it's big risks. Internet streaming is a large risk because of reasons said above, and cannot be attenuated without a ridicolously huge expenditure in upgrading infrastructure.

 

Not to say it won't happen, but I'm pretty confident that the 6 years to get the new disk format out are not too much.

 

Quote:
Once we relinquish total control to those who "make things easier for us" then we've given them all the power to do to us whatever they want. Streaming and downloads and cloud storage are all fine but without a physical disc in hand... media ownership is a fading dream.

piracy is still alive and well, and will remain alive in the future. If they push too much, their profit margins will be eroded by piracy, forcing them to limit their shenanigans. No moral judgement on either side, only a statement of a fact.

StinDaWg and TeflonSoul like this.
bobafetthotmail is offline  
post #928 of 1363 Old 05-19-2014, 08:25 AM - Thread Starter
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,609
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1074 Post(s)
Liked: 2238
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobafetthotmail View Post
 
Quote:antoniobiz1
This is SO not true it's scary. I can rent a personal server for 60 UK pounds a month (about 100$) with a 30TB/month bandwidth and 10Gbit/second speed.

Congrats for your knowledge of google. The issue here is in the network infrastructure someone needs to pay for that theoretical 10 Gbit/second to actually hold true once it clears the servers. Providers overbook. They overbook their lines everywhere, and this leads to huge jams in case people starts really using that bandwitdh all together.  Example of 3G and 4G networks. They give large amount of theoretical bandwith, but since it's all overbooked at the moments most users are at home the connection is slower... guess why?

 

Unless a large amount of network infrastructure around (especially outside the US) gets a SERIOUS upgrade, you are looking at quite a few network slowdowns and significant lag at the moments of higher network activity (evenings, weekends).

 

Sorry but internet is a dynamic system, this is a significant risk. Selling physical media is not anywhere near the complexity of predicting how well networking will cope with your services.

 

Also, you are not addressing the major issue that a very large part of population (outside US for sure) is still not in a place served by decent broadband.
 

Quote:

 

Indeed, the costs associated with package design, manufacturing, warehousing, distribution, and in-store display are formidable.

This is irrelevant. These costs are very very easy to predict (fixed costs 99%) and for the most part are already taken care of since decades ago. What frightens a big company isn't big costs, it's big risks. Internet streaming is a large risk because of reasons said above, and cannot be attenuated without a ridicolously huge expenditure in upgrading infrastructure.

 

Not to say it won't happen, but I'm pretty confident that the 6 years to get the new disk format out are not too much.

 

 

Tell that to Sears, K-Mart, Circuit City, Blockbuster Video, Sam Goody, Tower Records, Borders, and many others. You are right, Amazon and Apple take big risks (compared to traditional retailers) and B&M retailers are frightened. 


Find out more about Mark Henninger at
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
imagic is online now  
post #929 of 1363 Old 05-19-2014, 08:29 AM
Senior Member
 
TinnEars's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 259
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobafetthotmail View Post

Quote:
Once we relinquish total control to those who "make things easier for us" then we've given them all the power to do to us whatever they want. Streaming and downloads and cloud storage are all fine but without a physical disc in hand... media ownership is a fading dream.
piracy is still alive and well, and will remain alive in the future. If they push too much, their profit margins will be eroded by piracy, forcing them to limit their shenanigans. No moral judgement on either side, only a statement of a fact.

Agreed but not everyone will buy pirated media.
TinnEars is offline  
post #930 of 1363 Old 05-19-2014, 09:01 AM
Member
 
antoniobiz1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 135
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Liked: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobafetthotmail View Post

Congrats for your knowledge of google. The issue here is in the network infrastructure someone needs to pay for that theoretical 10 Gbit/second to actually hold true once it clears the servers. Providers overbook. They overbook their lines everywhere, and this leads to huge jams in case people starts really using that bandwitdh all together.  Example of 3G and 4G networks. They give large amount of theoretical bandwith, but since it's all overbooked at the moments most users are at home the connection is slower... guess why?

Nice snarky remark.

My point was that even if the cost to guarantee the required bandwidth was 5 times as high, it would still be 10 cents for a movie.
antoniobiz1 is online now  
Reply Latest Industry News

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off