Quote Originally Posted by E-Stat
Actually, it indicates what it indicates. Unlike you or I who gladly choose to pay extra, there remains a significant part of the video audience who remain happy buying DVDs. The studios obviously agree with that assessment or they wouldn't continue to release all the latest blockbusters in both formats.
Yes, and the audience that is buying DVD's is shrinking yearly. As far as you statement about the studios agreeing with your assesment, you have no idea what the studio agree with, you don't work for one(I do), you never have, nor will you ever. As I have told you before, the buzz around Hollywood is that there is less than two more years of support left for DVD at the current rate of disc sale losses, that is the assessment of the studios, not what you state. Secondly, I guess the concept of the transitional window completely escapes you. When DVD came to market, for a few years the lastest blockbuster were released on both VHS and DVD, but that came to a halt in about four years when VHS sales dropped below 50% of total home release sales.


Except of course for Avatar, which happens to be the topic of this thread. Let's review what the article says, shall we?

" For the Earth Day release, the single-disc version of "Avatar" will have a suggested retail price of $29.98 on DVD and $39.99 on Blu-ray. A source at Fox said the "shelf" prices at many retailers will be closer to $19.99 for the DVD and $29.99 for the Blu-ray."

The difference is ten bucks. I will agree that the shelf pricing will more realistic than list price where the differential is FIFTY PERCENT.
The accuracy of the article is in question when it comes to Amazon. Amazon lists Avatar's sales price at $25.00 for the Blu ray and DVD.

http://www.amazon.com/Avatar-Two-Dis...8969220&sr=1-1

It lists the DVD's price at $16.99.

http://www.amazon.com/Avatar-Sam-Wor...8969334&sr=1-3

This is real world pricing, not what the article states, and certainly not a ten dollar difference. You were foolish to use a article as support for your foolishness.


You are both preaching to the choir and completely missing my point. As for me, I couldn't care less if I get a DVD copy when I buy the higher resolution BR version.
Since the studios are not marketing directly and only to you, what you care about is irrelevant. Many folks love the fact they have the ability to view a copy on their HDTV's, and take a copy on the road to view on a PC or portable DVD player. That is why the studio include them.

I'm buying the better quality.
That is why you get the Blu ray.

For those who are not as quality sensitive, however, paying a FIFTY percent upcharge to get the BR version (DVD copy or not) may or may not seem reasonable to them.
Those who are not quality sensitive are probably not interested in Blu ray in the first place. This is not who the studios are marketing Blu ray to. Blu ray is for those who want the ultimate in viewing experience, and DVD is for those who don't own a Blu ray player yet. Two different consumers.


Agreed. A "big" percentage with a substantial percentage that is not. Such has nothing at all to do with my "two channel head". It is called observation.

rw
My goodness, another air sandwich. You sure do major in using words, but saying absolutely nothing. In the future, can you not major in minors?