Blu-ray Supporting Studios Respond to Payoff Question

[HDTV1080P]

QUOTE

“Asked directly whether they'd accepted financial incentives in exchange for their Blu-ray support, four BDA studios denied any such thing, while one remained conspicuously mum.”

http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/Industry_Trends/IFA/Blu-ray_Supporting_Studios_Respond_to_Payoff_Question/919

[glenn22]

That doesn't mean a thing. Think of yourself in the same situation... If I was asked that question I would say "no comment" also. Why should I bother having to deny such a thing??

In any event, who cares if they are being paid off? as long as they stay Blu.

[glenn22]

Originally Posted by JTK

Another HD-DVD troll.

Man you guys are really getting pathetic.

Agreed.

[CAB]

I'm all for playing by the same rules. All's fair in love and war. Isn't this called a format war?

Welcome to the winning forums, Superman. I'm sorry you won't be able to stay long.

[Sielle]

It's perfectly legal to pay a company to support or sell your product, it's not legal to pay a company to not support or sell a competing product.

[glenn22]

Originally Posted by Superman

Im not trolling, it's the truth. For 2 weeks the BD guys have been screaming bloody murder about the Paramount/Dreamworks deal. Everyone with a little common sense knows the BDA or Sony has been paying companies off from the get go. Disney refusing to comment on the subject makes no sense unless there is something to hide.

I don;t understand the double-standard here when it comes to business tactics. Ideally, all the studios would have been neutral. Sony saw to it that wasnt going to happen. And that deal with Target not selling HD DVD players in store, you think money didnt exchange hands there?

Come on.

Actually, while there were posts and talk (obviously) about the Paramount exclusivity agreement, I think the vast majority of people here don't consider Paramount that big of a loss. They have very few AAA titles. We all just think they are crazy for making such a commitment to inferior technology.

[CAB]

Originally Posted by Superman

Im not trolling, it's the truth. For 2 weeks the BD guys have been screaming bloody murder about the Paramount/Dreamworks deal. Everyone with a little common sense knows the BDA or Sony has been paying companies off from the get go. Disney refusing to comment on the subject makes no sense unless there is something to hide.

I don;t understand the double-standard here when it comes to business tactics. Ideally, all the studios would have been neutral. Sony saw to it that wasnt going to happen. And that deal with Target not selling HD DVD players in store, you think money didnt exchange hands there?

Come on.

I think you missed the point of the BD-fanboy thrust. It is my opinion the ONLY reason Paramount went HD-DVD only was the pay-off. I don't think any BDA supporting company is going to stay BD just because of incentives. There's a future in making BD products. There are very good reasons for a retailer to go only one way for equipment. Volume discounts from manufacturers increase profits, reduction in warehouse and distribution requirements, single non-conflicting story and solution just to name a few. Yep, Sony said they paid for end-cap space. That's called advertising.

[msallaq]

Originally Posted by Superman

Im not trolling, it's the truth. For 2 weeks the BD guys have been screaming bloody murder about the Paramount/Dreamworks deal. Everyone with a little common sense knows the BDA or Sony has been paying companies off from the get go. Disney refusing to comment on the subject makes no sense unless there is something to hide.

I don;t understand the double-standard here when it comes to business tactics. Ideally, all the studios would have been neutral. Sony saw to it that wasnt going to happen. And that deal with Target not selling HD DVD players in store, you think money didnt exchange hands there?

Come on.

why do u even care if target sell hd dvd or not unless ur hd dvd fanboy and u'll get banned.

[iceman]

Originally Posted by Superman

Im not trolling, it's the truth. For 2 weeks the BD guys have been screaming bloody murder about the Paramount/Dreamworks deal. Everyone with a little common sense knows the BDA or Sony has been paying companies off from the get go. Disney refusing to comment on the subject makes no sense unless there is something to hide.

I don;t understand the double-standard here when it comes to business tactics. Ideally, all the studios would have been neutral. Sony saw to it that wasnt going to happen. And that deal with Target not selling HD DVD players in store, you think money didnt exchange hands there?

Come on.

