Physical & Digital EST: The Future of Home Video Discussion Thread

[Vilya]

This article compares the number of ticket sold by year as well as how they arrived at those numbers.

In 1997, 1,385,216,757 tickets were sold.
In 2018, so far, 1,418,410,269 tickets were sold. 2018 has already surpassed all of 1997 and has surpassed every year from 2010 forward -and we are only a fraction over three months into 2018.

What any of us observe at our local theater is only anecdotal and it is also an insignificant sample size to reflect any trends. Data is our friend.

https://www.the-numbers.com/market/

Correction: Numbers for 2018 are just projections.
"Figures for 2018 are at an annualized rate."

[flyry]

Originally Posted by Vilya

This article compares the number of ticket sold by year as well as how they arrived at those numbers.

In 1997, 1,385,216,757 tickets were sold.
In 2018, so far, 1,418,410,269 tickets were sold. 2018 has already surpassed all of 1997 and has surpassed every year from 2010 forward.

What any of us observe at our local theater is only anecdotal and it is also an insignificant sample size to reflect any trends. Data is our friend.

https://www.the-numbers.com/market/

Disney #1 movie 7 years running and 8 of the last 9.


Recent article as well
https://www.theringer.com/movies/201...inity-war-coco

[peep6543]

Wow, yeah that is pretty interesting. Black Panther was/is a total juggernaut this year. Sprinkle in Avengers Infinity War and Disney just might make it into the black this year!

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by flyry

Disney #1 movie 7 years running and 8 of the last 9.

Recent article as well
https://www.theringer.com/movies/201...inity-war-coco

Disney is a juggernaut and "it’s Killmonger-proof."

In my post, I was just demonstrating that people are still attending the movie theater and in healthy numbers. I have no doubt that most of them likely saw a Disney film.

[Dustin44]

Originally Posted by Vilya

This article compares the number of ticket sold by year as well as how they arrived at those numbers.

In 1997, 1,385,216,757 tickets were sold.
In 2018, so far, 1,418,410,269 tickets were sold. 2018 has already surpassed all of 1997 and has surpassed every year from 2010 forward -and we are only a fraction over three months into 2018.

What any of us observe at our local theater is only anecdotal and it is also an insignificant sample size to reflect any trends. Data is our friend.

https://www.the-numbers.com/market/

Where are they getting these numbers for 2018?

BoxOfficeMojo.com shows totally different numbers for 2018:

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Dustin44

Where are they getting these numbers for 2018?

BoxOfficeMojo.com shows totally different numbers for 2018:

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/

The site I referenced says they arrived at their numbers thusly:

"Note: in order to provide a fair comparison between movies released in different years, all rankings are based on ticket sales, which are calculated using average ticket prices announced by the MPAA in their annual state of the industry report."

and: "Our Theatrical Market pages are based on the Domestic Theatrical Market performance only. The Domestic Market is defined as the North American movie territory (consisting of the United States, Canada, Puerto Rico and Guam). "

They say their source is the MPAA.

https://www.the-numbers.com/market/

Edit: I just saw this little tidbit regarding the 2018 numbers: "Note: Figures for 2018 are at an annualized rate." Or, they simply made their own projection for 2018. Damn italics getcha every time.

Other than their estimating for 2018, the numbers for the other years, 2017 and back, are a little more conservative than what boxofficemojo reported, but still in the same ballpark.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by flyry

Disney blockbusters are almost the only thing people are flocking to the theaters for. Disney owns 5 of the top 10 all-time worldwide grossers. and 8 of the top 15. Most of those in the last 3 years alone.

I know this. Think of a theatrical window of two or three weeks then a tier one subscription charge. Tier one being access to first run films just weeks after theatrical. Of course the regular subscription will give you those films at a later date, like the cinema you will be paying for quick access. This method will almost certainly be implemented sooner or later.

[alchav21]

Originally Posted by Vilya

Even so, for $19.96 you can have both and gift the disc to someone if you decide you have no need for it. Essentially, you can have both disc and code for the same price as just the code alone. The best value seems clear to me.

Originally Posted by Dustin44

Yeah, it looks like you can get the disc + digital for $19.96 now on Vudu.

So if he wants to watch it now, that would be his best bet. He can watch the digital now and get the disc on release day and then decide to keep or sell the disc.

So that's his best bet, if he wants to watch the movie right now.

