-
Quote:
Originally Posted by L.J.
OK, so Blu-ray is up. But what exactly needs to happen for Blu-ray to win?
Don't think there's a clear answer to that. I would guess as more titles are available, and sales continue to grow in favor of Blu-Ray, there'll be less incentive for stores to use up shelf space on HD-DVD, especially redundant titles. And stores like BestBuy may start to lean one side too. It'll end relatively fast once the industry predicts a winner.
The studio's could determine it too if they bail on one side or the other - if HD-DVD lost a access to one of the big studio's there'd be little incentive to buy a format that only supported 25% of all movie releases.
Toshiba might pull out if running losses on hardware and typing up resources to support the effort is deemed to be a losing cause. The downside to the low pricing and off-brand hardware competition is a short time to recover costs. Toshiba's usually a very smart company that's not afriad to cut it's losses, rather than incur them indefinitely out of spite or denial (Sony). Their focus is the hardware, not the license fees itself, IMO.
Wooch has stated many times that a lot of industry folk believe HD-DVD was just a tool to extend DVD's life as much as possible. Could be. If someone blinks it'll definitely be Toshiba though.
In the end I think it really comes down to the market watching to see which player I buy. As it was with Beta, Laserdisc, and MiniDisc, the machine I pick will inevitably die with a whimper...
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groundbeef
The problem is, there don't appear to be very many people interested in the gaming side of the PS3. That was the beauty of the pricing structure of the high price stand-alone player, and the less expensive combo game machine/blu-ray player.
Again, I don't see how your logic adds up. Having a lower priced gaming console that could do Blu-ray just as well as a $1,000 standalone player was an absurd situation that did not help anybody aside from early adopters that got a pretty good bargain with a low priced Blu-ray player that could also play games.
The delays and supply shortages on the Blu-ray side ultimate screwed Sony, because I seriously doubt that they intended to introduce the PS3 less than three months after the Blu-ray format's introduction. Having expensive standalone players on the market is only a benefit to profit margins if lower cost alternatives don't exist yet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groundbeef
I never thought that standalone players would be more expensive than the PS3 indefinitely. But, I seriously doubt that Sony is thrilled that 5 months after release, Blu-Ray players are now priced less expenisvely than their beforementioned "Combo-Deal" PS3 Game/Movie player. Thats the point. Rember how Sony flogged the PS3 as a console with a inexpensive option to HD Movies. Well, now forget the combo, and go with the standalone player.
Again, I don't see how it hurts Sony to have a more sane price structure established in the market. Having the PS3 selling for as low as $500 could not have helped sales for Sony, Samsung, Panasonic, or Pioneer's more expensive Blu-ray players.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groundbeef
No, but Sony didn't spend several BILLION developing the standalone Blu-Ray player. Remeber, they spent it on the gaming console, that currently is in the crapper sales wise. So every unit they sold as a "movie" player helped prop up the gaming side. With the advent of lower priced stand alone players, this can only further depress sales of the console for conumers who would have bought a PS3 (even if ONLY for movies), and the occasional game.
Disagree here. I think that Blu-ray is a more important to Sony in the long run, otherwise they would not have tied the PS3 to the Blu-ray format in the first place. Remember that the markets for Blu-ray include all devices that use optical media, and the OEM market potential is huge. A gaming console might have a shelf life of 5 to 8 years, but if Blu-ray becomes the de facto optical media standard, Sony will have a licensing revenue stream that will pretty much run all the way until the patents expire.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groundbeef
I think you are right that it spurred the Blu-Ray brand ahead of HD-DVD, but thats not really the point. Sony isn't going to set the world on fire with a commodity product (thats where we are headed with both formats pretty quickly). Margins are depressed, and investments are going to take much longer to recoup than was ever expected. Studio support isn't really going to matter in the long run if Blu-Ray prices reach those of DVD's and the like. At that point most consumers will vote with their wallets. DVD's are cheaper, so they will buy them instead of Blu-Ray OR HD-DVD. Remeber, the HD movement was to SAVE the industry with higher margins, and better return.
Oh, I think that's totally the point. Establishing Blu-ray as the dominant HD movie format is only a part of the overall picture. Blu-ray is also battling HD-DVD on the PC side as well, and that format war is just beginning. Toshiba has already announced that HD-DVD drives will come with all of their laptop computers starting in 2008, Dell has restated its exclusive support for Blu-ray, and the rumors continue to churn about Apple adding Blu-ray support to their new models. Sony lost out on the DVD gravy train, and they were going to do whatever was necessary to establish Blu-ray, even if it cost them their market position on the gaming side.