Paramount is the first company/studio to go from being a dual supporter to exclusive supporter. When you buy a HD-DVD player you KNOW that you aren't going to be able to see movies from Disney, Fox, Sony, MGM and Lionsgate. When you buy a BD player you KNOW that you aren't going to be able to see movies from Universal. However, when you bought a BD player you also thought that you were going to be able to see movies from Paramount. There's a big difference here, I hope you can see it.

And you are not banned, it's the truth.

[moweeis]

how does "no comment" reflect a "yes" ?
He could just have found the question so ridiculous that he simply wouldn't answer it aka "no comment"

Anyway i don't care if they are paid, that tactic is being used on both sides.

[JAGUAR1977]

Originally Posted by Superman

Im not trolling, it's the truth. For 2 weeks the BD guys have been screaming bloody murder about the Paramount/Dreamworks deal. Everyone with a little common sense knows the BDA or Sony has been paying companies off from the get go. Disney refusing to comment on the subject makes no sense unless there is something to hide.

I don;t understand the double-standard here when it comes to business tactics. Ideally, all the studios would have been neutral. Sony saw to it that wasnt going to happen. And that deal with Target not selling HD DVD players in store, you think money didnt exchange hands there?

Come on.

Blu-ray IS offering incentives to certain parties, but the majority are supporting the format because they believe it's a better product.

HD-DVD struggles for support without incentives.

There's only a format war in the US, which leaves HD-DVD on unsteady ground.

[UlicBelouve]

Originally Posted by Sielle

It's perfectly legal to pay a company to support or sell your product, it's not legal to pay a company to not support or sell a competing product.

This is why it's significant to me. It just seems improper to pay someone to dump a product that they were supporting in the first place. Blades of Glory goes to inferior standards (lower sound quality/processing), and a bunch of already made discs get dumped or sat on.

There are incentives all the time, and I really don't care. There are exclusivities all the time too, and those are generally fine also.

But think of it if Konami developed Metal Gear Solid for PS3 and 360. And then Microsoft whips out their wallet and pays Konami to drop the PS3 version entirely, or for 18 months. That's far more aggravating than a studio being paid right from the start to develop a game SOLELY for the 360 (like Bungie and Halo, you can bet there would be an uproar if it was planned for multiple consoles and then a payoff came to drop it from one console). But since it had exclusivity from the start, no one really minds at all.

I hope that clarifies the distinction.

[TBoneCapone]

Originally Posted by glenn22

That doesn't mean a thing. Think of yourself in the same situation... If I was asked that question I would say "no comment" also. Why should I bother having to deny such a thing??

In any event, who cares if they are being paid off? as long as they stay Blu.

Agreed.

[msallaq]

lol Superman got banned thats what he gets for been hd dvd fanboy

[lch]

why do they have to respond/comment about payoff if paramount who so openly accepted the bribe and still deny it ?

[eat_me_cool]

Originally Posted by Iceman

Paramount is the first company/studio to go from being a dual supporter to exclusive supporter. When you buy a HD-DVD player you KNOW that you aren't going to be able to see movies from Disney, Fox, Sony, MGM and Lionsgate. When you buy a BD player you KNOW that you aren't going to be able to see movies from Universal. However, when you bought a BD player you also thought that you were going to be able to see movies from Paramount. There's a big difference here, I hope you can see it.

This is why I could see the EU getting involved. They removed choice from customers who had already bought BD players. Transformers even advertised as coming on BD.

[Shadowself]

Originally Posted by Superman

Buena Vista: "No comment."

Translation: "Yes, we were paid off."

BD fanboys: "B-b-b-but Paramount!!11!"

Originally Posted by Superman

Im not trolling, it's the truth. For 2 weeks the BD guys have been screaming bloody murder about the Paramount/Dreamworks deal. Everyone with a little common sense knows the BDA or Sony has been paying companies off from the get go. Disney refusing to comment on the subject makes no sense unless there is something to hide.

I don;t understand the double-standard here when it comes to business tactics. Ideally, all the studios would have been neutral. Sony saw to it that wasnt going to happen. And that deal with Target not selling HD DVD players in store, you think money didnt exchange hands there?

Come on.

