We can make Blu-ray catch like a wildfire.

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

Through August 18th in the United States, sales of BD have been about $1.06 billion and sales of DVD have been $3.4 billion.

Originally Posted by Neild

That is fascinating... are those numbers from home media magazine or something?

My own impression from walking around stores doesn't match. It seems like they have more blu-ray product and substantially more blu-ray going through the cash register. And that even if unit sales are similar, the higher unit price for blu-ray should show a much closer race than $3.40 billion versus $1.06 billion would suggest.

I decided to do a mini survey myself from Rentrak sales week of Sep 23, picking a bundle of 4 newer 'top 10' releases from both formats:

Blu-ray sales ($13.6 million)
---------------
Beverly Hills Chihuahua 3 $2,072,805
The Cabin in the Woods $4,534,824
The Hunger Games$1,321,677
Snow White and the Huntsman $5,664,830

DVD sales ($15 million)
----------------------
Beverly Hills Chihuahua 3 $4,956,459
The Cabin in the Woods $2,914,800
The Hunger Games $2,363,710
Snow White and the Huntsman $4,835,330

Looks like they are close right? But when you also include the many catalog re-releases where blu-ray sales are more compelling than DVD, there's no comparison.

My numbers are from Home Media magazine. While I accept that someone might want to challenge their numbers or survey techniques, they should be relatively correct. Of course, the only true survey would be one that's conducted at the cash register the way that SoundScan works for audio. And you can't compare a mini-survey of a few titles with the entire business. As for catalog titles, compelling has nothing to do with it. The mass market is filled with people who aren't doing well economically who are looking for cheap entertainment. Most of them never cared about PQ or AQ. Cheap DVDs fill their needs quite well. I do wish HMM broke out their numbers comparing titles released within 12 months and titles released >12 months ago and/or compared BD/DVD numbers for the same titles and then separate numbers for the unique titles in each format. Maybe for the same titles, especially for new releases (not necessarily new movies), BD does do better. I don't know. But the fact remains that overall, DVD is still a much bigger business in dollars, which makes it an even bigger business in units.

Originally Posted by Anthony P

exactly I don't understand why it is so hard to understand, luxury sport cars and million dollar homes exist even though the sheep can't afford them, LD lasted until DVD even though the sheep were OK with VHS...... Why can't people grasp the simple notion that a market for quality can exist without the masses. The masses can support and help a bad technology but they can't kill a good one. BD will exist at least until the day when the people that want high quality decide there is something that offers higher quality.

I agree with the concept, but not with the application. Esoteric audio, for example, can exist without the masses because they charge ludicrous prices for the equipment and there's apparently enough crazy people to buy it. Just as in Manhattan, there's apparently enough CEOs and Wall Street bonus babies to afford small apartments with a median price of $1.6 million.

However, most BD players and the associated BD content software are not marketed as high-end esoteric products. While they cost more than DVD, they don't cost that much more. And from both the studio and electronic manufacturers perspective, these are indeed mass-market products. Prices have dropped enough that "the cat is out of the bag" - these products will not survive if they're only supported by high end users.

In addition, Wal-Mart is the #1 physical retail marketer of media in this country. Think about what the average Wal-Mart buyer is like. And Amazon is by far the #1 online retailer of physical media in this country. And the Amazon buyer is looking for the lowest possible price.

Your analogy doesn't hold up because multi-million dollar homes still cost multi-millions of dollars and high-end sports cars are still very expensive. If BD players were still $1000 and all BDs, including catalog titles were still priced across the board at $50 and up, then yes, it probably wouldn't need the mass market to survive. But we're way past that point.

[U4K61]

Originally Posted by Canvas of Flesh

I agree with you on your first point. I would love to buy cheaper, single disc Blu-rays without the DVD or the Digital Copy. I hate paying extra for things I will absolutely never use.

I also don't like the thicker cases these sets sometimes come in as they create storage problems.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

I agree with the concept, but not with the application. Esoteric audio, for example, can exist without the masses because they charge ludicrous prices for the equipment and there's apparently enough crazy people to buy it. Just as in Manhattan, there's apparently enough CEOs and Wall Street bonus babies to afford small apartments with a median price of $1.6 million.

However, most BD players and the associated BD content software are not marketed as high-end esoteric products. While they cost more than DVD, they don't cost that much more. And from both the studio and electronic manufacturers perspective, these are indeed mass-market products. Prices have dropped enough that "the cat is out of the bag" - these products will not survive if they're only supported by high end users.

In addition, Wal-Mart is the #1 physical retail marketer of media in this country. Think about what the average Wal-Mart buyer is like. And Amazon is by far the #1 online retailer of physical media in this country. And the Amazon buyer is looking for the lowest possible price.

Your analogy doesn't hold up because multi-million dollar homes still cost multi-millions of dollars and high-end sports cars are still very expensive. If BD players were still $1000 and all BDs, including catalog titles were still priced across the board at $50 and up, then yes, it probably wouldn't need the mass market to survive. But we're way past that point.

You are missing the point. The home and luxury car examples, were just two of a few that I mentioned (including records/CDs today and LD during VHS). Obviously there is a big difference between a Ferrari/mansions and BD (or records, CD, LD) and that is that the first can never be main stream due to the cost of materials, parts and workforce, while the later is not a problem.

