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.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
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.