VB's article still being talked about?

[edgebsl]

Sorry to post this in the general forum.

But I see that everyone is still referencing this article in multiple threads all over the site.

I wanted to bring attention that everyone should let the writer know that what she printed was innacurate, biased and downright FUD.

I think if enough of us write to her at susanne.ault@reedbusiness.com or send a letter to her editor, we can get an update or retraction.

Noone outside this forum knows it was FUD. So if we just complain about it here it really does no good at all.

[Clark Kent]

Each side in the war has media contacts at various outlets and publications. The article was obviously written as a red-leaning news piece. I bet someone from Universal hyped up these numbers to the reporter.

[blindcat87]

If that is true, she should be fired. There is this little thing called due dillegence. She should have contacted Sony and WB for their comment on a competing studio's comments on their numbers. There was not even a "Sony and WB could not be reached for comment." This was shoddy reporting. I have seen more professionalism in high school newspapers and supermarket tabloids. Unless this publication wants to become thought of in the same category as the Weekly World News, they will make sure their writers follow at least the most basic tenets of journalism. I think people should complain to their advertisers as well as to the editor.

Chris

Originally Posted by Clark Kent

Each side in the war has media contacts at various outlets and publications. The article was obviously written as a red-leaning news piece. I bet someone from Universal hyped up these numbers to the reporter.

[JonBidinger]

I am always hearing about the pieces that are red biased, but rarely if ever blu biased ones. I don't know if that is a good thing or a bad thing.

[DealsR4theDevil]

I get VB at work and that article ruined my day when I read it.

[HDBlu]

You guys are funny. When Video Business prints something you like, it's the God's-honest truth, but when it doesn't fit with your narrow view of reality, it's scurroulous FUD and the writer is a paid shill.

I guess it in no way entered into your consiousness that the article just might be accurate.

[dialog_gvf]

Originally Posted by HDBlu

You guys are funny. When Video Business prints something you like, it's the God's-honest truth, but when it doesn't fit with your narrow view of reality, it's scurroulous FUD and the writer is a paid shill.

I guess it in no way entered into your consiousness that the article just might be accurate.

It is not accurate. An insider has already confirmed this.

Originally Posted by Maxpower1987

It's not settled yet, let's just say I jumped the gun when I said 1.7:1. Dave Vaughn jumped the gun when he said 1.2:1 and Universal don't know what they are talking about. Wait for the official VideoScan numbers.

Take note that WB haven't had a press release like they had for 300 (their other release on this scale), it should tell you all you need to know.

I guess it in no way entered into your consiousness that the article just might be inaccurate.

Gary

[HDBlu]

It is not accurate. An insider has already confirmed this.

What "insider"? A Blu-ray insider?

Of course. Much more credibility than an HD DVD insider.

[dialog_gvf]

Originally Posted by HDBlu

What "insider"? A Blu-ray insider?

Of course. Much more credibility than an HD DVD insider.

This one has more credibility about Warner sales than Universal, yes.

Guaranteed.

You're welcome not to be here if you choose to continue your course of attitude.

[blindcat87]

Right, there is nothing suspicious about one of the biggest red execs, one who's job is on the line if HD DVD fails, claiming that his title outsold a competitor's title while conveniently not mentioning that he is excluding the SKU of the title that sold the majority for said title. It is not questionable at all, that he reached back several months to pick a title for comparison instead of comparing with a current title. It couldn't be because the current title sold vastly more in its first week than the total of all SKUs of his title could it? It couldn't have something to do with the fact that the title he reached back for comparison on had multiple SKUs, thus allowing him to pick the lesser selling SKU. The fact that the larger SKU was a set that had all three titles appearing for the first time on the format has nothing to do with why it got the lion's share of the sales could it?
It isn't fishy at all that he decided to do a competing studio, and make no mistake no matter how much cooperation is going on with the format war, all studios are still in competition, a huge favor and announce their sales numbers for them. The fact that the numbers totally conflict with what both BD insiders and nominally neutral insiders who have had a track record for accuracy have stated is absolutely no reason to question this. I know! His competition willingly gave him their internal sales numbers and implored him with tears of hope and gratitude in their eyes to report them so that they would be spared the onerous task of gaining publicity for their HD releases.

