Ask questions to The Digital Bits team (Bill Hunt, Jeff Kleist et.al.)

[kefrank]

Originally Posted by Taffy

I don't pirate...don't need to when I can legally record off Dish Network and archive virtually all movies in HD that I have an interest in.

As a Dish Network subscriber, I don't really understand how you settle for that from a quality perspective. Between cropping/zooming, ever-present station logos, pop-up overlay ads, and visible compression artifacts on the vast majority of channels showing movies, it hardly seems worth it. The premium channels (HBO, Showtime, etc) and some movie channels in the higher packages are better about some of that, but the monthly cost honestly ends up higher than what I spend on BDs which give me a substantially better experience.

[MerrickG]

Jeff,

Bill mentioned a little while back (a few weeks ago by my recollection) that thedigitalbits was going to have some further comments on the Alien Anthology in the coming weeks.

Can you elaborate on that in any way?

Thanks!

[Jeff Kleist]

Weeks ain't come yet

[MerrickG]

Well it appears we wont have to wait weeks for what Warner plans to bring to the screen from the DC Universe.

http://www.darkhorizons.com/news/182...p-its-dc-films

Hopefully the future of Superman, The Flash and Wonder Woman will be brought up.

[Constitution 101]

My apologies if this is a repeat question, but what's up w/ the "essentials repackaging" stuff I'm seeing in the pre-order list?

[Jeff Kleist]

Catalog reprice

[BillieCassin]

Originally Posted by merrick97

Where did I say I was referring to online only???!! Don't put words in my mouth. Best Buy and Walmart's release day prices are now pretty much on par with amazon release date prices. Sometimes even better. Amazon usually has better sales most of the time, but plenty of my best bluray bargains have come from Walmart and Best Buy.

Look, I get what your saying and Ive made those comments before myself, but I have always looked at bluray as a premium product that will command a higher price.

DVD spoiled the studios and I dont think anyone realistically expects bluray to have the same impact. It was the perfect product at the perfect time.

LOL look you started your last post to me with, "Another mistake you are making..." and have been talking down to me like a child, so no need to get uppity dude. You said:

You are talking like those prices for BttF and the Alien Anthology prices right now are set in stone. Yes, they are $100 and $55 right now, but odds are VERY good those prices will drop by release date. Boxset prices have almost always dropped their prices on release week

Now, I guess you will have to forgive me for "putting words in your mouth" (a nicer way to put that would have been "Perhaps you misunderstood me...") but since Wal-mart nor Best Buy have Alien Anthology in the stores, and you mention the prices "right now", I think you can see where I assumed you were talking about online since that's the only place prices have been posted. And, as I am sure you know, the online prices do not reflect in-store prices at sites like Wal-Mart, so I don't see how I could have thought you were discussing anything but online since there is no store who has said what they are selling it for "right now" as you so clearly specified.

That said, I'm not sure why you are arguing with me because we agree - Blu-ray is a premium product. That's MY WHOLE POINT. And that's how consumers view it, and why it's been stuck at the same percentage of overall sales for the last year. It's a niche product, like Laserdisc was. (And yes, before someone jumps on me yet again for the comparison, I am comparing it's POSITION IN THE MARKET and CUSTOMER VIEWS of it, not actual sales.)

So we agree. Blu-ray is a premium product. And from the stagnant market share of Blu-ray, it appears it will be that way for quite some time, unfortunately.

[Jeff Kleist]

That said, I'm not sure why you are arguing with me because we agree - Blu-ray is a premium product. That's MY WHOLE POINT. And that's how consumers view it, and why it's been stuck at the same percentage of overall sales for the last year. It's a niche product, like Laserdisc was. (And yes, before someone jumps on me yet again for the comparison, I am comparing it's POSITION IN THE MARKET and CUSTOMER VIEWS of it, not actual sales.)

I would say that the vast majority of the general public never even knew Laserdisc existed, and it certainly wasn't advertised on television past the early 80s when they were fighting with CED, if at all.

LD players were never flagship players for any CE you'd find in a general consumer shop but Pioneer

The two products are completely and utterly different, seriously. The comparison between the two is simply not able to be made beyond the very superficial "appeals to enthusiasts"

[BillieCassin]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

I would say that the vast majority of the general public never even knew Laserdisc existed, and it certainly wasn't advertised on television past the early 80s when they were fighting with CED, if at all.

LD players were never flagship players for any CE you'd find in a general consumer shop but Pioneer

The two products are completely and utterly different, seriously. The comparison between the two is simply not able to be made beyond the very superficial "appeals to enthusiasts"

I guess we'll just have to disagree about that, Jeff.