Indeed the stated goal for creating these new disc formats was to maintain higher margins on the hardware side, that's the whole reason why you have a whole coalition of manufacturers supporting these formats. But, ultimately the most responsible party for commodifying the market has been Toshiba. They lost out on hardware support, they lost out on studio support, so the only card they have left to play is to push down the price points. Supposedly, Toshiba has been losing money on HD-DVD hardware from the outset, and I've been of the opinion all along that their entire objective for HD-DVD is to simply extend the DVD (where they hold most of the patents) as long as possible and force a dual format compromise of some kind. Their actions only serve to confirm this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groundbeef
Your missing the boat a bit on the Blu-Ray fortune. Sony doesn't need Blu-Ray to maintain its edge in the market place. Yes, it will be a nice feather in their cap, but again, the big money Sony has on the table is the PS3, and it is selling like electric heaters in the height of summer in the Death Valley.
And I think you're missing the big picture on what Blu-ray represents to Sony's fortunes. They've been making a decent profit with their electronics hardware, but more so than any other company out there, they are also about creating new media formats. They've had their fair share of flameouts in the market, but they've also created several that became ubiquitous standards. The degree to which they've invested themselves in Blu-ray indicates that the format is a huge part of their long-term objectives.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by L.J.
OK, so Blu-ray is up. But what exactly needs to happen for Blu-ray to win?
I had plans on getting an HD-DVD player but I'm still kinda on the fence with that and will probably hold out until the end of the year to see how things look at that time.
I think it's pretty simple. Blu-ray wins this format war if/when Universal goes neutral and starts releasing titles in both formats. I read on The Digital Bits that the Universal Home Video executive most responsible for the studio staying with HD-DVD has been forced out, and they predict that Universal will likely go neutral by early next year. That would give Blu-ray 100% support from the major studios, and leave HD-DVD still without titles from Fox, Disney, MGM, and Sony. Warner, Paramount, and Universal would likely continue to release HD-DVD titles, but no telling for how long.
No matter how cheap HD-DVD hardware prices go, no way that format can remain viable if Blu-ray attains complete major studio support. As Kex said, formats die more with a whimper, and it would just be a situation where fewer and fewer major releases come out in HD-DVD and then just one day stop with hardly anyone noticing.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woochifer
Again, I don't see how your logic adds up. Having a lower priced gaming console that could do Blu-ray just as well as a $1,000 standalone player was an absurd situation that did not help anybody aside from early adopters that got a pretty good bargain with a low priced Blu-ray player that could also play games.
The delays and supply shortages on the Blu-ray side ultimate screwed Sony, because I seriously doubt that they intended to introduce the PS3 less than three months after the Blu-ray format's introduction. Having expensive standalone players on the market is only a benefit to profit margins if lower cost alternatives don't exist yet.
The one major "draw" as you call it to the PS3 (and indeed I think you personally collected almost 6 figures in royalties alone from SONY for shilling the company line:ihih: ) is the integrated Blu-Ray player. Not required for gameplay, and one of the pricier parts of the machine that helped justify its out of this world price point. And while prices for the standalone player were touching $1000, it WAS a very attractive way to play HD movies, and what the heck pick up a game or 2. Now that advantage is gone.
As I pointed out before, Blu-Ray DOESN'T need the PS3 to survive as a (I'll even say excellent HD playback method). However, I think that you are dis-ingenouis to now try and seperate the importance of PS3 to Blu-Ray. That WAS the draw for many PS3 sales. Now the low price (relative) will draw the "Movie" fan away from the PS3. And as stated before 87,000 units in May is TERRIBLE. Considering the 360 sold about 135,000 units, (not very good IMHO either) the PS3 is lagging far behind. This will only hasten the movement to less units sold. That is my point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woochifer
Again, I don't see how it hurts Sony to have a more sane price structure established in the market. Having the PS3 selling for as low as $500 could not have helped sales for Sony, Samsung, Panasonic, or Pioneer's more expensive Blu-ray players. .
See above. It will not hurt the Blu-Ray sales (how could it?) but it will hurt Sony if it causes "Movie" people to abandon the PS3 Game/Movie player.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woochifer
Disagree here. I think that Blu-ray is a more important to Sony in the long run, otherwise they would not have tied the PS3 to the Blu-ray format in the first place. Remember that the markets for Blu-ray include all devices that use optical media, and the OEM market potential is huge. A gaming console might have a shelf life of 5 to 8 years, but if Blu-ray becomes the de facto optical media standard, Sony will have a licensing revenue stream that will pretty much run all the way until the patents expire. .
