The DVD Is Dying - Page 25 - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #721 of 1422 Old 09-05-2012, 01:32 AM
AVS Special Member
 
losservatore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,257
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 271 Post(s)
Liked: 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by losservatore View Post

I also use streaming since 2009 no cable at all,I understand,But I also love to watch bd movies at 1080p/24hz, streaming for me is my every day tv entertainment is like cable to me , But I also enjoy watching bd movies, I own over 100 bd movies, The ones that I own are the top rate picture and audio quality bds,I understand that there is a huge list of crappy bd movies out there that don't worth spending the money and Im aware of that.Im also aware that there is a lot of hdx movies that looks even better than the bd versions.

That's a shame isn't it - low quality BDs. Especially when BD's advertising slogan used to be "Blu-ray Disc . . . Beyond High Definition" biggrin.gif


Yes it is, There are people that just buy every bd that they see on walmart for 7 dollars so they can impress eek.gif people with their huge collection of crappy (((blue rays)))

I always use this site before I buy my bds http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/top.php?show=userrating

Panasonic 65VT60 / Marantz SR7005 / Marantz UD7007 /2 PSA XS30 /Revel Performa3 F206 / Revel Performa3 C205 / Revel Surrounds/Sonos Connect/ Roku 3 / Amazon Fire tv / Xbox One / HTPC / Darbee 5000.
losservatore is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #722 of 1422 Old 09-05-2012, 07:26 AM
AVS Special Member
 
J_Palmer_Cass's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,475
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 277 Post(s)
Liked: 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by J_Palmer_Cass View Post

In the context of the reason why DVD / Bluray sales and rentals are down, I suspect that most people will refuse to buy or rent a movie based on simple "subjective" criteria.

Not at all. People are just not buying like they used it. Even the blockbuster movies aren't doing the sales numbers (units sold) that they did back in 2006 and 2007. Lionsgate was boasting about The Hunger Game's first weekend sales; 3.8 million units (DVD and BD) sold. Many DVDs of very succesful movies did 5 million or more their first weekend's sales.

Then rentals are up (number of transactions) but the revenue is down due to their reduced cost.


Ignoring content for the moment, what was the early release pricing strategy in 2006 / 2007 and what is the early release pricing strategy in 2012. The blockbuster movie selection was pretty good in 2006 / 2007, and going by what I purchased back then in early release most all the blockbuster movies that I purchased were priced as "loss leaders".

I don't seem to see the same "loss leader" pricing for early releases these days. In addition, the number of retail outlets handling DVD / Bluray sales will also affect the number of units being shipped "early on".

That being said, I did catch some Fox MOD "early release" DVD's at Amazon for under $11 each. They were only "cheap" for a few days.

If you go back to that thread that you linked to earlier, early on there are a few charts of the number of DVD releases listed by year. Based of a quick look it seems like there is a strong link between the number of total releases per year and the number of units sold per year. It seems like after a few years of availability, those who own them have them and sales fall. The number of annual releases seems to be a leading indicator of future sales.

Like I said, my library if fairly full but my "must buy when available" list is getting smaller and smaller each year. I also do have some unopended DVDs hanging around, but I will get around to watching them some day.






Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by J_Palmer_Cass View Post

If the movie looks like a bore or if you already own it on DVD, you most likely will not buy / rent the bluray version of the same movie. A restored movie may be worth a new buy, but if it is not worth watching more than once who cares about it!

I believe I touched on this early in the thread - that consumers have realized that looking at their collections, they have so many unopened movies and movies they have only watched once. The bigger you collection gets - the more this happens. So they no longer impulse buy. They turn to renting instead.



Speaking of impulse buys, it's kind of hard to find a decent selection of DVD's and Bluray's at retail stores. I used to poke around in retail stores in the past, but now there is pretty much no where to go to poke around for an "impulse buy". Same goes for CD purchases.

These days I put my DVD / Bluray purchases in my Amazon cart, then I wait for the sale. No sale pricing most likely means "no sale", but that is not a firm rule. I purchased The Egyptian DVD this summer for around $23, and it is quite a bit more expensive these days.