People knew what Laserdisc was (another format for movies that was better quality), even if they referred to it as "those big shiny discs" or even remembered it from the CED days). Did they know a lot about it? Probably not, besides "big discs and expensive", but it wasn't like most people didn't know the product even existed. They didn't care because they were happy about what they had.

That's what seems similar to Blu-ray. And in this case, we have HUGE marketing pushes for Blu-ray like Laser never saw, and they *still* don't care because they are happy with what they have.

They are both formats that enthusiasts have embraced but the general public has not. They both hold/held a higher price tag than the average sell-through title (though it was nice on laser to get a day/date with the VHS for $35 and have the VHS still rental priced at $100). They both had/have superior image quality than the more popular format.

Sure, market conditions and many other things are different, which is why I have avoided saying, "Blu-ray is just exactly the same as laserdisc - same same!" They are not. However, their position in the market seems remarkably similar to me, at least at this point in Blu-ray history.

When I hear people talk about why they don't care about Blu-ray, they are the same exact reasons even those that knew about Laserdisc gave for not being interested. Price, lack of a quality differential they cared about (right or wrong, if it doesn't look much better to them, you can throw all the #'s at them you want and they still don't care), and availability. That's the only comparison I am making.

[Jeff Kleist]

Billie, I worked for Tower Records as a video buyer during the height of LD's reign and the rise of DVD. When I'm speaking about this I'm speaking from experience in a high traffic store in a very wealthy area with the high end electronics shop (later eaten and destroyed by Tweeter) literally 50 feet away that I collaborated with quite a bit to showcase product and move software.

So I'm not just talking about hazy memories of perception, I'm talking about several years of my own experiences catering to people both enthusiast and the general public. We had the best LD section this side of New York, people would come from miles to flip the LD bins or show up at midnight when a big title came out like Star Wars SEs or a DTS release. We kept stocked with high quality imports along with the domestic stuff, and even a good selection of cutouts for the budget people. I didn't just have access to our store's figures, but maintained close relationships with the vendors and other shops in the chain as well. By the time I left, the LD racks had been dismantled, the format was dead and we'd clearanced all the discss out the door. VHS was dying and DVD was burning up the charts.

I keep similar tabs on trends 10 years later

Most of my customers thought the bins were movie soundtracks on vinyl, and even well into DVD era they were all about why we had movies on "CD" but not on VHS

Over the next 12-24 months you're going to see DVD upconverters start to go the way of the dodo. The second the Insignias and Vizios are $69.99 and the name brands start at $99.99, DVD players are done. Blu will pick up on its own through if nothing else, osmosis. The junk decks tend to have a lifetime of 2-3 years on the outside, so when they go to replace them, that extra 20 buys an upgrade to Blu.

You're going to see those prices before the end of the year on older models BTW.

The only people that ever gave LD a push on the software side were the boutique labels. Criterion, AnimEigo, Image, and many of the studios sublicensed their titles to Image or Pioneer for LD because they couldn't be bothered.

So like I said, the mere fact that Blu-ray is doing 15-20% of the market on the average week means it's already about 20 times more successful than LD ever was. A huge percentage of people know what Blu is thanks to it being pushed on TV every day of the week from all angles. You're just expecting too much too fast. The fact that on the right title, Blu-ray can suck down half the sales shows how well it is doing. Check out Iron Man 2 in 2 weeks, that's going to be a major showcase title for the format through the end of the year

[BillieCassin]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

So like I said, the mere fact that Blu-ray is doing 15-20% of the market on the average week means it's already about 20 times more successful than LD ever was. A huge percentage of people know what Blu is thanks to it being pushed on TV every day of the week from all angles. You're just expecting too much too fast. The fact that on the right title, Blu-ray can suck down half the sales shows how well it is doing. Check out Iron Man 2 in 2 weeks, that's going to be a major showcase title for the format through the end of the year

Hehe, Jeff, I don't need your resume.

I can't explain any more clearly than I did above why I feel the way I do. As I said, we just disagree. I see a lot of similarities as I outlined above. And I specifically said that they are not identical, I am talking about consumer impressions of the format and consumers view it similarly in my opinion. Most of what you said above I specifically agreed with, and I did not make any long-term conclusions based on it.

I totally agree that eventually most people will end up with a Blu-ray player - in fact, I've been telling people that for quite some time - "The next time you go to replace your DVD player, you will end up just getting Blu." That's a given.

What is not a given yet is, even if they HAVE a Blu-ray player, that they still won't be fine with their DVD's, especially since the Blu-ray player will make them look even better.

That's all.

I do have to take issue with your numbers, though. In the last 50 weeks, Blu-ray has only been 15% or more of the market 7 weeks. That's far from "15-20% in the average week". The average week is lucky to get 11 or 12%, and often times we struggle just to maintain the 10%. These numbers have been remarkably flat for the past year.