I'll give you partial credit for that answer. But for you to suggest that the PS3 is not more important in the immediate future would be a foolish mistake. Sony has invested FAR more into the PS3. And it is NOT paying off. Exclusive titles are migrating to other platforms (great for gamers, not for PS3), and sales are in the gutter. Every month that sales lag behind 360 (and the mighty Wii), the PS3 stands out as the overpriced, uninvited guest to the party. Not to mention that no games of interest are set to be released for about 4 months only reinforces that image.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woochifer
Oh, I think that's totally the point. Establishing Blu-ray as the dominant HD movie format is only a part of the overall picture. Blu-ray is also battling HD-DVD on the PC side as well, and that format war is just beginning. Toshiba has already announced that HD-DVD drives will come with all of their laptop computers starting in 2008, Dell has restated its exclusive support for Blu-ray, and the rumors continue to churn about Apple adding Blu-ray support to their new models. Sony lost out on the DVD gravy train, and they were going to do whatever was necessary to establish Blu-ray, even if it cost them their market position on the gaming side..
And PS3 was set to be the de-facto standard for gamers (Sony had hoped anyways). Don't forget licencing fees for games is a major source of income for SOA. And that is just not materializing. Perhaps they will prevail in getting Blu-Ray the standard. But being the standard, and getting people to buy are another thing. Remeber, the folks on this board tend to buy ahead of the curve. But for everyone of us, there are 100+ people thinking, why the heck do I need a "new-fangled DVD player, when I can get the Dukes of Hazzard for $13.00 versus $25.00 for the Blu-Ray?"
And if Toshiba can do that, it would be a pherric (sp) victory for Sony indeed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woochifer
Indeed the stated goal for creating these new disc formats was to maintain higher margins on the hardware side, that's the whole reason why you have a whole coalition of manufacturers supporting these formats. But, ultimately the most responsible party for commodifying the market has been Toshiba. They lost out on hardware support, they lost out on studio support, so the only card they have left to play is to push down the price points. Supposedly, Toshiba has been losing money on HD-DVD hardware from the outset, and I've been of the opinion all along that their entire objective for HD-DVD is to simply extend the DVD (where they hold most of the patents) as long as possible and force a dual format compromise of some kind. Their actions only serve to confirm this..
And why not for Toshiba. If they can be the fly in the ointment why not? Its like apple vs MS at this point. They are just sticking their finger in SONY's eye, and there really isn't that much SONY can do about it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woochifer
And I think you're missing the big picture on what Blu-ray represents to Sony's fortunes. They've been making a decent profit with their electronics hardware, but more so than any other company out there, they are also about creating new media formats. They've had their fair share of flameouts in the market, but they've also created several that became ubiquitous standards. The degree to which they've invested themselves in Blu-ray indicates that the format is a huge part of their long-term objectives.
Don't disagree with you there. But you seem all to eager to write off the PS3 as some sort of minor problem with a "standard". The PS3 is to be the "next" generation. And its not working out for them, and is a very expensive boat anchor at this point. They have sunk billions into this foray, and its not paying off.
-
Groundbeef: Think Wooch's point is that Sony's struggles with PS3 will likely have little effect going forward on the success of BluRay (though an unexpected come from behind win by HD-DVD could be helped by poor PS3 sales). You seem to keep redirecting the discussion to the "Sony's in trouble because PS3 sucks" route again...nobody's doubting that, but this thread's more about BluRay vs HD-DVD, not Sony vs. Microsoft/Nintendo.
Wooch: I think BluRay became as successful as DVD, it still wouldn't be nearly as important to Sony for the next several years as PS3. Every analyst I've asked seems to agree Sony's centered it's restructuring and plans for a return to profitability around PS3. Everything else just has to do its part and give the ball to PS3 was how it was explained to me. At least this is what they've been telling investors for a few years now.
That said, the predicted shortfall in units for the next year is already built into Sony's share price which continues to rally this year. Most investors who get these horrible sales figures every month still believe PS3's going to pick up steam in late 07 and early 08 as it starts to release a lot of highly anticipated games, and even a poor selling PS3 can turn a profit for them eventually (just not as much as they've been hoping for).
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by kexodusc
Groundbeef: Think Wooch's point is that Sony's struggles with PS3 will likely have little effect going forward on the success of BluRay (though an unexpected come from behind win by HD-DVD could be helped by poor PS3 sales). You seem to keep redirecting the discussion to the "Sony's in trouble because PS3 sucks" route again...nobody's doubting that, but this thread's more about BluRay vs HD-DVD, not Sony vs. Microsoft/Nintendo.