I will probably break "loss leader sale" rule for the new Batman movie when it is released this December. However, I will not pay a premium for that movie.
J_Palmer_Cass is offline  
post #723 of 1422 Old 09-05-2012, 07:35 AM
AVS Special Member
 
J_Palmer_Cass's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,475
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 277 Post(s)
Liked: 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by losservatore View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulpa View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by losservatore View Post

Im really sorry I don't have any intention to offend,I will repeat Im honestly sorry, we are talking about picture quality here, either streaming or blue rays but also equipment have a point here.but okay I will stop if that feels uncomfortable to you.Is just a constructive critic.

It's okay, I'm not mad. I'm just telling you that I don't need a full on 1080p set to appreciate blu-ray, or that my equipment is the reason I stream.

I know what blu-ray is capable of. I would still stream even on a 1080p set. (And I never said I didn't watch blu-rays.)


Like I said, I know you were trying to imply that I prefer streaming because I can't appreciate full blu-ray quality, and I just disagree. That is not the reason I use streaming. I do it for the convenience and the availability of certain titles.

Same reason Lee knows about Ultraviolet, even though he doesn't own any UV movies. You don't need to own something to know how things work and where tech is headed.


I also use streaming since 2009 no cable at all,I understand,But I also love to watch bd movies at 1080p/24hz, streaming for me is my every day tv entertainment is like cable to me , But I also enjoy watching bd movies, I own over 100 bd movies, The ones that I own are the top rate picture and audio quality bds,I understand that there is a huge list of crappy bd movies out there that don't worth spending the money and Im aware of that.Im also aware that there is a lot of hdx movies that looks even better than the bd versions.




How many of those Blurays were replacements for a DVD copy? Ball park numbers are fine. What did you do with the old DVD if the Bluray was a replacement?

Nearly all of my DVD's playback at 1080 24P, with some doing 1080 60P. If the original print is good quality, then the DVD looks just fine.

As far as hdx movies looking better than the bluray version, most likely that means that detail is being lost in the hdx copy.
J_Palmer_Cass is offline  
post #724 of 1422 Old 09-05-2012, 08:12 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ack_bk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Maple Grove, MN
Posts: 8,841
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by losservatore View Post

Im really sorry I don't have any intention to offend,I will repeat Im honestly sorry, we are talking about picture quality here, either streaming or blue rays but also equipment have a point here.but okay I will stop if that feels uncomfortable to you.Is just a constructive critic.

I think it is relevant to the conversation and should be discussed. For my 32", 42" HDTV, Netflix and Amazon streaming are much more tolerable. And it is mostly used by the kids and they really don't care about PQ/AQ.

On our 125" 1080p 3D screen from 12' away, Netflix SVOD looks like bad VHS and HD often looks worse than DVD to me. Amazon is the same. iTunes HD is okay and tolerable. Vudu HDX is solid. Blu-Ray is typically the best option.

Quality matters to me. I spent a lot of time and money building my theater area and on my equipment, so my wants may be different than somebody who is sitting 8+ ft away from a 42-50" 720p TV.

My son is really enjoying 3D now, and we have had a blast hosting some movie parties at our house for him and his friends to watch a 3D movie. A heck of a lot cheaper than the theater and way more fun to do it from the comfort of your own home.
ack_bk is offline  
post #725 of 1422 Old 09-05-2012, 08:14 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Tulpa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 10,026
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by J_Palmer_Cass View Post


As far as hdx movies looking better than the bluray version, most likely that means that detail is being lost in the hdx copy.

Or the blu-ray had a bad transfer and the HDX copy didn't. Which happens (and more likely than you'd think.)

And so what if detail is being lost? If it looks better, it looks better. Sometimes overly sharp images look like utter crap.

Don't believe everything on the Interwebz! A duck's quack DOES echo!
Tulpa is offline  
post #726 of 1422 Old 09-05-2012, 08:19 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Tulpa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 10,026
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by ack_bk View Post

I think it is relevant to the conversation and should be discussed. For my 32", 42" HDTV, Netflix and Amazon streaming are much more tolerable. And it is mostly used by the kids and they really don't care about PQ/AQ.
On our 125" 1080p 3D screen from 12' away, Netflix SVOD looks like bad VHS and HD often looks worse than DVD to me. Amazon is the same. iTunes HD is okay and tolerable. Vudu HDX is solid. Blu-Ray is typically the best option..

I think this illustrates the difference between HT enthusiasts and the masses. Most people are like your kids. They're watching on 42" screens (or smaller.) They want decent PQ, but not necessarily super sharp BD quality (AQ they're fine with stereo.) They don't have 125" screens (which, btw, is large even by HT standards.) In your case, yeah, blu-ray would probably be the option you'd go for, and probably give a tad more effort to getting the discs to get t he reward.