[Jeff Kleist]

I do have to take issue with your numbers, though. In the last 50 weeks, Blu-ray has only been 15% or more of the market 7 weeks. That's far from "15-20% in the average week". The average week is lucky to get 11 or 12%, and often times we struggle just to maintain the 10%. These numbers have been remarkably flat for the past year.

The numbers fluctuate depending on whether anything exciting comes out. Big title, bigger share. Overall actual units moved during 2010 are way up over 2009, even week to week. Big picture

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

The numbers fluctuate depending on whether anything exciting comes out. Big title, bigger share. Overall actual units moved during 2010 are way up over 2009, even week to week. Big picture

I was thinking blu-ray would overtake DVD next year but it probably won't happen, now I think late 2012. I do wonder how long it will be till most major releases only come out on blu-ray.

[BillieCassin]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

The numbers fluctuate depending on whether anything exciting comes out. Big title, bigger share. Overall actual units moved during 2010 are way up over 2009, even week to week. Big picture

I know they fluctuate. I've posted a link to the market share sales chart several times.

Where am I reading it wrong? From there I see 7 out of the last 50ish weeks where it has been 15 or above, and for most months the average seems to top out at 11 or 12%, and those numbers are pretty consistent for the past year.

[Jeff Kleist]

I was thinking blu-ray would overtake DVD next year but it probably won't happen, now I think late 2012. I do wonder how long it will be till most major releases only come out on blu-ray.

I'm thinking later than that. 2012 is a solid foothold in the public conciousness

Where am I reading it wrong? From there I see 7 out of the last 50ish weeks where it has been 15 or above, and for most months the average seems to top out at 11 or 12%, and those numbers are pretty consistent for the past year.

Because you're taking the numbers at face value. You're not comparing them to the same month last year, you're not poking into the "What came out in week X? What came out on DVD that didn't come out on Blu?" What events may have happened that supressed consumer spending? (among many more)

Raw market share numbers were a lot of fun during the format war. But as far as how trends are running, they don't even come close to telling the whole story. If you're going to do the numbers game, then go for how many discs were moved, and how many dollars in total were generated, because that's the biggest and most important pair that the studios and CEs pay attention to at the end of the day.

[BillieCassin]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

Because you're taking the numbers at face value. You're not comparing them to the same month last year, you're not poking into the "What came out in week X? What came out on DVD that didn't come out on Blu?" What events may have happened that supressed consumer spending? (among many more)

Raw market share numbers were a lot of fun during the format war. But as far as how trends are running, they don't even come close to telling the whole story. If you're going to do the numbers game, then go for how many discs were moved, and how many dollars in total were generated, because that's the biggest and most important pair that the studios and CEs pay attention to at the end of the day.

OK. I guess we are reading different things because I am looking at the last year of sales compared to the same sales one year ago, and I am providing links to the raw numbers. The percentage of market share is practically unchanged since a year ago today.

Of course those other details matter (for example, you can pick out the week Avatar was released very easily just by looking at the chart). Each week, out of all the sales of home video media, Blu-ray is holding at about the same percent of sales. So, out of what *is* sold, the same roughly 10-12% average of them are Blu, and the other 88-90% are DVD.

The studio's and CE's can look at whatever numbers they wish, but each week, only about $1 for every $10 spent on home video goes to Blu instead of DVD. Just about the same as last year. Sure there are many reasons week to week this may be so, but looking at the "big picture" - no more people seem to be choosing Blu over DVD than a year ago.

[johndoyle123]

hello

seeing as this year (later parts off) have seen some great classics come to blu-ray are we more likely to see a bunch more start coming out from january onwards .... we already have like citizen kane , ben hur and stuff like scarface coming so im just hoping studios like paramount start releasing the biggies such as chinatown and breakfast at tiffanys

what is your opinion or have you heard any good indications of more classics coming from paramount etc ?

thanks again
-jon-

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by BillieCassin

I think we are talking about different numbers. I'm talking the market share of home video sales that are DVD vs. Blu-ray. Looking at the last year, the numbers are pretty stagnant and they have never reached anything near 40-50%.

For the week Avatar came out, it did hit 22% of sales from Blu (week ending Apr 25, 2010). However, most other weeks it's somewhere between 9% and 13%, with a few odd weeks a point or two higher (excluding the Avatar fluke week, 16% is the high for this year, 17% for last year) or even lower (it's gone as low as 8% this summer, which is a past-year low.)

Looking at those numbers, Blu-ray has been pretty much the same, and certainly hasn't shown any real growth, much less the type of growth that was expected by Year 3 of the format. The week Avatar came out was a fluke, and even our fluke only got us 22% for that one week.

Like I said, not trying to be Debbie Downer, but those numbers show that average consumers still aren't latching on to Blu-ray in any significant way.