It goes to company policy of one studio versus the policy of the others. The "No Comment" came from a studio that has a history of saying that no matter what the situation is.

Claiming their saying, "No Comment", is tantamount to them admitting they took money to be exclusive is just like saying Apple is not going to release something new when they say, "No Comment". Neither one has any basis in fact.

It's the way that specific company handles mud slinging questions -- just don't answer at all either way.

Additionally, there has been several pieces of evidence that Paramount/SKG got paid to drop Blu-ray support. The only denials I have read have been with regard to who is paying the money.

With regard to Target... It has already been shown -- and even pointed out by the Blu-ray supporters on these boards (Just do a search!) -- that Target was paid for exclusive "end cap space" to highlight Blu-ray players. Target has NOT gone Blu-ray exclusive nor stopped selling HD DVD players (just look into it more closely before making such statements). Target was not paid to stop selling HD DVD.

[atdm71]

Originally Posted by Superman

Im not trolling, it's the truth. For 2 weeks the BD guys have been screaming bloody murder about the Paramount/Dreamworks deal. Everyone with a little common sense knows the BDA or Sony has been paying companies off from the get go. Disney refusing to comment on the subject makes no sense unless there is something to hide.

I don;t understand the double-standard here when it comes to business tactics. Ideally, all the studios would have been neutral. Sony saw to it that wasnt going to happen. And that deal with Target not selling HD DVD players in store, you think money didnt exchange hands there?

Come on.

There's a difference, dude. You know, and we all know, Blu-ray sells double what HD DVD does despite launching in the market several months later than HD DVD. So if Paramounts neutral titles were selling twice as well on Blu-ray, and they were!, to sell out the proportionately larger portion of your high definition customer base is counter-intuitive. The only reason anybody buys (no pun intended) into any type of rationale, is that there must have been some sort of big payoff involved. And there clearly was. So really, I don't think you'll find too many Blu-ray supporters that will have issue with incentives on their own. Business is business. However, when a large scale transaction like this goes down that runs counter to the greater portion of consumer support, and largely because of a payout, that's why Paramount's move illicited rage, and the actions taken by Target and Blockbuster can be more readily justified from a market demand perspective. The market demand for HD DVD content is very low. The manufacturer support for HD DVD is, by fact, very low in comparison. The only real reason to support it is that for some Consumers, it addresses the low end of the market through low price points on Toshiba devices. But for whatever reason, that hasn't worked. Consumers also want choice in devices (I hope it doesn't surprise you to learn that not everyone in the world adores Toshiba product). So when the market sees Paramount make such a bizzare move to a format few of their high def customers are buying -- everyone's scratching their head looking for a reason. You decide whether it was genuinely about the technology, or one hundred fifty million cash.

Most of their pissed off customers feel it was the latter. The only thing in the Paramount transaction that made any sense in the court of public opinion was the payoff, not the demand of their customers (which again, in the numbers, clearly indicated otherwise). That's why people think the move was akin to a *****, or a perfect definition of a sellout. Media didn't say anything negative about the Target or Blockbuster deal because it could be rationalized in genuine retail sales volume.

Understand or deny?

[Blu Titan]

Great job by the Mods banning the Trolls. I honestly had no idea how full some of the DUDers are. Do they have families or jobs? I am a supporter of the best HD format for movies, but I will not spread rumors or harrass anyone. I am most of us have notice all of the outright lies. All I can say is that I am happy.

[caliminius]

Originally Posted by UlicBelouve

But think of it if Konami developed Metal Gear Solid for PS3 and 360. And then Microsoft whips out their wallet and pays Konami to drop the PS3 version entirely, or for 18 months. That's far more aggravating than a studio being paid right from the start to develop a game SOLELY for the 360 (like Bungie and Halo, you can bet there would be an uproar if it was planned for multiple consoles and then a payoff came to drop it from one console). But since it had exclusivity from the start, no one really minds at all.

I hope that clarifies the distinction.

Halo is a bad example. It was originally planned for PCs and Macs, then MS bought Bungie to bring it over to the Xbox. So, Halo wasn't exclusive from the start. But I do understand your point.