I agree, at this point it is stupid to be discussing if BD can be mainstream, it is there right now. Like Neild showed if we look at sales of new releases between BD and DVD the market is roughly 50/50. It might not be 50/50 yet for total sales since there are still some places like the pharmacy that I was at that only sells cheap DVDs, but it will be there soon enough (and like I am sure you have read from me many times, a studio will decide what to use for distribution for new titles based on sales of new titles and not the discount bins). But Steedeels and krazeyeyez posts did not deal with the past or today and an imaginary future (which might eventually be true or not) when most people buy on digital.

My point was simple, that the same way that there are few but "important" Ferrari buyers and so Ferrari can continue making and selling cars without most people buying them, you have the same with records and CDs, it was also true for LD(even though it was never main stream it continued until the people that saw a benefit for it over VHS moved to DVD).


AS for BD needing mass market in order to survive because it has grown to be too popular already. Why can I go into best buy or Walmart (or their web sites) and buy a record player/CD player or VHS player? why do you think that close to 30 years after CD launched I can still buy record players? And why do you think that new record albums are still released, the same with CD but not VHS? Because the movie studios know that the cheap person that might have bought a VHS copy in 2006 was not worth it since if he was not given the choice the person would most likely buy the DVD (or BD/HD-DVD) but the record producer releasing on a record today does so because he knows the guy still buying the record will not. And this is the crux of it. You say the studio won't be happy to produce a BD for the (we are assuming) few people that will be buying BD, but if these people choose BD because it offers something (for example quality)important to them that can't be matched by DL then it would be impossible to convince them to change and that means lost sales. You are forgetting that there is a reason that I (and I am sure many here) have bought BDs (or DVDs) at under 5$ or even 3$, that there are BDs with 1 disk that are more expensive than a different title that comes 4 or 5 disks, that a title is much more expensive on the day it comes out and much cheaper several months later (even if the content/packaging is the same or better).And that is because you don't pay for disks but for the content. The disks are cheap and cost pennies. I can go to http://www.pacificdisc.com/PricingBluRay.html and if you look at retail packaging it is $2.49/disk for SL BD and $4.49/disk for DL for 1000 copies, (this for replication, obviously you will need an AACS key and a BD master so the cost would be higher if someone wanted to do 1000 copies of their summer vacation) but imagine how much cheaper it is for real studios that won't go for a small 1 time job of 1000 disks?

[Steedeel]

well regardless of future, i am stocking up on blurays and a good solid player or two to last me as long as possible.

[OldSkullGamer]

Why do we need to make blu ray spread like wildfire? I think the format is past the point of needing more supporters to survive. Tactics such as releasing the Dvd version a month after its blu ray counterpart would be ridiculous. Why should those who have no desire for blu ray be punished?

[UncleBuckWild]

You know what would make people adopt blu faster - if only the industry folks could come up with a new disc that can play on both dvd/blu-ray players with the added ability to upgrade (HD) /downgrade (SD) picture quality.

I know there are some flipper discs out there, but that's a real hassle and kinda 1999.

[msb1428]

I agree with an earlier post!! that BLU and DVD will co-exsist, for a long long long time. which i am perfectly happy with, I like having the option of watching my dvd on road trips.
And there are some people I have talked to that just dont see the point or see no major differance in the formats, and they are entitled to their opinions(they are the people that usually just watch a movie once and forget about it) I feel Blu Ray is geared more tward movie buffs, and the collectors like Myself.

[Anthony P]

Originally Posted by msb1428

I agree with an earlier post!! that BLU and DVD will co-exsist, for a long long long time.

I find that odd. I don't get why some people think this. Is it just wishful thinking (since you brought up the DVD player in the car) or just out of touch with reality?
72% of the avengers sales where on BD. That means that stores sold around 3 copies on BD for every DVD copy they sold. What happens when it is 80% or 85% or 90%? Can't you see that soon enough a store will need to start questioning the wisdom of ordering 1-2 or even a handful of copies just in case someone will walk in and want the DVD? Obviously at 72% we are not there yet, but lets face it that % will continue to grow in favour of BD

And there are some people I have talked to that just dont see the point or see no major differance in the formats, and they are entitled to their opinions(they are the people that usually just watch a movie once and forget about it) I feel Blu Ray is geared more tward movie buffs, and the collectors like Myself.

I won't disagree with that, some people don't care. But not caring and not wanting are two different things, also if your friend that does not care does not actually buy movies and the collector that cares buys movies who do you thing the studio is more interested in? the guy they can sell a copy to or the guy that won't buy it because he will only see it once and so not worth it.

[Canada]

The best we can hope for at this time I think is directors like Steven Spielberg and Ridley Scott saying this is the best way to view their films

[TheHighRoller]

Originally Posted by Livelong420

2. Bring blus out earlier than any other format. I remember some DVDs coming out earlier than VHS.

I agree that this point will have the most impact. Studios are doing a new thing with digital copies, where they're available up to two weeks in advance.

Like with Prometheus, you could pre-order it and get the digital copy right away. I think this is dumb because streaming digital copies are lower quality than the actual Blu-ray.

[Steedeel]

even the term 'digital copy' is confusing. people use that description for 1080p HD downloads from Vudu or Itunes for example. They also use the term for extremely low quality files that you get with blurays to play on phones and computers.