That use to be very appealing to me, Disc+Digital then you can watch the Movie right now with Vudu InstaWatch. Then I would sell the Disc later, but no one wants to pay anywhere near the Buying Price, even with the Digital Copy included. So if you shop the MA/UV Digital Stores you can find Recent Release Movie Codes from around $7 - $12. For UHD they can go from $10 - $15. I still buy 4K Combo Packs, but I won't pay over $20 because I can't sell the Disc for usually $10 and below. Nobody wants the Disc anymore!

[Dustin44]

Originally Posted by Vilya

The site I referenced says they arrived at their numbers thusly:

"Note: in order to provide a fair comparison between movies released in different years, all rankings are based on ticket sales, which are calculated using average ticket prices announced by the MPAA in their annual state of the industry report."

and: "Our Theatrical Market pages are based on the Domestic Theatrical Market performance only. The Domestic Market is defined as the North American movie territory (consisting of the United States, Canada, Puerto Rico and Guam). "

They say their source is the MPAA.

https://www.the-numbers.com/market/

Edit: I just saw this little tidbit regarding the 2018 numbers: "Note: Figures for 2018 are at an annualized rate." Or, they simply made their own projection for 2018. Damn italics getcha every time.

Other than their estimating for 2018, the numbers for the other years, 2017 and back, are a little more conservative than what boxofficemojo reported, but still in the same ballpark.

Oh, okay. They are just making a projection for 2018 based on the numbers so far. That makes sense. (I just knew that 2018 couldn't have already surpassed all of 2017 just 3 months into the year. They should have made it more clear that the 2018 numbers are just a projection.)

Their numbers and BoxOfficeMojo's numbers are pretty much the same otherwise.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by alchav21

Nobody wants the Disc anymore!

You and your hyperbole; there is no end to it.

Disc had 22.9% of the home video entertainment market in 2017 compared to Digital Sell thru's 10.48%. Disc sales were $4.7 billion while Digital was just $2.15 billion.

People not only want and buy discs, they spend more on them than they do on digital sell thru by more than 2 to 1.

I will give you credit for being consistent: consistently wrong.

https://forum.blu-ray.com/attachment...1&d=1515529654

[veritas]

Originally Posted by alchav21

That use to be very appealing to me, Disc+Digital then you can watch the Movie right now with Vudu InstaWatch. Then I would sell the Disc later, but no one wants to pay anywhere near the Buying Price, even with the Digital Copy included. So if you shop the MA/UV Digital Stores you can find Recent Release Movie Codes from around $7 - $12. For UHD they can go from $10 - $15. I still buy 4K Combo Packs, but I won't pay over $20 because I can't sell the Disc for usually $10 and below. Nobody wants the Disc anymore!

I sell a few of my physical movies and yesterday a guy offered to buy a few digital movies for like $4 a piece (for finding dory, peter pan and aladdin king of thieves I actually found the offer kind of insulting given 1 is in the vault and the other is dmc exclusive). Every time somebody offers to buy just a digital copy of a movie from me they either flake or offer like $5 or less. If we go with your logic then nobody wants to buy digital anymore!

Personally I think its just that nobody wants to pay full price. If you are selling something that is new sealed they want at least 20% off what retail would charge them and if it isn't new sealed they want like 50% off retail. On the digital side of things people are even more picky and they want deals at around 66% to 75% off retail in my experience.

From my own personal experience digital copy's have so little value I just buy a movie used when I want a digital copy code (because its not worth redeeming them or worth trying to sell them for most people). The odds are like 4/5 that the digital copy code wont have been used ( its more like 50 50 for disney movies) and then either way I just resell the blu ray for what I payed or more since the used market isn't nearly as volatile. I actually did this just last night I bought Bambi 2 for 5.99 and the digital copy was still good. I already have a copy of bambi 2 with a slip cover so I'll probably just resell Bambi 2 eventually for like 10 to 15.

[alchav21]

Originally Posted by alchav21

Nobody wants the Disc anymore!

Originally Posted by Vilya

You and your hyperbole; there is no end to it.

Disc had 22.9% of the home video entertainment market in 2017 compared to Digital Sell thru's 10.48%. Disc sales were $4.7 billion while Digital was just $2.15 billion.

People not only want and buy discs, they spend more on them than they do on digital sell thru by more than 2 to 1.

I will give you credit for being consistent: consistently wrong.

Originally Posted by veritas

Personally I think its just that nobody wants to pay full price.

From my own personal experience digital copy's have so little value I just buy a movie used when I want a digital copy code (because its not worth redeeming them or worth trying to sell them for most people).