Yes this is Blu-Ray.com. Of course we have our own slant as the red fans have theirs. But don't be so dense. Notice the comments after the story? It isn't just BD fanatics crying foul. It is retaillers and industry insiders. This little plant piece is so obvious and desparate that it is pathetic. Most of the slanted articles have had some subtlety, some attempt at feasibility, has followed basic corporate ettiquite and protocol with respect to allies. This was just totally off the deep end. One doesn't even have to make an effort to discredit all but the numbers that have not yet been released. The unreleased numbers in question do not belong to Universal and it is flat out inappropriate and downright disrespectful for a Universal executive to release them for WB even if they were accurate. If they are not, then it is almost an act of sabotage or hostility from Uni to WB.

So, I guess you have a point, there is absolutely nothing fishy about this article. We should be ashamed of ourselves for questioning Ken Graffio. Get a grip.

Edit: I see that dialog_gvF is on the ball. I wasted all that great logic and sarcasm. Oh, well. That's what happens when you post on a site where the mods are actually on the ball.

Chris

Originally Posted by HDBlu

You guys are funny. When Video Business prints something you like, it's the God's-honest truth, but when it doesn't fit with your narrow view of reality, it's scurroulous FUD and the writer is a paid shill.

I guess it in no way entered into your consiousness that the article just might be accurate.

[JasonR]

Originally Posted by dialog_gvf

This one has more credibility about Warner sales than Universal, yes.

Guaranteed.

You're welcome not to be here if you choose to continue your course of attitude.

Are we still looking at 1.2:1?

[DetroitSportsFan]

Originally Posted by HDBlu

What "insider"? A Blu-ray insider?

Of course. Much more credibility than an HD DVD insider.

Go back under your bridge, troll.

[Razzy]

Originally Posted by DetroitSportsFan

Go back under your bridge, troll.

He's under a "suspension" bridge as we speak.

[DetroitSportsFan]

Originally Posted by Razzy

He's under a "suspension" bridge as we speak.

Hopefully permanent.

[dobyblue]

Originally Posted by HDBlu

What "insider"? A Blu-ray insider?

Of course. Much more credibility than an HD DVD insider.

You're obviously a troll. Smell ya later douchebag.

[dobyblue]

I just sent a letter to all the senior editors. |
Susanne is brutal. Her track record on articles speaks for itself.

[beavis667]

Even if sales were close in HP/Blade Runner early on I think that BD will pull away as it did with 300. There is SO much selection for BD owners. We can't buy everything new at once. There are alot of PS3's under trees out there. Big movies like Blade Runner and HP will have long legs and sell well on Blu-Ray. Once the handfull of folks with HD-DVD players buy their copies, those sales will fall though the cellar (as they already are on Amazon).

[Balian]

The author finally corrected her mistake. It was 45:55 as in HD DVD:Blu-ray:

Additionally, notes Universal research, Warner Home Video’s HD DVD release of Order of the Phoenix is nearly even with sales of its BD version, managing a 45 to 55 ratio

http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6515097.html

Email excerpt:

Hi I am back at work and had an easier time checking over my reporting - and you guys were right on the Harry Potter error. The Nielsen numbers have it that the HD DVD to Blu-ray versions are selling at a 45 to 55 ratio. I put it the other way around– but have since definitely corrected it in my Web story. I profusely apologize for the error. I’m thinking of reiterating the mistake in my ‘ Red State , Blue State ’ blog, just to try to get the correct information out there.

Thanks for your feedback. I need to stay on my toes. Hope you’re having a great holiday season.

You will notice that she changed the headline and the story as well.

Susanne

[tuku]

What a load of crap - shouldnt she have made a new article stating the previous was incorrect.

[spicynacho]

Originally Posted by blindcat87

If that is true, she should be fired.

As a dyslexic person I take exception to this. Regardless of what grief or heartburn this article may have caused you, it is just a misprint. It happens all the time. It is also not only her fault, their should have been a copy editor or someone who should have caught the error. Just calm down.