It is interesting that VUDU is solid for you. And encouraging.

Don't believe everything on the Interwebz! A duck's quack DOES echo!
Tulpa is offline  
post #727 of 1422 Old 09-05-2012, 09:08 AM
AVS Special Member
 
J_P_A's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: L.A. - Lower Alabama
Posts: 4,172
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 283 Post(s)
Liked: 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by J_Palmer_Cass View Post

.............Do people really need another copy of Lord of the Rings?
........

Easy now, everybody calm down! Let's not say something we can't take back, okay! biggrin.gif

I realize I'm speaking from a small market segment, but as a satellite internet customer, streaming is no longer an option. When I had wired broadband, we streamed quite a bit of content, but it was primarily TV shows. For a movie, we go back to physical media the vast majority of the time. When I see this topic pop up, I always wonder how much potential revenue the industry would be giving up by going to a streaming only model. How much of the country is without broadband capable of supporting streaming media either due to data caps or speed. According to one article, 94% of Americans have broadband access (that still leaves 19 million people without, and that's a lot of potential movie sales), but some of those with broadband still can't stream a movie. DSL in neighboring areas here is too slow for streaming. I know it's been mentioned before in this thread, but I would be surprised if more ISP's don't start implementing data caps.

Ultimately, the death of DVD will be a financial decision, but I wonder how many potential sales the distributors are willing to write off before making that step?

Dude, are you made of leprechauns? Cause that was awesome!

The Plains Theater Has Begun
J_P_A is offline  
post #728 of 1422 Old 09-05-2012, 09:12 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Tulpa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 10,026
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by J_P_A View Post

Ultimately, the death of DVD will be a financial decision, but I wonder how many potential sales the distributors are willing to write off before making that step?

They do it from a cost benefit analysis. So it's not like it's a whim choice on their part. It's possible that a shrinking market could result in the determination that a smaller streaming market is more profitable than a larger disc market. Who knows yet?

19 million without broadband. Is keeping discs alive for them profitable? Or would it be a financial drain? Yes, they already have the infrastructure to distribute, but it's subsidized by a market that was huge in the early 00s but is shrinking now. Can 19 million sustain current DVD production, even scaled back?

Also, if they don't have broadband, they may not have a blu-ray player, as many features and firmware updates for them are coming over broadband.

Is there an alternative physical format that is cheaper (SD cards, etc.)? That's what they would look at.

Don't believe everything on the Interwebz! A duck's quack DOES echo!
Tulpa is offline  
post #729 of 1422 Old 09-05-2012, 09:36 AM
AVS Special Member
 
J_P_A's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: L.A. - Lower Alabama
Posts: 4,172
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 283 Post(s)
Liked: 267
Agreed.

It would be interesting to find the stats on the number of users with "broadband" that will not support streaming media. I know there are subdivisions near my home that the infrastructure was not designed to support the density of homes at today's data consumption rates. So these people are paying for broadband that isn't fast enough to download/stream a movie between 6 and 10 in the evening. Part of my subdivision has DSL, but the ISP refuses to add anyone else because of the number of complaints regarding the speed. My neighbors tell me it's like having dial-up again.

Dude, are you made of leprechauns? Cause that was awesome!

The Plains Theater Has Begun
J_P_A is offline  
post #730 of 1422 Old 09-05-2012, 09:41 AM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulpa View Post

They do it from a cost benefit analysis. So it's not like it's a whim choice on their part. It's possible that a shrinking market could result in the determination that a smaller streaming market is more profitable than a larger disc market. Who knows yet?
19 million without broadband. Is keeping discs alive for them profitable? Or would it be a financial drain? Yes, they already have the infrastructure to distribute, but it's subsidized by a market that was huge in the early 00s but is shrinking now. Can 19 million sustain current DVD production, even scaled back?
Also, if they don't have broadband, they may not have a blu-ray player, as many features and firmware updates for them are coming over broadband.
Is there an alternative physical format that is cheaper (SD cards, etc.)? That's what they would look at.

The studios supported LD with just 1 to 2 million households having an LD player. But LD was primarily a buy only format. Would they support a market size of 19 million? If they too were primarily buying households and not renting households, IMO yes - no problem.

