Optical (Blu-ray/DVD) and Digital (EST/UV) Sales Thread

[bruceames]

Originally Posted by PSound

That is not factually incorrect. By the end of August 2011, we knew Q4 was going to be front loaded and that end of Q3 had strength of releases that would naturally mean they could not be released in Q4.

You are posting falsehoods again.

I honestly had no idea it was front loaded until you mentioned it here last October. I did the upcoming release comparison a week or so later and was shocked to see the disparity that lied ahead. But then I wasn't following the summer box office thread like you guys were.

[Kosty]

Originally Posted by PSound

That is not factually incorrect. By the end of August 2011, we knew Q4 was going to be front loaded and that end of Q3 had strength of releases that would naturally mean they could not be released in Q4.

You are posting falsehoods again.

We knew that the Q3 releases with Thor and X:Men first Class were staring the season earlier along with the new to Blu-ray Star Wars release. We also knew that Twilight 3 was going to be there in late Nov or December but my recollection was that it was very uncertain in August what all the Dec 2011 releases would be from a performance standpoint. There were still a lot of unknowns at that time when I said that. Plus we had no idea of what the December new to Blu-ray releases were going to be back in August.

[Kosty]

Originally Posted by bruceames

Good point. I don't think there was anything in 2010 catalog releases that would compare to Star Wars, certainly nothing released in Q3 2010. It was a monster release.

This year I hear Indiana Jones is coming out this fall, so it'll be interesting to see how sales of that compare with Star Wars (although obviously it will fall short, revenue-wise).

We will have not only The Indiana Jones new to Blu-ray release but also Titanic as well to go along with its 3D theatrical release.

You are right, it will be interesting.

[Kosty]

Originally Posted by bruceames

I honestly had no idea it was front loaded until you mentioned it here last October. I did the upcoming release comparison a week or so later and was shocked to see the disparity that lied ahead. But then I wasn't following the summer box office thread like you guys were.

We all knew that the September and October releases were looking pretty strong in the 2011 vs 2011 comparisons. The summer blockbusters started a couple weeks earlier with Thor and X-Men First Class and Star Wars and other new to Blu-ray titles would act as proxy new releases. Plus the general genres in 3Q and early 4Q were better action adventure matches to Blu-ray and packaged media sell through.

But after mid November the strong 4Q 2011 holiday releases were no match for the even stronger holiday releases of late 4Q 2010.

[bruceames]

Originally Posted by Kosty

I agree. We will really know.

Also the earlier in the year the lower the magnitudes being compared.

I'd assert that the slowdown in the late 4Q had a possible larger impact as that was in the higher volume period of the year.

It does seem like if the year before had a 58% YoY growth rate that was goosed upward by the better box office and Twilight Saga movies and Avatar, that even box office that year would have instead of been lower, say around 50% instead of 58% with even box office.

So its would be plausible to see 27% to 36% growth the next year if the box office was the same.

But its all kinda academic anyway as there is no way to really know for sure. If box office is up from year to year it will help home video sale as well as the other way around it will hurt if its down.

Well all we had was that one week (ending 11/12) that had flat box office for the whole year and a lot of weeks (45) behind it.

I don't think it matters much when the box office disparity occurs. Last year it was at the beginning (Q1) and at the end (last 7 weeks of Q4). Had they been towards the middle of the year it wouldn't have made much difference.

As I stated before, new release sales are going to sell according to how many want to buy it, not according to if whether was released during the busy or slow season. Look at HP 7.1 vs. 7.2, one released in April and the other during the "busy" season. Sales of both were nearly equally strong. Cars 2 would have sold similar units no matter if it was released in June or November. The difference is in titles falling outside the top sellers and especially with the more attractive discount pricing given in Q4 to catalog.

It's plausible to see 37% to 36% YoY this year, but certainly not very likely. The box office YoY would have to be at least 15% to get to the lower range, and 20%+ to get to the upper.

[Kosty]

Originally Posted by PSound

Yep. Indiana Jones would definitely register, but I would expect it to fall short of Star Wars.

That's my thoughts at this time as well.

Indiana Jones should do well on Blu-ray but it probably will not do as well as Star Wars did last year.

I really have no idea on how Titanic will do on Blu-ray though as a lot of its box office strength was Twilight type demo female teenage repeat viewership and they are all grown up now its been so long ago.

$600,788,188 was Titanic's domestic gross in 1997 and it was one of the first day and date DVD releases as well. Its hard to judge how it will do now on re release on home video.

We also probably have Finding Nemo as a new to Blu-ray release coming up sooner than later. That was the best selling DVD ever IIRC.

[Kosty]

Originally Posted by bruceames

Well all we had was that one week (ending 11/12) that had flat box office for the whole year and a lot of weeks (45) behind it.

I don't think it matters much when the box office disparity occurs. Last year it was at the beginning (Q1) and at the end (last 7 weeks of Q4). Had they been towards the middle of the year it wouldn't have made much difference.

