Home Video Sales Thread (HMM weekly/DEG quarterly/Nielsen Top 20/etc.)

[bruceames]

Originally Posted by Ant1010

lol Bruce you must be bored tonight to be entertaining this

Yeah after I typed that up I thought damn why I am spending so much time on this.

[20th Century Boy]

I have zero idea how 4k discs will take off when one camp wants to go all digital and include people who aren't sticklers for A/V quality, just convenience, and the other side who are sticklers (myself included) know 4k is a total rip off of just 2k upscales with new packaging. I won't pay premium prices for upscaled blu rays, why would I reconfigure my entire system to do so for "4k" discs? Obviously films made from the 90s and prior are candidates for true 4k remastering, but those are hardly the titles getting any attention. And as far as I know movies today, especially tech heavy ones are still finishing with a 2k pipeline and big blockbusters like LOTR almost certainly won't be going back and reworking their SFX for 4k, so, yeah, save for a REALLY good marketing campaign I see 4k as the last physical media and a pretty weak one at that.

I also don't see HDR as much of a (genuine) selling point either: it fudges the original schemes of past films that can be redone in 4k and is a gimmick for the current day upscales.

And to add to that, the biggest draw back that few people are discussing are the built in software/firmware in EVERY 4k player that can be used at will to bind a specific disc to a specific machine. That almost negates the entire reason for physical media altogether. I don't say this often but: EPIC FAIL.

[ZoetMB]

You guys are overthinking this. What drives technology upgrades by consumers in TV are two things: a) people with too much money who always want the latest thing, or b) the replacement cycle (a set dies, or someone wants a bigger screen and they upgrade technology at the same time, generally reverting the old TV, if still working, to another room).

People don't necessarily want 4K TV, but that's practically all that's available and certainly what gets pushed at retail.

UHD is not going to kill 1080p Blu-ray. And Blu-ray is not going to kill DVD. DVD still outsells BD. After all this time (I don't know how many times I have to repeat this), BD still only has a 24% physical market unit share and a 36.7% physical market revenue share (in the U.S.). In a typical week, only 5 titles sell more on Blu than DVD, although for the week ending 3/19, 8 titles are selling more on Blu, a good sign if it sticks.

In that same week, no title had a 3D share above 10% and only one title, "John Wick" had a decent UHD share at 21.72%. The #2 title with the biggest UHD share was "Suicide Squad" with 11.29% and everything else was under 10%. The #16 title with the biggest UHD share sold only 1.28% in UHD. So let's get real.

Trying to rationalize the numbers is gamesmanship. They are what they are. DVD is still very successful for two reasons: a) many people don't understand the more advanced technology, and b) whether they do or don't, they don't care. DVD provides very inexpensive entertainment and works on players purchased 15 years ago for people who just want to see the movie and don't care what it looks like. These were people who were perfectly happy watching VHS on a crappy analog TV and only moved to DVD because it was less expensive and more convenient.

IMO, streaming might drive down BD sales more than DVD sales because it's more likely that DVD users either don't have high speed internet or have limited data plans.

And what's going to hurt all physical media going forward is the youth culture that doesn't feel the need to own media.

[bruceames]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

IMO, streaming might drive down BD sales more than DVD sales because it's more likely that DVD users either don't have high speed internet or have limited data plans.

And what's going to hurt all physical media going forward is the youth culture that doesn't feel the need to own media.

I assume by streaming you're referring mainly to Netflix. By now Netflix is very mainstream and is just as likely to be used by the poor as by the rich. Maybe even more so. Limited data plans matter little if you're streaming in SD. After all, you say most people don't care about quality.

I think what hurts physical media most is the general oversaturation in content. Streaming actually hurts cable/sat the most. Netflix rarely has any of the top 20 titles, and EST growth has slowed to single digits. People have so much to watch from so many sources (including their stash of unwatched DVDs) and so little time (especially considering how much time people spend on social media and their smart phones these days).

But still, many still want to watch the latest movies coming out. And the only way to do that is to either buy it on physical or buy (or sometimes rent) it on digital. Physical is always the better buy because it always come with the digital copy anyway. So that helps keeps sales going and will for a long time.

BTW, although most titles in the top 20 sell more DVD units that BD, the top titles almost always sell more BD units. In fact, on average the overall Top 20 unit share is close to 50 percent and perhaps 60 percent in favor of BD when it's converted into revenue.

[rdodolak]

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by rdodolak

Shame, but at least it's not too damaging.

[bruceames]

It's actually pretty good considering the box office power last year was $100 million more and that doesn't even include the top selling title Game of Thrones season 5.