The studios continued to support VHS when the revenue gained from it was just $1.5B (2005) but at the same time they were getting $22.8B from DVD so that may not be a valid comparison. The following year - 2006 when Hollywood stopped supporting VHS, the total VHS revenue was $200 million.

I don't think it has been mentioned before in this thread - the costs and effort to create a transfer are spread across numerous revenue streams and not just the HV market. The studios make TONS of money licensing their content to Television. Last estimate I saw was in the neighborhood of $12+ billion a year.
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #731 of 1422 Old 09-05-2012, 09:46 AM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
I don't know where that 94% number came from. According to this report from Q3 2011, the USA had 81% of it's households on Broadband:

http://gigaom.com/broadband/global-broadband-zooms-us-penetration-is-over-80-percent/
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #732 of 1422 Old 09-05-2012, 09:49 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Tulpa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 10,026
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

The studios supported LD with just 1 to 2 million households having an LD player. But LD was primarily a buy only format.

They also tended to be somewhat affluent households. With $40 and up per disc prices (in 80s dollars.) I'm sure that added up.

The 19 million without broadband, not to stereotype anyone, but I suspect they wouldn't be in the upper income levels. But I also haven't seen disc buying demographics cross referenced with income, either. Do lower income levels tend to buy or rent more?

Don't believe everything on the Interwebz! A duck's quack DOES echo!
Tulpa is offline  
post #733 of 1422 Old 09-05-2012, 09:56 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ack_bk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Maple Grove, MN
Posts: 8,841
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulpa View Post

They do it from a cost benefit analysis. So it's not like it's a whim choice on their part. It's possible that a shrinking market could result in the determination that a smaller streaming market is more profitable than a larger disc market. Who knows yet?
19 million without broadband. Is keeping discs alive for them profitable? Or would it be a financial drain? Yes, they already have the infrastructure to distribute, but it's subsidized by a market that was huge in the early 00s but is shrinking now. Can 19 million sustain current DVD production, even scaled back?
Also, if they don't have broadband, they may not have a blu-ray player, as many features and firmware updates for them are coming over broadband.
Is there an alternative physical format that is cheaper (SD cards, etc.)? That's what they would look at.
Quote:
Originally Posted by J_P_A View Post

Agreed.
It would be interesting to find the stats on the number of users with "broadband" that will not support streaming media. I know there are subdivisions near my home that the infrastructure was not designed to support the density of homes at today's data consumption rates. So these people are paying for broadband that isn't fast enough to download/stream a movie between 6 and 10 in the evening. Part of my subdivision has DSL, but the ISP refuses to add anyone else because of the number of complaints regarding the speed. My neighbors tell me it's like having dial-up again.

I think the CD market is a good barometer. The death of CD has been predicted for a very long time, yet this is the first year digital revenue finally surpassed physical revenue for music. I don't see studios in a hurry to kill off CD because it is still mainstream and nearly every home and automobile has a CD player. Optical disc is similar. So many people have DVD/BD libraries and multiple players (including in their car and portable players). Factor in collectors who still may want that physical copy with artwork, extras, etc and then folks who don't have broadband or a high enough speed, and then folks that are simply not interested in buying/renting movies digitally (old fashioned) and then of course retailers who still want you to sell a movie in the store/online and I believe you have a situation where some sort of physical media will be in demand enough where the studios and retailers can make money.

DVD/BD is most likely going to remain that physical medium for quite some time as the infrastructure and players are already there to support it. If digital looks to be more of a rental platform than an ownership platform studios will most likely ling to optical disc as long as they possibly can.
ack_bk is offline  
post #734 of 1422 Old 09-05-2012, 09:58 AM
AVS Special Member
 
49Merc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: North Texas
Posts: 1,132
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulpa View Post

They also tended to be somewhat affluent households. With $40 and up per disc prices (in 80s dollars.) I'm sure that added up.
The 19 million without broadband, not to stereotype anyone, but I suspect they wouldn't be in the upper income levels. But I also haven't seen disc buying demographics cross referenced with income, either. Do lower income levels tend to buy or rent more?

IMO, lower income households share disc's, rent at lowest cost and purchase from bargin bins. Keep in mind that a % of the population with average and above income live in scenic countryside where broadband HS is not available.

