Two very interesting new studies on BD by research firms

[Grubert]

Both of these were presented at Media-Tech

Screen Digest





Blu-ray to account for one in three sales by 2011 (W. Europe & USA)
Blu-ray movie sales in Europe in 2008 to be only 2% of DVD sales
Blu-ray adoption limited by HDTV adoption (but this is increasing swiftly - will go in Europe from 17% in 2007 to 74% in 2012)
Penetration of BD standalones in HDTV-equipped households to hit 34% in Europe and 51% in US by 2012

BD movies sold to consumers in 2007:
US 5,192,000
UK 819,000
France 285,000
Germany 300,000
Italy 157,000
Spain 120,000

Understanding and Solutions


(Western Europe market)

Key points:
- In Europe, percentage of displays 37" or more will rise from 13% in 2006 to 40% in 2011.
- There is a "content gap" in Europe: lots of households will have HD-ready displays but no HD broadcast.
- In Western Europe digital download sales will increase, but nowhere as much as BD movie sales

[Bullseye]

Very interesting. But the market penetration is somewhat slow but at least we are still in business in 2012.

[The Lion King]

Damn. Blu-ray will become commercial. It will no longer be this cool thing that you can brag about to people who don't have it. Damn.

[Bageara]

Originally Posted by The Lion King

Damn. Blu-ray will become commercial. It will no longer be this cool thing that you can brag about to people who don't have it. Damn.

Haha...LOL..yeh thats right i like bragging about blu.Damn

[JAGUAR1977]

Looks good and what we expect.

[tron3]

Originally Posted by The Lion King

Damn. Blu-ray will become commercial. It will no longer be this cool thing that you can brag about to people who don't have it. Damn.

I don't brag about it, really. But I do extol the virtue of BD to the ignorant.

When you brag it sometimes comes across as, "Ha, ha, you don't have it and you can't get it. NYA NYA." That can turn people off from even wanting it. "Share the blu-ray experience. Don't hog it."

[dialog_gvf]

Originally Posted by Grubert

(Western Europe market)

Key points:
- In Europe, percentage of displays 37" or more will rise from 13% in 2006 to 40% in 2011.
- There is a "content gap" in Europe: lots of households will have HD-ready displays but no HD broadcast.
- In Western Europe digital download sales will increase, but nowhere as much as BD movie sales

Shouldn't the lack of content be an opportunity for explosive BD adoption?

In North America we're fighting people who think HD-lite movies are great. BD has HD competition.

Gary

[theprophecy247]

Originally Posted by The Lion King

Damn. Blu-ray will become commercial. It will no longer be this cool thing that you can brag about to people who don't have it. Damn.

hah yeh no more braggin to your friends bout how good the PQ is

[CptGreedle]

I figured it would take until 2011 or 2012 for it to really hit it big. I hope that by 2013 it gets close to 50% of the market.
I think DVD will linger around longer and stronger than VHS, especially since it IS backward compatible on Blu-ray players (so far). I was surprised to see VHS still lingering around in 2005.

[Anthony P]

that first graph

does not look right to me. Assuming there is growth, that graph looks almost linear, while it should be exponential.

[MCAN]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

that first graph

does not look right to me. Assuming there is growth, that graph looks almost linear, while it should be exponential.

You're right, it does look very linear and that just doesn't seem very accurate. Even the VHS decrease is linear.

[Blu-Ray Buckeye]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

that first graph

does not look right to me. Assuming there is growth, that graph looks almost linear, while it should be exponential.

Actually you might be looking at it incorrectly. Notice that the top of the bars is rising as well. The eye is drawn to the bottom of the blue section so it looks very linear, however the top of the bars is moving as well. The YOY increases are substantial. Also I'm not even totally convinced that the increase has to be all that exponential in nature... the growth is completely dependent on broad installation of HDTVs and will be hampered by that dependency.

[Blu Titan]

Great news. Thank you Grubert!

[Anthony P]

Actually you might be looking at it incorrectly. Notice that the top of the bars is rising as well. The eye is drawn to the bottom of the blue section so it looks very linear, however the top of the bars is moving as well. The YOY increases are substantial. Also I'm not even totally convinced that the increase has to be all that exponential in nature... the growth is completely dependent on broad installation of HDTVs and will be hampered by that dependency.

I was looking at both sides. It might not be exponential, but it still needs to be increasing with each in a none constant way. If a format is not being adopted then it should not be growing and if it is being adopted then the rate should be increasing over time until it reaches close to mass market. It looks like they add somewhere between .8 and .9 each year. Look at the difference between 2008/2009 and 2011/2012.