[floridaswamprat]

What amazes me is that according to Home Media Magazine (March 18, 2017), DVDs still outsell BD by 3-to-1 (unit sales). I still think that if the cost of BD came down, many would convert, but, again citing the same source, average DVD cost is $10.28 while average BD cost is $19.19. For some (many?) that extra $9 means a lot.

http://www.homemediamagazine.com/mar...k-ended-031817

[bruceames]

Originally Posted by floridaswamprat

What amazes me is that according to Home Media Magazine (March 18, 2017), DVDs still outsell BD by 3-to-1 (unit sales). I still think that if the cost of BD came down, many would convert, but, again citing the same source, average DVD cost is $10.28 while average BD cost is $19.19. For some (many?) that extra $9 means a lot.

http://www.homemediamagazine.com/mar...k-ended-031817

In a way that 3:1 ratio is misleading as DVDs are sold in every nook and cranny and even now a lot of stuff is released only on DVD (especially TV shows, docs, special interest, and many catalogs).

But for the Top 20 sales, it's about half Blu-ray, half DVD, with the top movies probably close to 60 percent Blu-ray. Also note that the price difference on Top 20 titles is less than $9 and probably closer to around $5. DVD has a long sales tail and many are sold really cheap, which brings the average price down.

[rdodolak]

Originally Posted by bruceames

In a way that 3:1 ratio is misleading as DVDs are sold in every nook and cranny and even now a lot of stuff is released only on DVD (especially TV shows, docs, special interest, and many catalogs).

It would be interesting to see the overall DVD to BD ratio only for titles released on both formats.

[bruceames]

Originally Posted by rdodolak

It would be interesting to see the overall DVD to BD ratio only for titles released on both formats.

It really depends on the type of release and the price difference of course. New releases DVD don't tend to have a UV code anymore and if the price difference is small then that would help Blu-ray's share (for example, Sing DVD was only $2 cheaper and didn't have a code, so the BD share was 65%).

On the other hand if both releases offer similar content but have a big difference in price then that would tilt the scales to DVD.

[Dynamo of Eternia]

I'm not sure how easy this info would be to track/obtain/maintain (probably difficult), but I'd be interested in seeing disc sales statistics from another view point...

Rather than just the total overall revenue of all DVD and Blu-ray sales collectively, I'd be interested in seeing how some types of releases are selling compared to past similar releases.

Meaning like when a season of an old TV series comes out on DVD for the first time, how well is something like that selling now compared to DVD releases of similarly popular series a few years back? The same with the random catalog title that may be coming out for the first time, etc.

I know disc sales are down and that digital (both services and streaming) are having an impact on that.

But still, I've always maintained that some degree of decline was inevitable, even if digital simply didn't exist today.

I still very actively collecting Blu-Rays and DVDs. But on average I'm not buying as many of them as I did say 10 years ago.

And that's not due to me making it a point to cut back, or a loss of interest on my part. Rather, it's just that when I have something in my collection already, I have little reason to buy it again (short of a re-release on a newer format, a new transfer, new bonuses, etc... and my interest in double-dipping will depend on a number of other factors such as how much I like the title, the price, etc.).

The point is that with how much I've already collected and have, there is little reason to go out and buy most of it again.

These days it's mostly new releases (i.e. movies just out of theaters, TV seasons just coming to Blu-Ray or DVD) with the occasional catalog title sprinkled in here or there.

I would imagine that such is the case for a lot of collectors.


So getting back to my main overall point, I'm interested in knowing how certain releases/types of releases individually are doing compared to similar individual releases 5, 10, and 15 years ago. I realize this is info that is probably not readily available. But I think it would give a different perspective on this topic.

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by bruceames

In a way that 3:1 ratio is misleading as DVDs are sold in every nook and cranny and even now a lot of stuff is released only on DVD (especially TV shows, docs, special interest, and many catalogs).

But for the Top 20 sales, it's about half Blu-ray, half DVD, with the top movies probably close to 60 percent Blu-ray. Also note that the price difference on Top 20 titles is less than $9 and probably closer to around $5. DVD has a long sales tail and many are sold really cheap, which brings the average price down.

I don't consider that 3:1 ratio misleading. DVD is sold in every nook and cranny because there's demand in every nook and cranny. If there was a demand for BD, that would be sold in those nook and crannies as well. And while some of those TV shows can't be released on BD due to only SD tape being available (unless they were shot on film), the rest would be released on BD if there was a demand, but there's no demand. I still find it hard to believe that anyone buys those DVDs sold (and overpriced) in my local drug store, but if they didn't sell, they'd use the space for something else.

The average share of the top 20 BD titles with the greatest share (for the week ending 3/26) is 53.3%. The median is 50.73%. But if you weight it based upon the relative sales level of each, it actually brings the average up to around 60%, but that's only because the best selling title garners almost all the sales. For the week ending 3/26, the 2nd best selling BD title sold 26% of the #1 title. The #4 title sold only 7.6% of the #1 title. The 20th best selling title sold less than 1% of the #1 title.