MY EQUIPMENT
Sony HDTV KDL-46HX750
Denon AVR 1912
DirecTV HD DVR HR24 & AM21N OTA Receiver
Panasonic HD DVD DMP-BD65 & Toshiba HD DVR A20
Infinity Alpha Series Speakers - 50's (2), 20's (2), 10's (2), 37c (1) & Velodyne Subwoofer
Panamax M4300-PM Power Center
Monoprice Cables & Harmony One Remote
49Merc is offline  
post #735 of 1422 Old 09-05-2012, 09:59 AM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulpa View Post

They also tended to be somewhat affluent households. With $40 and up per disc prices (in 80s dollars.) I'm sure that added up.
The 19 million without broadband, not to stereotype anyone, but I suspect they wouldn't be in the upper income levels. But I also haven't seen disc buying demographics cross referenced with income, either. Do lower income levels tend to buy or rent more?

This link has some info though it's from 2009:

http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/consumer/dvd-kiosks-signal-shift-in-home-movie-viewing-renting-and-buying/
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #736 of 1422 Old 09-05-2012, 10:03 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Tulpa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 10,026
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by 49Merc View Post

Keep in mind that a % of the population with average and above income live in scenic countryside where broadband HS is not available.

Yeah, but I suspect the majority of the upper class have access to broadband somewhere. Some also tend to own more than one residence.

Most middle class live in the 'Burbs and (increasingly in the past few years) in the central cities, sort of a reverse urban flight.

I don't think that those who live in rural areas without broadband should be ignored, but the main markets are in cities. Pretty much always have been.
49Merc likes this.

Don't believe everything on the Interwebz! A duck's quack DOES echo!
Tulpa is offline  
post #737 of 1422 Old 09-05-2012, 10:05 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mgkdragn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Illinois, East of St Louis
Posts: 10,870
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 329 Post(s)
Liked: 684
DSL providers are notorious for capping bandwidth in a neighborhood .. and peak usage times usually have these choke points ..

The sad part is, this problem could be eliminated with companies spending some money on infrastucture

My DSL business connection at my office is much more consistent than my home Cable connection ..

Uncle Willie


Oddball: Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?
mgkdragn is offline  
post #738 of 1422 Old 09-05-2012, 10:06 AM
AVS Special Member
 
J_Palmer_Cass's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,475
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 277 Post(s)
Liked: 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by J_P_A View Post

Agreed.

It would be interesting to find the stats on the number of users with "broadband" that will not support streaming media. I know there are subdivisions near my home that the infrastructure was not designed to support the density of homes at today's data consumption rates. So these people are paying for broadband that isn't fast enough to download/stream a movie between 6 and 10 in the evening. Part of my subdivision has DSL, but the ISP refuses to add anyone else because of the number of complaints regarding the speed. My neighbors tell me it's like having dial-up again.


I just checked my DSL speed with the Verizon internet speed test. 1.018 Mbps download and .385 Mbps upload speed at the time of the test. Not sure if that is fast enough for steaming video.

Streaming download bit rates vary, so all streaming is not created equal.

I think I checked Shooter standard definition on Amazon and these were the bit rates that were listed. 300 Kbps, 600 Kbps, 900 Kbps and 1.2 Mbps. All are 480 P with only 2 channel audio. As a comparison PC downloads have 5.1 audio.
J_Palmer_Cass is offline  
post #739 of 1422 Old 09-05-2012, 10:09 AM
AVS Special Member
 
J_P_A's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: L.A. - Lower Alabama
Posts: 4,172
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 283 Post(s)
Liked: 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Stewart View Post

I don't know where that 94% number came from. According to this report from Q3 2011, the USA had 81% of it's households on Broadband:

Sorry, I should have linked to the article. I just Googled it and looked at the first hit.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2012/0824/Got-broadband-Access-now-extends-to-94-percent-of-Americans

I wonder if the difference in the statistics is based on the actual speed? Advertised broadband reaches 94% but users with actual broadband speed is only 81% perhaps?

In either case, that's a lot of potential BD and DVD sales/rentals
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulpa View Post

They also tended to be somewhat affluent households. With $40 and up per disc prices (in 80s dollars.) I'm sure that added up.
The 19 million without broadband, not to stereotype anyone, but I suspect they wouldn't be in the upper income levels. But I also haven't seen disc buying demographics cross referenced with income, either. Do lower income levels tend to buy or rent more?