I agree. Couldn't agree more actually. I won't even dispute the fact that the PS3 undoubtably helped push Blu-Ray ahead of HD-DVD. Even Whooch was honking that horn a few posts back. My point is the new low price points for "Stand-Alone" players will only depress the PS3 market. This point seems to be lost on Whooch, who among others here and eleswhere sought to rationalize the high price of the PS3 by pointing out that it included a Blu-Ray player, that was significantly lower in price ($600 VS $1000+).
Now, all of the sudden it seems inconcievable that people that picked up the PS3 because of the price advantage will continue to do so just for the Blu-Ray? I doubt it. And the depressed sales #'s of the PS3 also point to the lack of support in the gaming community.
I wasn't trying to hi-jack the post, but just thought it may cause further erosion of the PS3 sales due to lack of price advantage vs stand-alone players.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kexodusc
Wooch: I think BluRay became as successful as DVD, it still wouldn't be nearly as important to Sony for the next several years as PS3. Every analyst I've asked seems to agree Sony's centered it's restructuring and plans for a return to profitability around PS3. Everything else just has to do its part and give the ball to PS3 was how it was explained to me. At least this is what they've been telling investors for a few years now.
That said, the predicted shortfall in units for the next year is already built into Sony's share price which continues to rally this year. Most investors who get these horrible sales figures every month still believe PS3's going to pick up steam in late 07 and early 08 as it starts to release a lot of highly anticipated games, and even a poor selling PS3 can turn a profit for them eventually (just not as much as they've been hoping for).
What he said...
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groundbeef
The one major "draw" as you call it to the PS3 (and indeed I think you personally collected almost 6 figures in royalties alone from SONY for shilling the company line:ihih: ) is the integrated Blu-Ray player. Not required for gameplay, and one of the pricier parts of the machine that helped justify its out of this world price point. And while prices for the standalone player were touching $1000, it WAS a very attractive way to play HD movies, and what the heck pick up a game or 2. Now that advantage is gone.
As I pointed out before, Blu-Ray DOESN'T need the PS3 to survive as a (I'll even say excellent HD playback method). However, I think that you are dis-ingenouis to now try and seperate the importance of PS3 to Blu-Ray. That WAS the draw for many PS3 sales. Now the low price (relative) will draw the "Movie" fan away from the PS3. And as stated before 87,000 units in May is TERRIBLE. Considering the 360 sold about 135,000 units, (not very good IMHO either) the PS3 is lagging far behind. This will only hasten the movement to less units sold. That is my point.
I guess it was only a matter of time until the shilling accusations came back ... :rolleyes: As kex pointed out, you're just trying to redirect this discussion into a gaming thread, which it is not.
Again, how does having a lower priced standalone Blu-ray player create problems for Blu-ray? Are you saying that Sony should have undercut DVD player prices when they introduced the PS2? A gaming console that includes more features than a standalone Blu-ray player SHOULD cost more, but the conflicting market issues with the Blu-ray and PS3 launches created a warped pricing structure at the outset.
Uh, disingenuous? :lol: I stated very clearly that the PS3 did its job in helping to create and maintain a market share advantage for Blu-ray, DESPITE being a market failure so far on the gaming side. The PS3 seeded the market for Blu-ray and held the studio support intact, but that does not mean that Blu-ray's fortunes are forevermore tied to the fate of the PS3, just as the DVD format and the PS2 both flourished even as the hardware price gap widened between the two devices and the DVD playback became a progressively less important feature for prospective PS2 buyers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groundbeef
And PS3 was set to be the de-facto standard for gamers (Sony had hoped anyways). Don't forget licencing fees for games is a major source of income for SOA. And that is just not materializing. Perhaps they will prevail in getting Blu-Ray the standard. But being the standard, and getting people to buy are another thing. Remeber, the folks on this board tend to buy ahead of the curve. But for everyone of us, there are 100+ people thinking, why the heck do I need a "new-fangled DVD player, when I can get the Dukes of Hazzard for $13.00 versus $25.00 for the Blu-Ray?"
And if Toshiba can do that, it would be a pherric (sp) victory for Sony indeed.