Hey, I just call it as I see it. My small eBay window, and my observations at Best Buy or Target tells me a lot. Like I said, I took some Marketing Classes and Statistics was one of them. I learned you can show what ever you want to prove with Stats. Also Disc people are in denial, the Bit Stream for Blu-ray is a mere 40Mbps, and iTunes was clocked at 30Mbps one of the lowest rated Providers. Someone should check MA, their Bit Rates should be well above Disc Quality.

[stonesfan129]

How does it make any sense to compare a 1080P Blu-ray encoded with H264 to a 4K (2160p) iTunes stream encoded with H265? 4K discs run at 80-100mbps so a stream at 30mbps would probably look terrible. From the information I could find, iTunes 1080P streams run at 7-15mbps (not 30) and are encoded with H264. It probably looks okay but it's a far cry from the quality of the same thing on 1080P Blu-ray running at 25-50mbps.

iTunes also encodes audio with 384k AC3 5.1 - some movies are only available with stereo AAC - and it sounds awful compared to even the core AC3 tracks on a Blu-ray much less compared to Dolby TrueHD, PCM or DTS-HD Master Audio. At least with VUDU, some movies give you DD+ in 7.1 channels.

Then to make matters worse, take a movie like Dark Knight Rises. The Blu-ray has the IMAX shots in full screen. The streaming channels chop it off and make the whole movie widescreen.

Streaming is convenient, but it is not disc quality. Stop saying it is.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by alchav21

Hey, I just call it as I see it. My small eBay window, and my observations at Best Buy or Target tells me a lot. Like I said, I took some Marketing Classes and Statistics was one of them. I learned you can show what ever you want to prove with Stats. Also Disc people are in denial, the Bit Stream for Blu-ray is a mere 40Mbps, and iTunes was clocked at 30Mbps one of the lowest rated Providers. Someone should check MA, their Bit Rates should be well above Disc Quality.

No, you just repeat unsupported assertions based on nothing but your limited observations at a couple of local retailers that you occasionally visit. You have in the past regaled us with your conversations with store clerks and a random customer or two in a further attempt to prop up your made-up beliefs.

You said:
"I learned you can show what ever you want to prove with Stats."

If that is so, where are your stats then? Where is your statistical proof for your position? You dismiss all evidence because you have none to support any of what you postulate and because you dismiss it, you don't feel you need to offer any. Very convenient for you.

All of these "observations" you claim to have are just anecdotes and your sample size of a couple of stores in your neighborhood is beyond insignificant. From two trips to two stores, you diagnosed the health of an entire global industry.

You dismiss the data, the statistics, which have come from multiple and well respected sources not because they are "made up", but because they contradict what you want to hear. With you, nothing is true, no matter the sources, unless you like what it says. Your denial of facts is the height of intellectual laziness; with you all the data is a fabrication, therefore you do not need to support your imbecilic statements because all stats are fake and thus your circular illogic is fulfilled.

Instead, you just repeat these extreme and absolutist statements that "disc is dead" and that "streaming has achieved disc quality" when neither are true. You never support your ridiculous claims because they can not be supported; you offer no citations because you have none. You dismiss all evidence and then offer nothing but your silly shopping stories in their place. News flash for you: what you think you see during a trip to St. George, Utah's Target is not the barometer by which a worldwide industry is measured.

What people purchase is objectively and quantitatively tracked, analyzed, and verified. Every industry relies on such data as a fundamental part of their planning. Why do they go through all that expense and bother when they could just send you out shopping?

As for you taking a marketing class and a statistics class somehow elevating you to some imaginary expert status above any and all other sources of documented fact, I offer you this meme:



After all this time and after all of your parroting the same robotic, reflexive, and boilerplate slogans, you are either just a troll or you are cognitively impaired, or even both.

I took a psych class once, so by your own standards of having taken a marketing class once, that makes me an expert and thereby qualifies me to diagnose you. Now, if only I could have you committed.

[doctor_who]

Originally Posted by stonesfan129

How does it make any sense to compare a 1080P Blu-ray encoded with H264 to a 4K (2160p) iTunes stream encoded with H265? 4K discs run at 80-100mbps so a stream at 30mbps would probably look terrible. From the information I could find, iTunes 1080P streams run at 7-15mbps (not 30) and are encoded with H264. It probably looks okay but it's a far cry from the quality of the same thing on 1080P Blu-ray running at 25-50mbps.

iTunes also encodes audio with 384k AC3 5.1 - some movies are only available with stereo AAC - and it sounds awful compared to even the core AC3 tracks on a Blu-ray much less compared to Dolby TrueHD, PCM or DTS-HD Master Audio. At least with VUDU, some movies give you DD+ in 7.1 channels.