Certainly some of these areas with no broadband are rural, low income areas where it doesn't make sense to run fiber for 10 miles to pick up one house. However, the other aspect of this is densely packed sub-divisions where the broadband isn't fast enough. Of which there are several mid-to-upper income examples in my area. As a disclaimer, my information is based on speaking with the local rep for ATT and Charter about getting broadband to my home. It's possible they were giving me the "You're not the only one with sucky internet" speech, but it sounds reasonable.

Dude, are you made of leprechauns? Cause that was awesome!

The Plains Theater Has Begun
J_P_A is offline  
post #740 of 1422 Old 09-05-2012, 10:09 AM
 
pds3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 231
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by J_Palmer_Cass View Post

I just checked my DSL speed with the Verizon internet speed test. 1.018 Mbps download and .385 Mbps upload speed at the time of the test. Not sure if that is fast enough for steaming video.
Streaming download bit rates vary, so all streaming is not created equal.
I think I checked Shooter standard definition on Amazon and these were the bit rates that were listed. 300 Kbps, 600 Kbps, 900 Kbps and 1.2 Mbps. All are 480 P with only 2 channel audio. As a comparison PC downloads have 5.1 audio.

Your download speed is rather dismal.
pds3 is offline  
post #741 of 1422 Old 09-05-2012, 10:10 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ack_bk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Maple Grove, MN
Posts: 8,841
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulpa View Post

I think this illustrates the difference between HT enthusiasts and the masses. Most people are like your kids. They're watching on 42" screens (or smaller.) They want decent PQ, but not necessarily super sharp BD quality (AQ they're fine with stereo.) They don't have 125" screens (which, btw, is large even by HT standards.) In your case, yeah, blu-ray would probably be the option you'd go for, and probably give a tad more effort to getting the discs to get t he reward.
It is interesting that VUDU is solid for you. And encouraging.
HT enthusiasts alone could probably justify a format that focuses on quality. Face it, the cost of owning large 1080p TV's and projectors have plummeted in years. My projector is less than a year old and supports 3D, 1080p. has high lumen output and cost under $1500. The cost of receivers and speakers have also plummeted. More and more people can experience 5.1/7.1 audio in there home on a 50"+ 1080p screen on a modest budget.

Many weeks we see the new release of a Blu-Ray combo pack that typically sells for $3-5 more than the DVD version sell 30-60% of the total copies sold on release week.
ack_bk is offline  
post #742 of 1422 Old 09-05-2012, 10:12 AM
AVS Special Member
 
J_P_A's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: L.A. - Lower Alabama
Posts: 4,172
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 283 Post(s)
Liked: 267
Quote:
Originally Posted by mgkdragn View Post

.....
The sad part is, this problem could be eliminated with companies spending some money on infrastructure
...... ..

I would guess they are more interested in making new customers than keeping their existing customers happy. Hence, they spend their money on adding infrastructure to new areas rather than updating existing equipment or running more lines.

Dude, are you made of leprechauns? Cause that was awesome!

The Plains Theater Has Begun
J_P_A is offline  
post #743 of 1422 Old 09-05-2012, 10:15 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ack_bk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Maple Grove, MN
Posts: 8,841
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 106
About 2.5 years ago we lived in the suburbs of Salt Lake City (so we are not talking the middle of nowhere here) and my only options were broadband over satellite of Qwest DSL that offered max connection speeds or around 1.5Mbps. That was it. Now I live near Minneapolis and can get 50Mbps-100Mbps easily, but it cost an arm and a leg. I am at 20Mbps and pay about $70 per month after all taxes and fees through Comcast. It ain't cheap. I think when I priced out 100Mbps service it came to around $150-160+ a month after all taxes and fees.
ack_bk is offline  
post #744 of 1422 Old 09-05-2012, 10:15 AM
 
Lee Stewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 19,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by J_P_A View Post

Sorry, I should have linked to the article. I just Googled it and looked at the first hit.
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2012/0824/Got-broadband-Access-now-extends-to-94-percent-of-Americans
I wonder if the difference in the statistics is based on the actual speed? Advertised broadband reaches 94% but users with actual broadband speed is only 81% perhaps?

Your link says that DSL is included. My link shows that 81% have an internet speed of better than 2 Mbps.

