According to the VideoScan results, last week Blu-ray was only up 33% over this time last year, though it's worth mentioning it did better the two weeks previous to that, being up around 65% over the same period the previous year.
Which... er... is awful. I mean, last year at this time Toshiba was dumping HD DVD players left right and center, and people were snapping up cheap HD DVDs like they were going out of business (which they were), and this year HD DVD isn't even in the equation, anyone who wants HD is stuck either buying this awful format or waiting around for a viable, affordable (and impulsable) HD downloads system, so Blu-ray ought to be doing absolutely fantastically.
Even if Blu-ray hadn't attracted a single new customer since last February, you'd expect a fairly substantial growth in BD sales simply because of the larger library available.
60% over last year? Seriously? WTF?
Great job Warner. You picked the dud. Great job Sony, with your obsessive control and willingness to whore yourselves over DRM, you made it one.
i like the bit over at betanews about how futuresource said only 18% of the disc's made were sold to the public and the rest were "pipline fill" i remember some mention of not enough production lines, etc were part of the high cost of blu apparently not the case if 82% of the disc's being made are sitting somewhere collecting dust....
Actually that seems reasonable. I'd imagine the time difference between producing 10,000 discs and 40,000 is probably not that great, the major issue is probably the time taken to set up each new pressing.
That's a guess though, I don't work in the industry.
So are you saying (squiggleslash) that HD-DVD would be doing better had it won the war? Or are you thinking downloads will overtake DVD before Blu-Ray? I am not understanding your point.
I think it is clear why sales numbers are less than fantastic. We are in the midst of the worst economic downturn in over 2 decades. People are tightening belts and cutting frivolous spending like eating out, buying movies, etc. Couple that with lackluster releases this time of year and you have small numbers.
The truth of the matter is that nothing is going to move as long as the economy is the way it is. Having said that, it seems Blu-Ray will still be the next dominant format, it just may take longer to take hold. Downloads are too far off to and have too many hurdles of their own (quality, price, standards, internet speed, bandwidth caps, etc) stop Blu-Ray. And DVD is on the way out. Sooner or later people's DVD players will die and many will go with Blu-Ray because it is the new tech and still plays their old DVDs. I think as we get sub-$200 players (likely this fall) this will become more and more common.
cash - sometimes I look at people who ask me to clarify a point, and look at what they've written, and just give up, as they seem to be on another planet entirely. I can't really think of an answer to your comment that would help you understand what I've written, so I invite you to re-read it until it makes sense, or just move on to the next thread.
Or, Squiggle, you could stop being a condescending dope and answer the question that was asked of you. It seemed fairly simple. Your original post was scattershot at best. You brought up HD-DVD and your post clearly insinuates that it was the "non-dud". So, do you think it would be doing better than BD if it had won? If so, why? It was already floundering in sales. BD didn't win because one company decided it was the better format. It won because it had the sales momentum in 2007.
Comparing one week in 2009 to one week in 2008 is pointless and I'm not sure why the Videoscan numbers are released that way. Especially in the movie business where one week can have a blockbuster release, the next week nothing, and never the same new releases twice. If there's no major movie released on BD the second week of December 2009 (when The Dark Knight was released in 2008), you're going to see a major drop in revenue from the same week the prior year. Does that mean that BD is failing? No, in fact by that time I'm fairly certain that year-to-date BD revenue will be ahead of where it was at that time last year. Year-to-date revenue is the number that needs to be compared.
That said, I don't have the YTD comparison numbers to look at, but since when is a 50 to 60% revenue growth rate unacceptable? I could understand if we were talking about comparing to hundreds of dollars in sales in 2008, but we're talking about millions. Besides that, everyone knows that disc revenue is driven by new releases, not catalog titles. The two weeks in February 2008 and 2009 had no new releases of any consequence. So that 50 to 60% was driven by catalog titles only which are normally a minor player. Let's see what happens when the first big blockbuster discs of 2009 start showing up. BD will not be judged a success or failure based on your unrealistic expectations.
Obviously squiggle is a disgruntled HD-DVD fan that can not accept the fact that BD, given that we have the biggest financial crisis since the depression, is doing quite well.
Obviously squiggle is a disgruntled HD-DVD fan that can not accept the fact that BD, given that we have the biggest financial crisis since the depression, is doing quite well.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
squiggleslash @ Feb 24th 2009 2:08PM
Or you could read this:
http://www.engadgethd.com/2009/02/23/nielsen-videoscan-high-def-market-share-for-week-ending-february/
According to the VideoScan results, last week Blu-ray was only up 33% over this time last year, though it's worth mentioning it did better the two weeks previous to that, being up around 65% over the same period the previous year.