[Anthony P]

Even the VHS decrease is linear

VHS is not linear 2004~1/2(2003) and 2005~1/2(2004) I would also assume (hope) that they used accurate numbers for the past.

[Blu-Ray Buckeye]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

I was looking at both sides. It might not be exponential, but it still needs to be increasing with each in a none constant way. If a format is not being adopted then it should not be growing and if it is being adopted then the rate should be increasing over time until it reaches close to mass market. It looks like they add somewhere between .8 and .9 each year. Look at the difference between 2008/2009 and 2011/2012.

This is not true in almost any phenomenon. The rate of change is initially somewhat slow but once adoption starts the rate of change peaks fairly early in the cycle then ramps down forever more. However the chart will still appear asymptotic because the nominal increases on the growing base dominate the visual. Eventually the chart levels off. It is nearly impossible in naturally occurring events for the rate of change to accelerate as the base number grows.

Example: Plot the numbers 5, 10, 19, 34, 59, 98, 157, 240, 355, 507... the chart is certainly a rapidly escalating asymptote. However the rate of change is actually declining by 10% every year.

[Anthony P]

This is not true in almost any phenomenon

depends what phenomena we are talking about the truth is that we agree, sales should be slow but increasing rapidly until it peeks (gets near main stream) and then even though it is still increasing obviously the amount it increases by will be limited by how much bigger it can get. That is my issue with this graph it is almost constant growth until 2012 where it has already reached around 1/3 of the market.

Until someone explains why it makes sense for this case to be so different then any other one (look at mainstream and none mainstream formats) it looks odd (to someone like me that studied math). Is it right? I don't know. But if they are showing something that looks so unnatural with normal assumptions, I want to know what assumption they are making to make such a graph make sense to them. It would not be the first nor the last time that people have used bad math.

[Grubert]

Indeed, Screen Digest has a linear model in place:





This comes from the report on the PEVE 2008 conference, where concerns on replication (and letting smaller replicators get a piece of the action), licensing and other stuff were discussed. It's an interesting read.

The perennial online-vs-physical delivery debate seems to have entered a more serene phase, owing principally to the recognition – by the online prophets – that packaged media is still an enormous business – $70 billion worldwide, servicing an installed base of 1.3 billion DVD playback devices – and that online digital delivery revenues are still minuscule. Screen Digest forecasts that they will account for just four per cent of movie spending in the US and Europe by 2012.

Sonic’s Taylor reckons that, while inexorably heading thist way, delivering high-definition content without physical media “might still be 20 years into the future.” There is not yet consumer-friendly methods of delivering quality content over the internet on a on-demand basis “unless you are not very demanding,” Taylor quips. Internet speed, price of blank BD disc, burning time, DRM constraints, cross-device standards, all conjure up to make a physical-free entertainment world far off the horizon.

Simon Calver, CEO of LoveFilm International, sounded a note of warning as he reminded delegates that "free is the price point people want to pay online" and stressed that in the intensely competitive digital delivery space heavyweight consumer brands will have a substantial advantage.

It is a time of experimentation. Recent moves to include 'digital copy' (also known as 'second session') electronic movie files on DVDs were welcomed as introducing traditional DVD buyers to an easy – and, crucially, legal - way to access digital content. The continuing fragmentation of the digital marketplace remains a barrier to progress, although the increasing willingness of the Hollywood studios to experiment with different business models is a positive development.

“BD will replace DVD. It will be the last mainstream physical delivery format,” forecasts Taylor.

[jkwest]

Originally Posted by Grubert

wow....so overall, they are expecting a drop in complete sales this year over last year...

and in 2009, the bounce-back will be because of Blu-ray! That is quite amazing!

Look at the spike in Blu-ray sales in '09! Its almost triple from this year.

[Blu-Ray Buckeye]

Originally Posted by Anthony P

depends what phenomena we are talking about the truth is that we agree, sales should be slow but increasing rapidly until it peeks (gets near main stream) and then even though it is still increasing obviously the amount it increases by will be limited by how much bigger it can get. That is my issue with this graph it is almost constant growth until 2012 where it has already reached around 1/3 of the market.

Until someone explains why it makes sense for this case to be so different then any other one (look at mainstream and none mainstream formats) it looks odd (to someone like me that studied math). Is it right? I don't know. But if they are showing something that looks so unnatural with normal assumptions, I want to know what assumption they are making to make such a graph make sense to them. It would not be the first nor the last time that people have used bad math.

Without seeing the raw numnbers, it's hard for me to say that they did use a linear model. To me it looks like the increases are getting bigger with time. Are you saying a linear percent change or linear nominal change... hard to eyeball it.