Can you stream with DSL?
Lee Stewart is offline  
post #745 of 1422 Old 09-05-2012, 10:17 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Tulpa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 10,026
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by ack_bk View Post

HT enthusiasts alone could probably justify a format that focuses on quality. Face it, the cost of owning large 1080p TV's and projectors have plummeted in years. My projector is less than a year old and supports 3D, 1080p. has high lumen output and cost under $1500. The cost of receivers and speakers have also plummeted. More and more people can experience 5.1/7.1 audio in there home on a 50"+ 1080p screen on a modest budget.
Many weeks we see the new release of a Blu-Ray combo pack that typically sells for $3-5 more than the DVD version sell 30-60% of the total copies sold on release week.

Oh, I don't deny that costs have come down for equipment, but there's other factors to consider. Most people don't want to put speakers up (wired or wireless.) Most people are content with TV speakers. Putting up a screen and a projector is not what most people want to do with their living rooms. Most don't have an extra room for a full on theater. In recent years the trend has been for "multi-use rooms" in homes, rather than rooms dedicated to one chore (like a theater/TV viewing room.) So even with the lowering costs, I don't see more people adopting all the gear we appreciate.

Seriously, I've had friends see my (modest) gear and say, "sound great. How do we get that sound without all the stuff?" They mean the speakers and the equipment rack. I tell them to invest in a soundbar.

I'm sure HT enthusiasts will get Blu-ray for years to come, and whatever 4K comes out on. But I think the industry itself will more likely cater to where the masses want to go, in streaming. Physical media will be served, but not really pushing the forefront like the DVD and early BD days.

It used to be that the enthusiasts and the masses used the same stuff. VCRs, standard TVs, etc., because the cost of the high end stuff was so far up that only the rich need apply. But as prices come down, the masses haven't necessarily adopted all the gear we cherish, for many of the reasons I listed above. Or they just don't watch movies enough to buy it. Or find the TV alone "good enough."

Don't believe everything on the Interwebz! A duck's quack DOES echo!
Tulpa is offline  
post #746 of 1422 Old 09-05-2012, 10:21 AM
AVS Special Member
 
J_P_A's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: L.A. - Lower Alabama
Posts: 4,172
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 283 Post(s)
Liked: 267
A quick Google search looks like 3 Mbs is about the minimum for SD streaming (give or take). For DSL, advertised speeds are likely different from actual, and while you can get DSL that's faster than that, you don't necessarily see it during peak hours. My neighbors for example, can't stream a movie on DSL due to the number of people connected.

Dude, are you made of leprechauns? Cause that was awesome!

The Plains Theater Has Begun
J_P_A is offline  
post #747 of 1422 Old 09-05-2012, 10:24 AM
AVS Special Member
 
ack_bk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Maple Grove, MN
Posts: 8,841
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Liked: 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulpa View Post

Oh, I don't deny that costs have come down for equipment, but there's other factors to consider. Most people don't want to put speakers up (wired or wireless.) Most people are content with TV speakers. Putting up a screen and a projector is not what most people want to do with their living rooms. Most don't have an extra room for a full on theater. In recent years the trend has been for "multi-use rooms" in homes, rather than rooms dedicated to one chore (like a theater/TV viewing room.) So even with the lowering costs, I don't see more people adopting all the gear we appreciate.
Seriously, I've had friends see my (modest) gear and say, "sound great. How do we get that sound without all the stuff?" They mean the speakers and the equipment rack. I tell them to invest in a soundbar.
I'm sure HT enthusiasts will get Blu-ray for years to come, and whatever 4K comes out on. But I think the industry itself will more likely cater to where the masses want to go, in streaming. Physical media will be served, but not really pushing the forefront like the DVD and early BD days.
It used to be that the enthusiasts and the masses used the same stuff. VCRs, standard TVs, etc., because the cost of the high end stuff was so far up that only the rich need apply. But as prices come down, the masses haven't necessarily adopted all the gear we cherish, for many of the reasons I listed above. Or they just don't watch movies enough to buy it. Or find the TV alone "good enough."

What is Vudu HDX then? Who are they trying to cater to? Why do I see advertisements on DirecTV for PPV/VOD movies that have full 1080p and Blu-Ray quality? Why are so many people buying the more expensive Blu-Ray/combo pack release on release week vs the much cheaper DVD? Why do people buy a CD when the digital album or buying a couple of songs is usually cheaper?