If Blu-ray becomes the standard, it won't matter if people choose to buy because the capability will be included in any number of devices as an OEM installation. Just as computers from 15 years ago all came with 3.5" floppy drives (a Sony standard), all came with CD drives (another Sony standard) from the mid-90s on, and all computers now come with DVD drives (a Toshiba standard), Sony's strategy obviously is to create that same kind of ubiquity with Blu-ray for the next decade. HD-DVD is the primary obstacle right now to that objective.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groundbeef
Don't disagree with you there. But you seem all to eager to write off the PS3 as some sort of minor problem with a "standard". The PS3 is to be the "next" generation. And its not working out for them, and is a very expensive boat anchor at this point. They have sunk billions into this foray, and its not paying off.
I've never denied that the PS3 has become problematic on the gaming side (doubtful at this point that Sony will ever recoup what it dumped into developing the Cell processor). But, remember that this discussion is about Blu-ray, and on that topic the PS3's fortunes right now are becoming less and less consequential to the fate of Blu-ray. As I stated previously, the PS3 can disappear from the market altogether tomorrow, and Blu-ray will continue to maintain a market advantage over HD-DVD, and will continue to make a bid towards becoming the new 5.25" optical media standard for all devices. Whether or not the format ultimately pans out is a different question, but the ultimate success or failure of Blu-ray as an overall format (not just as a means by which to playback HD movies) will not rest squarely on the shoulders of what happens with the PS3.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by kexodusc
Wooch: I think BluRay became as successful as DVD, it still wouldn't be nearly as important to Sony for the next several years as PS3. Every analyst I've asked seems to agree Sony's centered it's restructuring and plans for a return to profitability around PS3. Everything else just has to do its part and give the ball to PS3 was how it was explained to me. At least this is what they've been telling investors for a few years now.
That said, the predicted shortfall in units for the next year is already built into Sony's share price which continues to rally this year. Most investors who get these horrible sales figures every month still believe PS3's going to pick up steam in late 07 and early 08 as it starts to release a lot of highly anticipated games, and even a poor selling PS3 can turn a profit for them eventually (just not as much as they've been hoping for).
The irony here is that if not for the PS3, Sony would have had a banner year in 2006 because their consumer electronics and movie divisions had unexpectedly strong returns last year. When the PS3 was in development, their gaming division was the only standout performer in the company, while their consumer electronics, movie, and music divisions languished. Now that the PS3 is out, it's the other activities that are bailing out their now flagging gaming division.
An even further irony is that the PS2 sales have continued to hold up and outpace both the Xbox 360 and PS3. (nearly 200k in console sales last month alone) Sony's itching to pull the plug on the PS2, but still can't afford to do so. On the gaming side, Nintendo is about to lap the field.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woochifer
I guess it was only a matter of time until the shilling accusations came back ... :rolleyes: As kex pointed out, you're just trying to redirect this discussion into a gaming thread, which it is not.
Again, how does having a lower priced standalone Blu-ray player create problems for Blu-ray? Are you saying that Sony should have undercut DVD player prices when they introduced the PS2? A gaming console that includes more features than a standalone Blu-ray player SHOULD cost more, but the conflicting market issues with the Blu-ray and PS3 launches created a warped pricing structure at the outset.
Again, not trying to Hi-Jack the post. You have missed my point. The low price stand alone player will ONLY help the Blu-Ray standard. I was pointing out that it will (IMHO) have an impact on the PS3. For those that were buying the PS3 for the low-price (relative to standalone $1000 vs $600), there is NOT that incentive anymore. So, it would stand to reason that PS3 sales will continue to underperform now that "movie" buffs will be getting their Blu-Ray fix elsewhere.
Thats the only point I was making. The low price standalones are going to make the now more expensive PS3 less attractive as a movie player.
As for the "shilling", at this point I think its more tongue-in-cheek. I certainly am not without a bit of "shilling" for MS, any more than you of SONY.
PS. It's nice to see that lack of sleep has not taken the edge off your posts. I hope your new arrival is doing well.
-
I think there is one very important point that does not seem to be discussed here. Content protection. I think there are many people like me that won't buy either technology, no matter how inexpensive, if I can not get my favorite titles on disc. I still see arguements that the content providers are holding back on the block buster titles until sales reach a certain level. I think that is a bunch of hog wash. The studios number one concern has always been the pirating of their high resolution content. Until they can be assured that HDCP will work (which it won't) or some other copy protection scheme will, we will never see the true Block Busters released and this will be the eventual downfall of both technologies. Just look at SACD and DVD Audio. No real content and it has pretty much failed. Music industry is unwilling to remaster our favorite music and we are unwilling to change or life long acquired tastes for audio and video.