But what that also means is that for the most part, titles that sell less overall also sell a smaller percentage on Blu. Logically, that shouldn't be the case.

BD share is improving though. It used to be that only five titles per week sold more than 50% on Blu. Now it's usually the top 10-11 titles. But that's still pretty lousy. Everything released on both formats should be selling better on Blu. But as I've posted many times before, the masses don't really give a crap about quality and I bet there's still an amazing number of consumers who really don't know what Blu is.

I still believe that streaming is going to hurt BD more than DVD. I have to believe that a larger percentage of DVD consumers don't want to pay for streaming subscriptions, even relatively inexpensive ones like Netflix and/or have limited data plans.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

I don't consider that 3:1 ratio misleading. DVD is sold in every nook and cranny because there's demand in every nook and cranny. If there was a demand for BD, that would be sold in those nook and crannies as well. And while some of those TV shows can't be released on BD due to only SD tape being available (unless they were shot on film), the rest would be released on BD if there was a demand, but there's no demand. I still find it hard to believe that anyone buys those DVDs sold (and overpriced) in my local drug store, but if they didn't sell, they'd use the space for something else.

The average share of the top 20 BD titles with the greatest share (for the week ending 3/26) is 53.3%. The median is 50.73%. But if you weight it based upon the relative sales level of each, it actually brings the average up to around 60%, but that's only because the best selling title garners almost all the sales. For the week ending 3/26, the 2nd best selling BD title sold 26% of the #1 title. The #4 title sold only 7.6% of the #1 title. The 20th best selling title sold less than 1% of the #1 title.

But what that also means is that for the most part, titles that sell less overall also sell a smaller percentage on Blu. Logically, that shouldn't be the case.

BD share is improving though. It used to be that only five titles per week sold more than 50% on Blu. Now it's usually the top 10-11 titles. But that's still pretty lousy. Everything released on both formats should be selling better on Blu. But as I've posted many times before, the masses don't really give a crap about quality and I bet there's still an amazing number of consumers who really don't know what Blu is.

I still believe that streaming is going to hurt BD more than DVD. I have to believe that a larger percentage of DVD consumers don't want to pay for streaming subscriptions, even relatively inexpensive ones like Netflix and/or have limited data plans.

It's a shame you don't express the same concern about Digital HD, a format that is shown worrying signs even at this early stage. Around 6% up YOY and has fallen from double digits.

[bruceames]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

The average share of the top 20 BD titles with the greatest share (for the week ending 3/26) is 53.3%. The median is 50.73%. But if you weight it based upon the relative sales level of each, it actually brings the average up to around 60%, but that's only because the best selling title garners almost all the sales. For the week ending 3/26, the 2nd best selling BD title sold 26% of the #1 title. The #4 title sold only 7.6% of the #1 title. The 20th best selling title sold less than 1% of the #1 title.

But what that also means is that for the most part, titles that sell less overall also sell a smaller percentage on Blu. Logically, that shouldn't be the case.

The titles that sell less (among new releases) tend to be comedies or dramas and those normally don't do as well, percentage-wise, on Blu-ray, so it makes sense to me.

BD share is improving though. It used to be that only five titles per week sold more than 50% on Blu. Now it's usually the top 10-11 titles. But that's still pretty lousy. Everything released on both formats should be selling better on Blu. But as I've posted many times before, the masses don't really give a crap about quality and I bet there's still an amazing number of consumers who really don't know what Blu is.

Blu-ray average Top 20 share seems to be improving at a faster rate than overall. But I think a lot of it has to do with the value proposition, especially as Digital HD becomes more popular. For example, the Sing DVD was only $2.00 less than the Blu-ray and it did not come with a digital code. I do wonder how much of the disc sales these days is people buying discs primarily for the code and using the disc as a backup. Seems you get more and more posters saying they are doing just that, since the BD combo pack is practically the same price as buying the Digital HD copy only, and even cheaper if they wait a few months for the inevitable price drop.

I still believe that streaming is going to hurt BD more than DVD. I have to believe that a larger percentage of DVD consumers don't want to pay for streaming subscriptions, even relatively inexpensive ones like Netflix and/or have limited data plans.

I don't know. One could make a case for the opposite. Netflix is super cheap and it's becoming very mainstream already. I know quite a few people who have very low incomes and it seems they all have Netflix. On the other hand, Blu-ray and UHD BD buyers will be more likely to be loyal to disc, since it's a newer format and because they are more discerning on quality. Also DVD versions on new releases are so gimped these days it's a wonder why the shares remain as high as they are.

Also BD/UHD buyers will have more disposable income to continue buying discs while DVD buyers may just say screw it and gravitate to Netflix.

