Originally Posted by reanimator
You've compared sales figures from the first six months of UHD-BD to "The Avengers," a title that was released six years into BD's life-cycle -- when many more players were available, and market penetration was substantially higher. That's not perspective.
Honest perspective would be comparing sales figures from the first six months of BD's life-cycle. DEG has already done this, and UHD-BD is selling better than BD over the same launch period.
As I acknowledged earlier today, reanimator, you're absolutely right that to compare today's sales of movies on UHD BD with sales of a movie on 1080p BD, when the population of 1080p Blu-ray players had already spent 6 years growing to a huge number of players, was a very invalid comparison for me to make.
However, comparing the total number of movies sold on 1080p Blu-ray during that format's first 6 months on the market, with the total number of movies on UHD Blu-ray that sell in the new format's first 6 months is still not a very valid comparison. Because, back in 2006 when 1080p Blu-ray was introduced to the market, it already had another 1080p disc rival in the stores to compete with. And many consumers who found the Blu-ray concept to be appealing, still held off on buying into a new disc format until one format, or the other would emerge as the winner of the high def disc battle.
And as I mentioned in another post, the home theater/video review press and the members of it who wrote product reviews and test reports were mainly saying, for about the first 5 or 6 months that Blu-ray was on the market, that in their experience movies on HD-DVD tended to yield somewhat superior image quality compared to the Blu-ray movie releases that they were evaluating.
Some reviewers blamed Blu-ray's somewhat lackluster showing in its early months on rush jobs that were done in the remastering of movie transfers. But it also didn't help that the first available Blu-ray player, a $1,000 Samsung that hit the market in June of 2006, arrived in the hands of reviewers and consumers with a built in video noise filter, which not only softened the image of Blu-ray discs, but could not be turned off. I remember a few video reviewers savagely attacking that Samsung player as a failure and a lousy machine to use if a consumer ever wanted to see what Blu-ray was capable of.
If memory serves, it took Samsung a while to even admit its expensive Blu-ray player had a problem, and then several months to fix it.
Unfortunately for 1080p Blu-ray in 2006, the first 5 to 6 months of the life cycle of the new format also saw it being plagued by reports from video and home theater writers that stated that movies on HD-DVD were generally yielding more impressive image quality than was the case with Blu-ray movies, plus the fact that the ONLY Blu-ray player available to consumers for the first few months after Blu-ray hit the stores, was that expensive $1,000 Samsung BD player that the video press was labeling as "a turkey".
And another thing was that, not only did Toshiba's first 2 HD-DVD players beat Blu-ray to the market by 2 months, when they were introduced at Best Buy, and other stores, in April of 2006, but the lower priced of those Toshiba players retailed for $499.95, which was half the price of the Samsung BD player that introduced the public to Blu-ray, while being attacked by the video press after it finally came out in late June.
It really took the introduction of the $599.95 (with no discounts allowed) Sony Playstation 3 in November 2006 (November 17th, if memory serves) to finally allow Blu-ray to start turning things around and stop HD-DVD from kicking Blu-ray's ass
At least today, Joe consumer is not being asked to spend $1,000 on a disc player of questionable quality, that's getting bad reviews, and on top of that, his thousand buck investment might just end up going down the drain, if a competing disc format emerges victorious, pushing the format that Joe invested in, right off of the market. To an awful lot of people today, it has to feel a lot less risky to put their money on the only UHD disc format that the industry supports, rather than having to take the chance that they're betting their money on one of two formats, when only one is likely to survive for very long.
Also, throughout 2006 and most of 2007, American consumers were getting mixed signals about which of their favorite movies would ultimately end up being available on which format. Movie studio executives were not always staying loyal to the same formats. Of the 6 or 7 largest movie studios, only 3 or 4 of those studios seemed to be promising that the lion's share of the movies they made would be available on both high def disc formats, with the rest of the studios being about equally divided between only releasing movies on Blu-ray, or only releasing on HD-DVD. But there were various exceptions too, like a studio indicating that basically all of its movies would be available on both formats, with one exception being that a number of major hits that Steven Spielberg made with that studio, would only being issued on one format.
Anyway, it's easy to understand how confused most consumers in 2006 and 2007 were if trying to figure out which high def disc format was more likely to end up as the wiser choice for the long haul.
At the end of August of 2007, after having come into some money from an inheritance I bought our first high def TV (a 73 inch Mitsubishi Diamond Series DLP that was part of the store's first shipment of 2008 models) and decided to splurge by investing in BOTH high def disc formats, as well as an Integra receiver that was HDMI 3a capable.
Anyhow, before all of the electronics were even delivered and set up in early September 2007, I read that Paramount and Universal had just decided to support HD-DVD exclusively, and drop any further support for Blu-ray. I remember thinking that since my wife and I have no interest in video games, it looked like the Playstation 3 I'd bought would end up being a waste of money since the top of the line Toshiba HD-XA2 HD-DVD player, that I'd also bought, was getting some rave reviews for its ability to do a great upconversion job with standard def DVDs. So it looked like we wouldn't even be using the Playstation 3 to play movies from our 1400 disc DVD collection. Of course, within several months of Paramount's and Universal's announcements, things ended up reversing themselves (with a lot of lobbying "help" from Sony) and Blu-ray finally emerged as the winner over HD-DVD in Feb. 2008.
Anyway, reanimator, I think that you can certainly appreciate now why I think that comparing UHD Blu-ray's disc sales in the first 6 months of this new format, with the first 6 months of 1080p Blu-ray disc sales in 2006, after that format was introduced, is not a valid apples to apples comparison either.
Obviously today, people who are fans of having their movies on physical media have much less reason to be confused or nervous about a decision to invest $400 in a UHD BD player, than the much greater difficulty in deciding that potential supporters of Blu-ray faced in 2006, about whether they should take a chance on an expensive player for a format that could soon be obsolete, while not even knowing for sure which of their favorite movies that the Hollywood studios would even agree to release on that format.