No winner will be determined until the content we want to watch becomes available and that may be never based on past scenarios.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by westcott
I think there is one very important point that does not seem to be discussed here. Content protection. I think there are many people like me that won't buy either technology, no matter how inexpensive, if I can not get my favorite titles on disc. I still see arguements that the content providers are holding back on the block buster titles until sales reach a certain level. I think that is a bunch of hog wash. The studios number one concern has always been the pirating of their high resolution content. Until they can be assured that HDCP will work (which it won't) or some other copy protection scheme will, we will never see the true Block Busters released and this will be the eventual downfall of both technologies. Just look at SACD and DVD Audio. No real content and it has pretty much failed. Music industry is unwilling to remaster our favorite music and we are unwilling to change or life long acquired tastes for audio and video.
No winner will be determined until the content we want to watch becomes available and that may be never based on past scenarios.
The only relevant point on content protection is that it's the primary reason that Fox has stuck with Blu-ray. Otherwise, it's not at all a major part of the discussion. Just look at what's happening in the market. Pretty much all of the "blockbuster" titles (i.e., the top grossing titles) from the past year have already come out on Blu-ray or HD-DVD, or have already been announced for release. So, I don't see where you're going with this "we will never see the true Block Busters released" argument.
The analogy to SACD/DVD-A is very short-sighted because unlike with the record companies' at best tepid support of high res audio, the movie studios have been on board with Blu-ray and/or HD-DVD from the outset and begun releasing their major titles concurrently with the DVD versions. Concurrent SACD or DVD-A releases were very rare (the latest releases from Fleetwood Mac and Donald F*gan are the only ones I can think of that got concurrent high res releases).
And what drives both the music and home video markets is the new releases, not remasters of catalog titles. The problem with SACD and DVD-A was not the absence of "real" content, but the absence of CURRENT content. Contrast that with Blu-ray and HD-DVD, where concurrent title releases with the DVD versions are rapidly becoming the norm.
Personally, I think the winner in the Blu-ray/HD-DVD format war will inevitably be Blu-ray. But, whether or not the format succeeds will depend on whether or not it can successfully supplant the DVD as the primary viewing format -- and whether or not that will happen is very much open to question.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woochifer
The only relevant point on content protection is that it's the primary reason that Fox has stuck with Blu-ray. Otherwise, it's not at all a major part of the discussion. Just look at what's happening in the market. Pretty much all of the "blockbuster" titles (i.e., the top grossing titles) from the past year have already come out on Blu-ray or HD-DVD, or have already been announced for release. So, I don't see where you're going with this "we will never see the true Block Busters released" argument.
You consider the recent releases BlockBusters? I would not spend one red penny on any of them. And my sentiment can be reflected in the overall drop in revenue over the years for the studios at the big screen. The only movie that has come out in the last five years I would consider spending $30 a disc or going to the big screen for would be The Lord of the Rings. Are you telling me that the Indiana Jones series, Star Wars, or Harry Potter would not sell? Or any of the other top 100 movies of all time?
Your viewpoint is much like the music industrys. They made the same assumptions and look where SACD and DVD Audio is now.
Copy protection is far more relevant than you give credit for. The studios may not want to admit it but a whole lot of money and effort has been spent cramming HDMI\HDCP down our throats for it not to have consideable merit.
You can not sell hardware without content and that is the bottom line.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by westcott
You consider the recent releases BlockBusters? I would not spend one red penny on any of them. And my sentiment can be reflected in the overall drop in revenue over the years for the studios at the big screen. The only movie that has come out in the last five years I would consider spending $30 a disc or going to the big screen for would be The Lord of the Rings. Are you telling me that the Indiana Jones series, Star Wars, or Harry Potter would not sell? Or any of the other top 100 movies of all time?
And your sentiment ignores what drives the home video industry -- the new releases. Catalog releases of classic titles do not dominate the sales and rental charts simply because they have already come out in other formats.
Like I said, if the studios were as obsessed with copy protection as you say they are, why would they already be releasing the titles with the most revenue potential on Blu-ray and HD-DVD? Maybe because they are out to make a buck? :idea: Your argument seems to be that studios are more concerned about piracy than they are about generating revenue. I would argue that when/if Blu-ray and HD-DVD reach a certain critical mass in the installed user base, you will see a flood of catalog releases.
Even if you don't buy discs for yourself, what do you think the video rental outlets are stocking? The titles where the most copies of an individual title get stocked are the new releases.
