Does Blu-ray really cost more???

[BobS]

I just read the post regarding the extra $1.00 that Netflix is going to charge for Blu-ray discs. I'm just wondering...is there any real reason why Blu-ray discs cost more then standard DVD's or do the studios just charge more because they think they can???? I mean is there any real technical or other reasons, especially in the case of more recent movies which I would think require less effort to master then an older movie. Just curious...

[tacoreed]

Blu-ray costs more right now because they are trying to pay for the research, development, advertising, engineering, and manufacturing costs associated with new technology. The cost is always higher when new tech is released beacuse they need to pay for all of the time and energy put into it somehow, as a result higher initial costs.

[Mr. J]

Premium price for premium movies!

[DetroitSportsFan]

Originally Posted by jayvo2009

Premium price for premium movies!

Simple as that.

Some people just don't get it.

[richieb1971]

Sony have so many hands in the blu ray pie you would think they could afford to give the stuff away.

I find it hard to believe US citizens think blu ray is expensive. Compared to what? If you already have HDTV, cable and now a blu ray player, the movies should be well in your budget. Saving that $ would'nt help much.

[4K2K]

On Blu-ray part of the cost is because of the huge fees AACS charge (and AACS is mandatory on Blu-ray).

See this link (copied from the thread about this in the Tech section of Blu-ray.com).

http://www.emedialive.com/Articles/R...rticleID=14071

I think the article says that AACS is made up of "IBM, Intel, Microsoft, Panasonic, Sony, Toshiba, Warner Bros., and Disney" so really all the money is going back to these companies/studios? For everyone else I guess they have to pay the huge fees for AACS but don't get any more back from AACS?

They also have to pay the replication costs too and that is probably more expensive than replicating a DVD.

[AintNoSin]

I think the real question is: Does Blu-ray cost more now than DVD did in 1999 (roughly two years in)? I know I'll be paying about the same for my player (adjusted for inflation) as I did in '99. What were you paying for DVD movies in 1999? I don't remember them getting cheap until about '02.

[Kevtronn]

Originally Posted by AintNoSin

I think the real question is: Does Blu-ray cost more now than DVD did in 1999 (roughly two years in)? I know I'll be paying about the same for my player (adjusted for inflation) as I did in '99. What were you paying for DVD movies in 1999? I don't remember them getting cheap until about '02.

Exactly. My first DVD Player was $250 (sony)! And DVDs were at least $20 a piece, the same we are all paying for Blu-rays on amazon.........

[surfdude12]

Originally Posted by richieb1971

Sony have so many hands in the blu ray pie you would think they could afford to give the stuff away.

I find it hard to believe US citizens think blu ray is expensive. Compared to what? If you already have HDTV, cable and now a blu ray player, the movies should be well in your budget. Saving that $ would'nt help much.

+10000!

i don't understand why people who drop $3-4K on an HDTV then say (1) i cant afford $300 for a BD player, and (2) i'll just watch SD movies (like a dude who buys a ferrari and never shifts above 3rd gear)

[Canada]

Probably the cost between a DVD and a Blu Ray disk is neglidgable, but as other people pointed out they're paying for R&D and the remastering of movies, new audio codecs and a like.

[Canada]

Originally Posted by surfdude12

+10000!

i don't understand why people who drop $3-4K on an HDTV then say (1) i cant afford $300 for a BD player, and (2) i'll just watch SD movies (like a dude who buys a ferrari and never shifts above 3rd gear)

Excellent point. But to me it's like a person who buys a Ferrari and is to cheap to buy insurance so it sits in the garage.

[WriteSimply]

Originally Posted by BobS

is there any real reason why Blu-ray discs cost more then standard DVD's or do the studios just charge more because they think they can????

Let's talk about Netflix's charging US$1 more per month. And the answer is yes. Even if Netflix buys 30,000 copies of BD and 200,000 copies on DVD, they are not getting those discs at cost. They are getting them at a huge discount but they are still paying a premium for the BDs. Passing it along to their clients is just a way to offset the cost and recoup the investment (BD catalog and its extra storage and handling).

As far as the studios are concerned, the price to replicate BDs is more than for DVD. That alone warrants the higher price.


fuad

[Anthony P]

| I just read the post regarding the extra $1.00 that Netflix is going to charge for Blu-ray discs. I'm just wondering...is there any real reason why Blu-ray discs cost more then standard DVD's or do the studios just charge more because they think they can???? I mean is there any real technical or other reasons, especially in the case of more recent movies which I would think require less effort to master then an older movie. Just curious...

the answer is yes and yes. Yes BD does cost more to produce and replicate, and yes the difference in BD vs DVD price is mostly them knowing that people that want something better are willing to pay more.

[cydetrakd]

i have a hdtv and a ps3 but sometimes cant afford to get all the movies i want due to the slowdown of the economy just because i own the two doesnt mean i can afford to pay a premium price for blus. I try to catch em on sale or used for the most part and mainly pick up my must buys lately.

[ground chuck]

Originally Posted by richieb1971

Sony have so many hands in the blu ray pie you would think they could afford to give the stuff away.

I find it hard to believe US citizens think blu ray is expensive. Compared to what? If you already have HDTV, cable and now a blu ray player, the movies should be well in your budget. Saving that $ would'nt help much.

are you serious.....someone clearly does not have an understanding of why companies exist. they exist to make a profit, profits that shareholders want to take to the bank in the form of the stock's value going up.

if anyone has a hdtv and a bd player and can't afford blu-ray, they are clearly living a lifestyle beyond their means.

[FilmMaster]

Originally Posted by ground chuck

are you serious.....someone clearly does not have an understanding of why companies exist. they exist to make a profit, profits that shareholders want to take to the bank in the form of the stock's value going up.

if anyone has a hdtv and a bd player and can't afford blu-ray, they are clearly living a lifestyle beyond their means.

Absolutely. They probably financed those items as well.

[SS316SRV]

Originally Posted by FilmMaster

Absolutely. They probably financed those items as well.

I bought some of my equipment with a credit card. There is nothing wrong with financing, as long as it is within appropriate limits.

[FilmMaster]

Originally Posted by SS316SRV

I bought some of my equipment with a credit card. There is nothing wrong with financing, as long as it is within appropriate limits.

If you are financing because you are in no way financially capable of purchasing the equipment and you can barely pay your bills as it is...that is a problem. That happens far more often than it should.

[SS316SRV]

Originally Posted by FilmMaster

If you are financing because you are in no way financially capable of purchasing the equipment and you can barely pay your bills as it is...that is a problem. That happens far more often than it should.

agreed. Just because you want it, doesn't mean you should buy it. Just because you have the means to purchase it, doesn't mean that you can afford it.

[Blu_Dude]

Originally Posted by jayvo2009

Premium price for premium movies!

Well put; you pay for what you get. $20-$30 to buy is not considerable considering you usually get 1080p video and lossless audio. So why shouldn't you pay slightly more for rentals of Blu-ray titles vs. the same title on DVD?