I believe there is a market for people who want quality. If the studios can monetize it, they will.
ack_bk is offline  
post #748 of 1422 Old 09-05-2012, 10:24 AM
AVS Special Member
 
J_Palmer_Cass's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,475
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 277 Post(s)
Liked: 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by pds3 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by J_Palmer_Cass View Post

I just checked my DSL speed with the Verizon internet speed test. 1.018 Mbps download and .385 Mbps upload speed at the time of the test. Not sure if that is fast enough for steaming video.
Streaming download bit rates vary, so all streaming is not created equal.
I think I checked Shooter standard definition on Amazon and these were the bit rates that were listed. 300 Kbps, 600 Kbps, 900 Kbps and 1.2 Mbps. All are 480 P with only 2 channel audio. As a comparison PC downloads have 5.1 audio.

Your download speed is rather dismal.


As a comparison, what does your internet speed test out at?

If I want to pay for it, I can easily get higher speeds. Then you get into cost and benefits. Do you spend money on higher speed internet as well as pay for streaming content, or do you buy hard copies of the same content? You can buy a lot of OD content for the annual cost of the higher speed internet connection!

My brother sells automobiles, and he was kind of surprised that a lot of people expect to buy an automobile with a monthly cost that is less than the monthly cost of their phone bill!
J_Palmer_Cass is offline  
post #749 of 1422 Old 09-05-2012, 10:29 AM
AVS Special Member
 
J_Palmer_Cass's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,475
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 277 Post(s)
Liked: 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by ack_bk View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulpa View Post

Oh, I don't deny that costs have come down for equipment, but there's other factors to consider. Most people don't want to put speakers up (wired or wireless.) Most people are content with TV speakers. Putting up a screen and a projector is not what most people want to do with their living rooms. Most don't have an extra room for a full on theater. In recent years the trend has been for "multi-use rooms" in homes, rather than rooms dedicated to one chore (like a theater/TV viewing room.) So even with the lowering costs, I don't see more people adopting all the gear we appreciate.
Seriously, I've had friends see my (modest) gear and say, "sound great. How do we get that sound without all the stuff?" They mean the speakers and the equipment rack. I tell them to invest in a soundbar.
I'm sure HT enthusiasts will get Blu-ray for years to come, and whatever 4K comes out on. But I think the industry itself will more likely cater to where the masses want to go, in streaming. Physical media will be served, but not really pushing the forefront like the DVD and early BD days.
It used to be that the enthusiasts and the masses used the same stuff. VCRs, standard TVs, etc., because the cost of the high end stuff was so far up that only the rich need apply. But as prices come down, the masses haven't necessarily adopted all the gear we cherish, for many of the reasons I listed above. Or they just don't watch movies enough to buy it. Or find the TV alone "good enough."

What is Vudu HDX then? Who are they trying to cater to? Why do I see advertisements on DirecTV for PPV/VOD movies that have full 1080p and Blu-Ray quality? Why are so many people buying the more expensive Blu-Ray/combo pack release on release week vs the much cheaper DVD? Why do people buy a CD when the digital album or buying a couple of songs is usually cheaper?

I believe there is a market for people who want quality. If the studios can monetize it, they will.



Yes, but what is the bit rate is used for Direct TV? Saying that 1080 P is bluray quality is misleading. All of my DVDs playback at 1080P, but that does not mean they are bluray quality.
J_Palmer_Cass is offline  
post #750 of 1422 Old 09-05-2012, 10:30 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Tulpa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 10,026
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by ack_bk View Post

I believe there is a market for people who want quality. If the studios can monetize it, they will.

I didn't deny there was a market. I said as much in my post. Blu-ray will not go away for the HT enthusiast, or for those who want the best quality (at least for their TVs.) That's who VUDU is focusing on. (And those who just want to watch the occasional movie right this moment and not trek to a Redbox or wait for the BD to come in the mail from whereever.)

Niches exist, and it can be nice. Ask any laserdisc enthusiast. Do you think that them only being a fraction of the market diminished their enjoyment? Heck no. They were proud of their place and proud of their purchases.

But as I said, the industry which formerly focused on DVD and BD is going to shift to streaming. That's where they're going to put most of their focus, that's what is going to drive the industry. It's not the guy with the mondo home theater with the nice speakers and room treatment, it's the kid with the iPad, or the family with the 42" Smart TV with no surround sound, or the college kid who watches the latest blockbuster in his dorm in between COD4 playing. The majority of them will find streaming "enough."

Don't believe everything on the Interwebz! A duck's quack DOES echo!
Tulpa is offline  
Reply Movies, Concerts, and Music Discussion

Tags
Blu Ray Movies

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