Then to make matters worse, take a movie like Dark Knight Rises. The Blu-ray has the IMAX shots in full screen. The streaming channels chop it off and make the whole movie widescreen.

Streaming is convenient, but it is not disc quality. Stop saying it is.

Wait, are you implying that iTunes 4K HDR is not as good as a standar blu-ray for the same title?

Because it’s certainly better.
It’s not a question.

You’re talking in the wrong decade

[veritas]

Originally Posted by doctor_who

Wait, are you implying that iTunes 4K HDR is not as good as a standar blu-ray for the same title?

Because it’s certainly better.
It’s not a question.

You’re talking in the wrong decade

A fair number of blu rays look better in blu ray then in 4k iTunes hdr. 4k hdr and blu ray is probably close enough that the majority cant tell the difference between them though. The HDR is also flat out terrible on some movies.

[Vilya]

If you are going to compare streaming quality with disc quality, you need to compare the best of what both can offer. With disc, that would be 4K UHD and with streaming it would be 4K streaming.

4K streaming has not equaled 4K UHD disc. Aple's 4K TV with an average bitrate of 30 Mbps and their advanced codec has come closest in picture quality, but they still have artifacts and macro blocking in dark scenes. Their 4K stream does not quite resolve fine detail, especially in backgrounds, as well as 4K UHD disc, either. 4K streaming looks very good, and good enough for many viewers, but it is not as good as 4K UHD.

The audio gap is much wider. 4K streaming does not compete well with 4K UHD. 4K UHD offers Dolby Atmos and DTS: X; 4K streaming does not.

The best of streaming has not equaled the best of discs. Maybe someday, but that day has not arrived.

[Vilya]

I am making a late night shopping trip to my local Super Walmart; does anyone have any burning questions they would like answered by the clerks working there? What is the meaning of life? Where is the fountain of youth? How to achieve world peace? Investment advice? Just let me know in the next few minutes.

[alchav21]

Originally Posted by alchav21

Hey, I just call it as I see it. My small eBay window, and my observations at Best Buy or Target tells me a lot. Like I said, I took some Marketing Classes and Statistics was one of them. I learned you can show what ever you want to prove with Stats. Also Disc people are in denial, the Bit Stream for Blu-ray is a mere 40Mbps, and iTunes was clocked at 30Mbps one of the lowest rated Providers. Someone should check MA, their Bit Rates should be well above Disc Quality.

Originally Posted by PenguinInfinity

Statistics often don't show the whole picture but thinking they are less accurate than your extremely minimal personal observations is just ridiculous.

I've sold thousands of DVDs and Blu-rays on eBay and Amazon but I've never sold any digital copies. Therefore from my very limited perspective: no one buys digital copies but thousands of people buy physical copies.

You could accurately say that streaming achieved "disc quality" close to 10 years ago when it surpassed DVD. The fact that streaming has now surpassed Blu-ray (another outdated disc format) is just as meaningless.

The term "disc quality" should only be applied to the highest quality disc format. That is currently 4K Ultra HD Blu-ray and streaming has not matched it.

I just say Blu-ray because it is just a mere 40Mbps, which is max, vary easily achieved. To surpass UHD 4K Discs you need 128Mbps, also not insurmountable. With the new H.265 Codec and Adaptive Streaming, all the Streaming Providers have to do is update the Movie Codec for the appropriate Bit Rate. Then it's all dependent on your Bandwidth, and the Bit Rate will increase with it. So to achieve UHD 4K Disc Quality, the highest Bit Rates are around 70Mbps. This is my Bandwidth, so I could have UHD Disc Quality Streaming!

[DouglasRobert]

I see that Walmart is selling these little cards for digital copies of movies for about $20 per each. I just don't get that at all. Why spend that much for a file, when one can buy the physical copy and perhaps a digital copy too.

That said, I prefer the actual physical copy.
The only portable device I have is a small screen smart phone. No way am I going to want to watch a movie on the tiny screen with bad sound.

For my computer I get online via paying for data for my hotspot. No way am I going to download movies and eat up my data just to watch a movie.

Even if I had unlimited data I still prefer the actual disc in hand.