Which... er... is awful. I mean, last year at this time Toshiba was dumping HD DVD players left right and center, and people were snapping up cheap HD DVDs like they were going out of business (which they were), and this year HD DVD isn't even in the equation, anyone who wants HD is stuck either buying this awful format or waiting around for a viable, affordable (and impulsable) HD downloads system, so Blu-ray ought to be doing absolutely fantastically.
Even if Blu-ray hadn't attracted a single new customer since last February, you'd expect a fairly substantial growth in BD sales simply because of the larger library available.
60% over last year? Seriously? WTF?
Great job Warner. You picked the dud. Great job Sony, with your obsessive control and willingness to whore yourselves over DRM, you made it one.
wreckedchevy @ Feb 24th 2009 3:12PM
i like the bit over at betanews about how futuresource said only 18% of the disc's made were sold to the public and the rest were "pipline fill" i remember some mention of not enough production lines, etc were part of the high cost of blu apparently not the case if 82% of the disc's being made are sitting somewhere collecting dust....
squiggleslash @ Feb 24th 2009 3:36PM
Actually that seems reasonable. I'd imagine the time difference between producing 10,000 discs and 40,000 is probably not that great, the major issue is probably the time taken to set up each new pressing.
That's a guess though, I don't work in the industry.
cashmonee @ Feb 24th 2009 8:18PM
So are you saying (squiggleslash) that HD-DVD would be doing better had it won the war? Or are you thinking downloads will overtake DVD before Blu-Ray? I am not understanding your point.
I think it is clear why sales numbers are less than fantastic. We are in the midst of the worst economic downturn in over 2 decades. People are tightening belts and cutting frivolous spending like eating out, buying movies, etc. Couple that with lackluster releases this time of year and you have small numbers.
The truth of the matter is that nothing is going to move as long as the economy is the way it is. Having said that, it seems Blu-Ray will still be the next dominant format, it just may take longer to take hold. Downloads are too far off to and have too many hurdles of their own (quality, price, standards, internet speed, bandwidth caps, etc) stop Blu-Ray. And DVD is on the way out. Sooner or later people's DVD players will die and many will go with Blu-Ray because it is the new tech and still plays their old DVDs. I think as we get sub-$200 players (likely this fall) this will become more and more common.
squiggleslash @ Feb 24th 2009 10:31PM
cash - sometimes I look at people who ask me to clarify a point, and look at what they've written, and just give up, as they seem to be on another planet entirely. I can't really think of an answer to your comment that would help you understand what I've written, so I invite you to re-read it until it makes sense, or just move on to the next thread.
NIUHuskie @ Feb 25th 2009 2:24PM
Or, Squiggle, you could stop being a condescending dope and answer the question that was asked of you. It seemed fairly simple. Your original post was scattershot at best. You brought up HD-DVD and your post clearly insinuates that it was the "non-dud". So, do you think it would be doing better than BD if it had won? If so, why? It was already floundering in sales. BD didn't win because one company decided it was the better format. It won because it had the sales momentum in 2007.
Comparing one week in 2009 to one week in 2008 is pointless and I'm not sure why the Videoscan numbers are released that way. Especially in the movie business where one week can have a blockbuster release, the next week nothing, and never the same new releases twice. If there's no major movie released on BD the second week of December 2009 (when The Dark Knight was released in 2008), you're going to see a major drop in revenue from the same week the prior year. Does that mean that BD is failing? No, in fact by that time I'm fairly certain that year-to-date BD revenue will be ahead of where it was at that time last year. Year-to-date revenue is the number that needs to be compared.
That said, I don't have the YTD comparison numbers to look at, but since when is a 50 to 60% revenue growth rate unacceptable? I could understand if we were talking about comparing to hundreds of dollars in sales in 2008, but we're talking about millions. Besides that, everyone knows that disc revenue is driven by new releases, not catalog titles. The two weeks in February 2008 and 2009 had no new releases of any consequence. So that 50 to 60% was driven by catalog titles only which are normally a minor player. Let's see what happens when the first big blockbuster discs of 2009 start showing up. BD will not be judged a success or failure based on your unrealistic expectations.
Jonsson @ Feb 25th 2009 3:03PM
Obviously squiggle is a disgruntled HD-DVD fan that can not accept the fact that BD, given that we have the biggest financial crisis since the depression, is doing quite well.
Realist @ Feb 25th 2009 3:04PM
Obviously squiggle is a disgruntled HD-DVD fan that can not accept the fact that BD, given that we have the biggest financial crisis since the depression, is doing quite well.