Your argument was about "blockbuster" titles -- what would you call the top grossing movies from any given year? Doesn't matter what you would buy for yourself. All that matters in the argument you're forwarding is what the market decides, and on that point your issue with copy protection is just a sidebar discussion since copy protection has already been built into the Blu-ray and HD-DVD formats.
And your assumptions about studio revenue are flat out wrong. While there has been a dropoff in movie theater ticket sales (which has rebounded last year and this year), the studio revenue has been consistently on an upward growth trajectory. This is largely due to the DVD and the dramatic shift in consumer behavior where more people now choose to purchase new releases rather than just rent them (the old pricing structure under VHS was not geared towards purchases of new releases) or even seeing them at the theater.
Quote:
Originally Posted by westcott
Your viewpoint is much like the music industrys. They made the same assumptions and look where SACD and DVD Audio is now.
Did you even read my post?
Again, the music industry support for SACD and DVD-A was half-hearted at best. If they were at all committed to those formats, they would have standardized their release schedules to include concurrent SACD and/or DVD-A releases. That never happened. In contrast, the movie studios have already integrated Blu-ray and HD-DVD into their release schedules.
Quote:
Originally Posted by westcott
Copy protection is far more relevant than you give credit for. The studios may not want to admit it but a whole lot of money and effort has been spent cramming HDMI\HDCP down our throats for it not to have consideable merit.
And since they've already got the copy protection in place, what's to stop them from now issuing content, aside from the market considerations that you claim are "hogwash"?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woochifer
And since they've already got the copy protection in place, what's to stop them from now issuing content, aside from the market considerations that you claim are "hogwash"?
The copy protection has already been circumvented on both formats. Granted the workaround is rather clunky right now, but it will be MUCH more prevelant once a standard gets chosen by the consumer.
Think about it, as piddily as the base is now, the gates are open for copy protection circumvention. So I don't really think that copy protection is the main safeguard that switching formats will provide.
Now consumers just need to be shown that they have a need for HD movies.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groundbeef
Now consumers just need to be shown that they have a need for HD movies.
With CC and BB both displaying 72+" 1080p sets with sample Blu-ray DVD's everyday, they may decide that on their own. I know I need one. Or two.
-
The Motion Picture Association reports that in 2005, U.S. admissions were down almost 9%, continuing a downward trend from 2004. International box office revenues decreased 8% in 2005, with a 14% decrease in Canada and 13% decrease in Europe/MiddleEast/Africa.
One year of a previous three year downward trend is not significant and people would still rather rent a disc then go to a theater and pay ridiculous prices for mediocre content.
The current movie industry business model is not working and the downward trend, in spite of almost exponential population growth is a perfect measure of its lack of success.
All the technology in the world is not going to force people to buy or rent content they do not care for. IMO, the safe bet is to sell the classic movies that dominate the rental archives of NetFlix and Blockbuster. And without releasing the proven performers like I mentioned above due to piracy concerns will only slow or stop the growth of HD discs and their associated players.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by westcott
The Motion Picture Association reports that in 2005, U.S. admissions were down almost 9%, continuing a downward trend from 2004. International box office revenues decreased 8% in 2005, with a 14% decrease in Canada and 13% decrease in Europe/MiddleEast/Africa.
And in 2006, you had a rebound in box office revenues, and this rebound has continued so far into 2007.
Quote:
Originally Posted by westcott
One year of a previous three year downward trend is not significant and people would still rather rent a disc then go to a theater and pay ridiculous prices for mediocre content.
The current movie industry business model is not working and the downward trend, in spite of almost exponential population growth is a perfect measure of its lack of success.
Then how do you explain that movie studio revenues have been consistently on the increase? The stagnant box office trends that you cite confirm that people increasingly watch movies from the comfort of their living rooms than out at movie theaters. Say what you will about the quality of the content (I will agree that quality is on the decline), the fact is that people are spending more than ever watching movies. The primary difference is that they have shifted their habits away from theatergoing and more towards other avenues (home video, PPV, downloads, etc.).
If anything, the current business model has created an unexpected cash cow for the movie industry, thanks to the DVD. A few years ago, the discussion was whether studios would move the DVD market towards the old VHS rental-pricing structure, where new releases would carry a list price somewhere around $90 and then go down a few months later for sell-through. But, the studios found that they could make more money by promoting the DVD releases for purchase, and moving the home video release windows closer to the theatrical release.
The losers in this scenario are the theater owners, but their problems go much further back.
Quote:
Originally Posted by westcott
All the technology in the world is not going to force people to buy or rent content they do not care for. IMO, the safe bet is to sell the classic movies that dominate the rental archives of NetFlix and Blockbuster. And without releasing the proven performers like I mentioned above due to piracy concerns will only slow or stop the growth of HD discs and their associated players.