Anyway streaming really only hurts catalog disc sales. Since most BD revenue comes from new releases which are largely unaffected by subscription streaming, it makes sense that the format would be less affected than DVD, which derives only perhaps a third of its sales from new and recent release.

And, as Steed mentioned, Digital HD sales are starting to peak already. So when it starts to decline, it may be at a faster rate than Blu-ray, meaning it won't hurt Blu-ray further at all.

Of course, the studios have some pull in that, where they can gimp the Blu-ray versions by deciding not to include the digital code in them anymore, forcing those buyers to instead buy the code directly. Will be interesting to see if they ever decide to go there.

[bruceames]

http://www.homemediamagazine.com/mar...k-ended-032517


Box Office Comparison DOWN -21.59% From the Previous Year
Street Title Box Office | Street Title Box Office
|
3/21/17 Sing $269.96 | 3/22/16 The Hunger Games: Mockingjay — Part 2 $281.72
3/21/17 Assassin's Creed $54.65 | 3/22/16 Daddy's Home $150.36
3/21/17 Live by Night $10.38 | 3/22/16 The Letters $1.65
3/21/17 Miss Sloane $3.50 | 3/22/16 James White $0.10
3/21/17 Julieta $1.46 | 3/22/16 Noma: My Perfect Storm $0.02
3/21/17 Evolution $0.02 |
3/21/17 A Kind of Murder $0.00 |
3/21/17 Fire at Sea $0.12 |
3/21/17 Tower $0.10 |
|
Total Box Office Power: $340.18 | Total Box Office Power: $433.85
|
Top Selling Title for Week Ended 3/26/17 | Top Selling Title for Week Ended 3/27/16
Sing | The Hunger Games: Mockingjay — Part 2









Unit Sales (in millions)
Share This Year Change Last Year
28.61% Blu-ray 2.31 -18.0% 2.81
71.39% DVD 5.75 -35.9% 8.98
Total 8.06 -31.63% 11.79
DOWN








Average Disc Cost
This Year Change Last Year
BD Avg Cost $18.85 1.6% $18.55
DVD Avg Cost $10.37 0.5% $10.32

[bruceames]

I guess more people wanted Hunger Games than Sing, which is not surprising.

[ZoetMB]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

It's a shame you don't express the same concern about Digital HD, a format that is shown worrying signs even at this early stage. Around 6% up YOY and has fallen from double digits.

If I had the numbers I might. But I would find it hard to believe between Netflix and Amazon Prime video services in addition to all the others that it's not growing quickly.

And if it's not growing, then why are studio execs fighting for day-and-date? (which I believe will kill the theatrical business).

If Blu is down, DVD is down and digital is not growing fast enough, then this industry is in real trouble as it would mean that consumers are giving up on movies in favor of tweeting, Facebook, Instagram, etc.

[bruceames]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

If I had the numbers I might. But I would find it hard to believe between Netflix and Amazon Prime video services in addition to all the others that it's not growing quickly.

And if it's not growing, then why are studio execs fighting for day-and-date? (which I believe will kill the theatrical business).

If Blu is down, DVD is down and digital is not growing fast enough, then this industry is in real trouble as it would mean that consumers are giving up on movies in favor of tweeting, Facebook, Instagram, etc.

Steed was referring to EST (which has been renamed Digital HD, although the name change isn't yet reflected in the DEG Report).

EST/Digital HD was up only 0.26 percent in Q4 2016 and 5.42 percent for the full year. The downward growth trend is obvious if you go back a few years.

I don't think the industry is in trouble but rather than the correction from the DVD spike from its glory days is still continuing. We should see a bottom in the sell-through market soon enough.

http://degonline.org/wp-content/uplo...tion_Final.pdf

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...&postcount=546

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

If I had the numbers I might. But I would find it hard to believe between Netflix and Amazon Prime video services in addition to all the others that it's not growing quickly.

And if it's not growing, then why are studio execs fighting for day-and-date? (which I believe will kill the theatrical business).

If Blu is down, DVD is down and digital is not growing fast enough, then this industry is in real trouble as it would mean that consumers are giving up on movies in favor of tweeting, Facebook, Instagram, etc.

You can't throw in Netflix and Amazon just because you have a 'theory' that Netflix is affecting Bluray. (Which I don't think it is) let's compare like for like here.



By the way, nothing is going to kill the theatrical experience. Several technologies are aligning that will make that experience a special one again. Also, why presume it's social media that would kill film? The games industry and tv shows are both expected to grow through to 2019. The gaming industry is already a multi billion industry and the top end gaming PC side is on fire at the moment. Also, tv has never been more popular, whether via streaming, broadcast or cable. By the way, none of those things will kill film.