No, you are just completely wrong


First, are you seriously arguing that total $ is a better determination of consumer interest then individual title %?I really don’t get that, if, for example 10 people buying movies, 5 of which are buying a particular popular title on DVD and 5 the same one on BD while combined they spend 400$ on DVD (obviously those 10 people bought more then those 5 DVDs) and 100$ on BD, that consumer interest is better represented by the 20% in total $ then the 50% in sales of a particular title. The issue is that there would be very few exceptions where a person would buy more then one copy of a movie and even then it would be limited in numbers and would make sense (i.e. the guy bought a copy for himself and one as a gift…) on the other hand I am sure most of us (and many other people) have left the store with more then one movie, plus why would a person buying Lost: The Complete Collection for 150$ (DVD on Amazon) show more consumer interest then someone that buys Prince of Persia on BD?



Now for the total sales %, it is normal that it fluctuates from week to week. And that some weeks it matches % of weeks last year. But that does not mean BD is stagnating or barely growing

1) let me ask you a simple question, we have some made up data Y1: 51 weeks have 8%, and one week has 16%, in Y2 you have 51 weeks 16% and one week 8%, both years have either 8% or 16% , but Y2 is still roughly 2x Y1, because most weeks are 16% in Y2 while most are 8% in Y1.
2) You decide to dismiss the 22% this year but make a big deal of the week that was 8% . But if you look at those two weeks revenue was 67M and 19M so if you average them out you don’t get (22+8)/2=15% but 19% the reality is that weeks where nothing good is released people buy more catalogue (or at least catalogue plays a more important role) and that helps DVDs % and hurts BD% but they are also weeks that are much less important
3) If you don’t understandf how % work and so they lead you to completely misunderstand the data because in Feb there was an 8% and that means BD is not growing, luckily you have DEG that computes it all for you. http://www.degonline.org/pressreleas...Q10release.pdf
So for the first ½ (end of June) of 2010 BD compared to the same period last year. BD software sales grew by 84%, BD stand alone player sales by 103% and DL by 23%

So obviously BD is not stagnating and obviously with 84% and 103% there is a lot of new consumers joining the group, depending on how you interpret the datat there is roughly doubling(and when you consider that prices are lower then last year it makes it even more so)

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by BillieCassin

I'm comparing what the guy in Wal-mart looks at.

Alien Anthology - $139.99 retail, $97 on Amazon right now
Alien Quadrilogy - Retail $59.99, $34 on Amazon right now

...for reference.

But when Joe Sixpack walks into Wal-mart, he'll see two options - this box set of the four movies for $100 on Blu, or he can buy them in 2fer packs, $7 each (I verified this morning when I was there that yes, they are available that way). So $100 for four movies, or $14 for four movies.

Now, I get what you are saying - obviously those are bare bones edition versus a mega set. The point I'm getting at, though, is appearances. You and I know that this set has a ridiculous, crazy amount of special features. Joe Sixpack doesn't quite get that, and probably doesn't care. He buys movies to watch...movies. So he sees four movies on Blu Ray for $100, or four on DVD for $14. You know better. I know better. He doesn't, and walks away going, "Dang that Blu-ray is expensive".

I know things are changing. I follow this site, your site, every site I can find. But I'm not seeing anyone outside of the current Blu-ray enthusiast community really "getting" it yet. And those that get it...don't even seem to care. I hope it changes soon, I really do.

Not at all, for the most part if Joe wanted Aliens or BTTF or another catalogue title he would have bought it a long time ago. This argument would work for titles that where not available before or for a long time (like Disney and their vault) or even a bit for new restorations. But Joe does not say "I have it at home but I read it is just being released on BD so I better buy an other copy on DVD. That is why % for catalogue are not used in the top 10 BD share graph they would always be extremely high and the top 10 would always be in the 90%+ and only catalogue. We only get their % if the titles reach extremely high in total sales, like Gladiator and BH that sold over 95% on BD.

The only people that go look at catalogue titles and compare the BD that just came out of a deluxe set to the bare bones DVD in the garbage bin and say "look the BD is much more expensive" are people that have something against BD and that is probably .1% of the population. For the rest, there are three possibilities: if they are in the store looking at the price of the BD, it is because they want the BD, and so the price of the DVD is immaterial (and they might already have it on DVD); there and the ones without a BD player (assuming they don't have the title) so they won't care about the BD price but only the DVD price; the guy that is not interested in the title and then they won't look at neither price.

This is the issue, on new releases there is not a big price difference and so the pricing argument falls, mostly, apart. So , like you, it becomes about catalogue, but then you need to assume a comparison that is not happening if we consider normal people and not just trying to make a point.

[PaulGo]

To me Blu-ray has gotten general public acceptance since it is advertised almost everywhere, supported by all the studios and most importantly is rented by Redbox.