But, again you're missing the main point -- it's new releases that drive the home video market (as well as the music industry). With a small installed user base, the best way to drive HD disc sales is with the current titles that dominate the sales charts. If you look at the top selling Blu-ray and HD-DVD discs, the vast majority of them are recent titles. Consumers choosing the HD version over the DVD as a new release are a more likely sale than consumers having to decide whether they want to double dip on a title that they already own.
Classic catalog titles will only generate significant sales with a larger user base, since a good number of consumers who already own a title on DVD will not want to buy it yet again. That's not a piracy issue, that's a market and cost issue. If there's a boatload of money to be made from a large audience of Blu-ray or HD-DVD households, I doubt that the studios will leave it on the table, regardless of piracy fears.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groundbeef
The copy protection has already been circumvented on both formats. Granted the workaround is rather clunky right now, but it will be MUCH more prevelant once a standard gets chosen by the consumer.
Think about it, as piddily as the base is now, the gates are open for copy protection circumvention. So I don't really think that copy protection is the main safeguard that switching formats will provide.
Now consumers just need to be shown that they have a need for HD movies.
I'll agree that copy protection schemes are made to be broken. The DVD's copy protection got circumvented rather early, yet the DVD market continued to grow at a double digit pace even as de-CSS programs were being sold one aisle over from the new DVD releases at Best Buy. It takes more than just breaking a copy protection key to create a rampant piracy problem that impedes market growth.
An analyst that I read said that the primary obstacle right now to video downloading (both legal and illegal) is not the copy protection schemes but the bandwidth. The analyst referred to what he calls the "Target question" -- can someone pick up a movie at Target in less time than it takes to download it? Right now, the answer is overwhelmingly yes, although that dynamic will inevitably change as broadband speeds increase. Even so, stepping up to HD resolution will require an even greater increase in bandwidth to make downloads at that resolution feasible. Eventually, the bandwidth for most households will make HD downloads feasible, but I have a feeling that by then, the Blu-ray/HD-DVD market might already be a mature market (or a complete failure) and well on its way to getting supplanted by yet another media format.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woochifer
I'll agree that copy protection schemes are made to be broken. The DVD's copy protection got circumvented rather early, yet the DVD market continued to grow at a double digit pace even as de-CSS programs were being sold one aisle over from the new DVD releases at Best Buy. It takes more than just breaking a copy protection key to create a rampant piracy problem that impedes market growth.
An analyst that I read said that the primary obstacle right now to video downloading (both legal and illegal) is not the copy protection schemes but the bandwidth. The analyst referred to what he calls the "Target question" -- can someone pick up a movie at Target in less time than it takes to download it? Right now, the answer is overwhelmingly yes, although that dynamic will inevitably change as broadband speeds increase. Even so, stepping up to HD resolution will require an even greater increase in bandwidth to make downloads at that resolution feasible. Eventually, the bandwidth for most households will make HD downloads feasible, but I have a feeling that by then, the Blu-ray/HD-DVD market might already be a mature market (or a complete failure) and well on its way to getting supplanted by yet another media format.
2 points.
1. Piracy will never really take over the market. If we lived in China, perhaps but not here. The vast majority of movie viewers probably don't want to spend the time, money, and effort buying the equipment necessary to rip/copy/burn a HD/Blu-Ray disc. With regular DVD's its much easier as the equipment is pretty inexpenisve right now. And the size and time involved with music CD's make them a much more appealing target for the casual copier.
2. The "Target" factor as you call it is an interesting notion. However, ponder this thought. I just rented the movie "Flags of our Father" from MS for my 360. I rented the movie in "HD". It came in at just over 5.9 Gig, and d/l in just over 1 hour 40 minutes. On a Friday afternoon about 5:00 PM CST. I have cable internet, and d/l speeds were pretty quick that day. Without getting all in a twist about whether it was "Tru-HD" or not, it was a pretty good showing. For the princly sum of $4.50. If I wanted SD resolution it would have been about 1.5 gig, and cost $3.50
I watched it, and didn't have to worry about a return fee or trip to the Target, or rental place.
MS has indicated that Lionsgate film has surpassed its "Optimistic" budget of movie rentals with the 360 by 50% and will increase its offerings to capture even more of this market. I think that the revolution has begun, and the HD/Blu-Ray battle may be a bit silly in a year or 2 if the D/L capablities continue to grow.
|