As I stated before, new release sales are going to sell according to how many want to buy it, not according to if whether was released during the busy or slow season. Look at HP 7.1 vs. 7.2, one released in April and the other during the "busy" season. Sales of both were nearly equally strong. Cars 2 would have sold similar units no matter if it was released in June or November. The difference is in titles falling outside the top sellers and especially with the more attractive discount pricing given in Q4 to catalog.

It's plausible to see 37% to 36% YoY this year, but certainly not very likely. The box office YoY would have to be at least 15% to get to the lower range, and 20%+ to get to the upper.

I think release seasonal timing matters as the Black Friday through Christmas season has more gift sales, but the studios really do not have much of a choice in the matter as most all releases have to get to home video about 4 months plus or minus their theatrical debut so its the summer movies that hit home video during the fall.

I think its just too early to judge the YoY gain as its still early. We will have a better idea around week 15 . By then there is not much to depress the YoY down much all the way until mid September in late 3Q.

If Blu-ray remains above 30% YoY by the end of 1Q 2012 early 2Q 2012 then that's 20% better than where it was last year at those benchmarks and ended up at 20% for the year.

Its possible some 2Q releases this year as well could run up the score a bit as well as the late 2Q 2011 performance was not huge.

Then it depends on how the holiday releases perform this year in the fall compared to last year.

[Kosty]

Originally Posted by bruceames

...

It's plausible to see 37% to 36% YoY this year, but certainly not very likely. The box office YoY would have to be at least 15% to get to the lower range, and 20%+ to get to the upper.

After 7 weeks into the year, we are up $138.9 M and up +15.26% TBO over 2011 and Blu-ray is up +32.7% in that time.

That's with most office advantage being with a Twilight Saga movie with not particularly great Blu-ray performing demographic with a modest 25% Blu-ray unit marketshare. Better performing titles in 2012 or better action genres will help as well.

I just think its too early to tell much to see where the end of year trends would be except to see its starting off better than last year.

Higher TBO will certainly help but good solid Blu-ray genre titles doing well will also be important in their impact as well.

[Malanthius]

There's always going to be good and bad years for box office. So it is what it is. Problem is if catalog sales were better for Bluray it wouldn't have to rely so heavily on new releases. Bluray has failed to inspire consumers to replace thier DVD collections with Blurays.

Originally Posted by Kosty

I agree. We will really know.

Also the earlier in the year the lower the magnitudes being compared.

I'd assert that the slowdown in the late 4Q had a possible larger impact as that was in the higher volume period of the year.

It does seem like if the year before had a 58% YoY growth rate that was goosed upward by the better box office and Twilight Saga movies and Avatar, that even box office that year would have instead of been lower, say around 50% instead of 58% with even box office.

So its would be plausible to see 27% to 36% growth the next year if the box office was the same.

But its all kinda academic anyway as there is no way to really know for sure. If box office is up from year to year it will help home video sale as well as the other way around it will hurt if its down.

[PSound]

Originally Posted by Kosty

You are missing up apples and oranges in two different discussions.

My comments were to bruceames there in regards to box office differences having a possible greater impact in the 4Q holiday seasonal sales period than they would earlier in the year.

Your continuous personally directed comments accusing me of lying, flip flopping and PR spin only make you look more foolish in your obsessions in attacking me instead of discussing the arguments at hand. They are a habit of ad hominem attacks from you that you use to displace the arguments against the source rather than the argument at hand. They do not help your arguments when you fail to discuss the disagreements in the actual issues but instead must resort to trying to malign the source instead of the actual issue.

You always use data to downplay negative Blu-ray performance, excuse past Blu-day performance or project stronger future performance. Period.

It is impossible to have a real conversation with you when on one date (August 2011) you state that H1 performance is irrelevant to 2011 year end projections due to YOUR strong projections for Q3 and Q4, and then state in March of 2012 that 2011 woes were due to H1 comparisons.

That is what you do. You are constantly in spin mode so that your previous assertions directly contradict what you are stating now... and then you cry foul for it getting pointed out.


And yes... I will point out when a source is not trustworthy. I certainly believe Home Media Magazine is not trustworthy due to them publishing false quotes attributed to studio execs.

It is only prudent to be aware of sources pushing false info and to clearly point it out when it happens.

[PSound]

Originally Posted by bruceames

I honestly had no idea it was front loaded until you mentioned it here last October. I did the upcoming release comparison a week or so later and was shocked to see the disparity that lied ahead. But then I wasn't following the summer box office thread like you guys were.

I had definitely mentioned it prior.

It was odd to see so many releases prior to November, and those were understood months before.


That is why someone professing at the end of August 2011 that YoY year end total was plausible at 40% if Q3 ended 15%+ cumulative could only be stated with:

1 - Clear knowledge of all H1 impact (including Q1 box office difference and Q2 Avatar)

2 - Clear knowledge of odd Q3 new release and catalog strength as well as Q4 being front loaded.


To now try and act like H1 was the major cause, or that weakness in late Q4 was a surprise is not being sincere (IMO).

Indeed, it is these contradictions in known info and knowledge based on how it can be used to excuse BD performance (today) or project strong BD performance (at end of August 2011) is an unambiguous sign of insincerity in having actual fact based discussion (for knowledge and discussions sake) vs selectively using facts for spin (to promote an agenda of projecting BD strength).

[Kosty]

Originally Posted by Malanthius

There's always going to be good and bad years for box office. So it is what it is. Problem is if catalog sales were better for Bluray it wouldn't have to rely so heavily on new releases. Bluray has failed to inspire consumers to replace thier DVD collections with Blurays.

The conversation was how good and bad releases in these recent years affect home video performance. Good releases help in the comparisons poorer ones hurt. It was a negative factor for much of last year a positive one in the 3Q. It seems to be better this year.

Blu-ray catalog sales will continue to grow over time but they will never reach the heights of DVD. But any level of Blu-ray catalog sales is additional money for the studios and retailers from another resale of those older assets that would not have existed without Blu-ray.

Almost no consumers are going to replace all their DVDs with Blu-ray even if all their DVDs were released on Blu-ray Disc. So Blu-ray sales for older releases will never be as strong as they were on DVD.

[Kosty]

Originally Posted by PSound

You always use data to downplay negative Blu-ray performance, excuse past Blu-day performance or project stronger future performance. Period.

It is impossible to have a real conversation with you when on one date (August 2011) you state that H1 performance is irrelevant to 2011 year end projections due to YOUR strong projections for Q3 and Q4, and then state in March of 2012 that 2011 woes were due to H1 comparisons.

That is what you do. You are constantly in spin mode so that your previous assertions directly contradict what you are stating now... and then you cry foul for it getting pointed out.


And yes... I will point out when a source is not trustworthy. I certainly believe Home Media Magazine is not trustworthy due to them publishing false quotes attributed to studio execs.

It is only prudent to be aware of sources pushing false info and to clearly point it out when it happens.

Your argument is chasing itself in circles trying to bit its own tail off.


You just can't put words in my mouth that I did not say and you are hardly accurately paraphrasing my commentary there at all.

I am clearly stating now that it was not just 1H 2011 that affected the statistics downward in 2011, late 4Q 2011 did so as well. I perfectly understand that and pointed it out then and once again do so right now. That's not the same as saying that 1Q 2011 drove the entire year of comparison last year as no matter what good or bad happened latter in the year which it did, the legacy of the 1Q TBO deficit still affected things the entire year.


As to your consistent accusations. Its typical of you to always attack the source instead of the argument itself and its only undermines your credibility over time when you resort to it time and time again.

We all understand you do not like any person or organization that tends to disagree with your assumptions biases and personal point of view. We all do not have to agree with you to have a valid point of view though and its not my fault you disagree with my point of view.

News flash, Home Media Magazine and other trade journals that cover their industries have vastly more credibility to their audiences than you or I do posting on these forums. I put it into perspective as should you as well. I personally enjoy following and talking about this stuff over time and I hope you should and do as well.

[Kosty]

Originally Posted by PSound

I had definitely mentioned it prior.

It was odd to see so many releases prior to November, and those were understood months before.


That is why someone professing at the end of August 2011 that YoY year end total was plausible at 40% if Q3 ended 15%+ cumulative could only be stated with:

1 - Clear knowledge of all H1 impact (including Q1 box office difference and Q2 Avatar)

2 - Clear knowledge of odd Q3 new release and catalog strength as well as Q4 being front loaded.


To now try and act like H1 was the major cause, or that weakness in late Q4 was a surprise is not being sincere (IMO).

Indeed, it is these contradictions in known info and knowledge based on how it can be used to excuse BD performance (today) or project strong BD performance (at end of August 2011) is an unambiguous sign of insincerity in having actual fact based discussion (for knowledge and discussions sake) vs selectively using facts for spin (to promote an agenda of projecting BD strength).

I explained it above in quite some detail so I will not repeat it again.

If you choose not to read or understand my explanation to you and why my point of view was around that time and how it is now, then that's your problem not mine.

If you choose to call anyone disagreeing with you all the time as just spin then that would seem to be more an acknowledgement of your personal capabilities to respect other points of view more so than my inefficiency in sharing my opinion with others. Seems to be a habit with you.

I appreciate and respect your point of view even when I disagree with it I still like to see it and have you defend it.

I wish you would do the same as well.

[PSound]

Originally Posted by Kosty

News flash, Home Media Magazine and other trade journals that cover their industries have vastly more credibility to their audiences than you or I do posting on these forums.

I don't care about their credibility elsewhere. I know they have opted to post false quotes to support their PR message.

Because of that, I know they are an trustworthy source. Anyone who will knowingly publish falsehoods to support their argument is not in it for discussion. They are in it to sell a message.


Contrast that to someone like Bruce, who I have had major disagreements. I have never known him to be anything but consistent in his use of data. I have seen him acknowledge new data. And I have seen him shift his position based on new information.

That is in direct contrast to insincere sources that never change their position and USE data to sell a story rather than INGEST data to modify their position.