High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource

Go Back   High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource >
Rules HDTV Forum Gallery LINK TO US! RSS - High Def Forum AddThis Feed Button AddThis Social Bookmark Button Groups

High Definition News & Informative Articles Get the Latest High Definition News & Informative Articles Here! Please post newsworthy information here only! This forum is NOT for your first post. Thank you!

Upconversion players vs HD DVD, Blur-ray

Reply
AddThis Social Bookmark Button
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-21-2007, 02:25 PM   #31  
High Definition is the definition of life.
 
Chris Gerhard's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 10,946
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BobY View Post
Hmmm, Stringer made his statement recently, not in response to Paramount/Dreamworks, and he said the situation currently *is* a stalemate as things are (Warner neutral). You were the one who said if Warner goes HD DVD exclusive, it's a stalemate.

Unless Stringer is being uncharacteristically honest and not spinning as usual, then his statement may be a sign of something worse than a stalemate for Blu-Ray. Either way, your opinion is not shared by the CEO of SONY, the prime force behind Blu-Ray.

Come on Chris, you are smarter than that--to just keep repeating the BD propaganda points:

Fact: The huge Blu-Ray lead in Hardware (as a result of PS3) has not led to a significant Blu-Ray lead in disc sales--they are still struggling to get back to 2:1 (using Nielsen's questionable numbers).

Fact: In the past several weeks, Blu-Ray has only been able to maintain their existing disc sales lead through special offers and giveaways of discs. There is no doubt they would have lost "Transformers week" if it wasn't for special promotions enacted specifically to blunt the success of Transformers. It's a fine strategy, buy please don't tell me they fooled you and you believe it represents a sign of strength for Blu-Ray disc sales--you're the one who keeps bringing up "fire sales" as a sign of desperation.

Fact: Warner has stated repeatedly and precisely that they have no plans to go exclusive with either format and that they will be examining how things go in 2008.

Fact: The studios don't give a whit about disc sales right now because neither format is selling enough discs to make any money. A less than 2:1 sales lead means nothing at this point. Any studio with accountants and a Sales and Marketing department is looking at player sales and attach rates, because that is the data that will give them an idea what future disc sales might be.

SACD may have won over DVD-A, but they are both losers, that's why I don't have either format (well, actually my DVD player will play them, but I haven't the slightest interest in them).

According to the RIAA stats, in 2006, DVD-A discs far outsold SACD discs, you can look that up in my previous post on the subject. Yes there may be more SACD titles, but it's not adding up to better sales. In the RIAA 2006 consumer profile, they list SACD with 0% market share--obviously it's not zero, but it was too low for them to bother. DVD-A was listed at 1.3%. Even vinyl LP's significantly outsold SACD, but LP's only sold half of what DVD-A did.

I understand perfectly what happened, two formats that were of zero interest to average consumers were introduced and they both failed to achieve significant market share. The same thing could happen with HD DVD and Blu-Ray, but my point is, there is a huge market push for HD aimed at average consumers, something that didn't exist at all with either Hi-Def audio format. SACD and DVD-A were targeted at a tiny niche market, that's where they stayed and that is exactly what will happen to Blu-Ray if Blu-Ray wins.

I serously doubt the average consumer would consider Blu-Ray a better value than upscaled DVD, but a $100 HD DVD player that also upscales SD--that's a good value.
Wrong, read the Stringer statement, it did refer to the Paramount decision as the reason for the current state of the format war. Typical for you though.

For some odd reason you continually refer to the SACD v. DVD-A war which involved many of exactly the same players, as only intended for tiny unprofitable niche status. Then you state with Blu-ray v HD DVD they are shooting for the moon. You don't have a clue and really shouldn't bother to discuss things you don't understand. I will try to state it very clearly since Warner, Sony, Matsushita, Philips, Pioneer, Toshiba, Universal, Onkyo, Denon and the list could go on, all were involved in both wars. I will be damned if I could believe for one second, they were just walking out into the street and throwing money in the air to watch it blow away when they invested in the high resolution audio formats, but when they invested in the next generation video formats, they were trying for success. Your responses aren't worth the effort to bother with.

I will state emphatically you are wrong, the intentions with SACD v. DVD-A are exactly the same as Blu-ray v. HD DVD and the goal was a profitable market. So far the results are exactly the same, one is doing much better but nowhere near well enough to be worth the investment.

Chris
Chris Gerhard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2007, 12:51 AM   #32  
What's all this, then?...
 
BobY's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,197
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Gerhard View Post
Wrong, read the Stringer statement, it did refer to the Paramount decision as the reason for the current state of the format war. Typical for you though.
Thank you, it is indeed typical of me to check my facts. You could have done so also.

Stringer's statement was made in early November, nearly three months after the Paramount/DreamWorks announcement, and the article begins by noting HD DVD's recent holiday pricing before mentioning anything about Paramount. Clearly Stringer was commenting on the current overall state of the format war and was not responding specifically to the Paramount decision.

Regardless, he doesn't share your opinion. He says it's a stalemate as it is and would probably lose it if Warner went HD DVD exclusive, as he couldn't find any positive spin. Right now, to him, "stalemate" is positive spin!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Gerhard View Post
For some odd reason you continually refer to the SACD v. DVD-A war which involved many of exactly the same players, as only intended for tiny unprofitable niche status. Then you state with Blu-ray v HD DVD they are shooting for the moon. You don't have a clue and really shouldn't bother to discuss things you don't understand. I will try to state it very clearly since Warner, Sony, Matsushita, Philips, Pioneer, Toshiba, Universal, Onkyo, Denon and the list could go on, all were involved in both wars. I will be damned if I could believe for one second, they were just walking out into the street and throwing money in the air to watch it blow away when they invested in the high resolution audio formats, but when they invested in the next generation video formats, they were trying for success. Your responses aren't worth the effort to bother with.

I will state emphatically you are wrong, the intentions with SACD v. DVD-A are exactly the same as Blu-ray v. HD DVD and the goal was a profitable market. So far the results are exactly the same, one is doing much better but nowhere near well enough to be worth the investment.

Chris
I have never once referred to SACD/DVD-A as having been intended for tiny, unprofitable, niche status, I said they were doomed to tiny, unprofitable, niche status. They provided improvements over CD in ways few consumers cared about and there was no marketing effort whatsoever to convince general consumers that they should want something like SACD/DVD-A. It's not my fault a whole boatload of CE companies were too naive to realize that.

Blu-Ray is certainly doomed to tiny, unprofitable niche status--with the exception of lining up some exclusive studios, they have done just about everything wrong when it comes to attracting consumers. Then again, as you pointed out, it's a lot of the same people who thought SACD had a chance.

HD DVD may also fall, but the huge, huge, huge difference between HD DVD/Blu-Ray and SACD/DVD-A is there is a huge, huge, huge marketing push for HD. Next year a consumer will not likely even be able to buy a non-HD TV.

If you don't believe that makes a difference, you are the one who has no clue about consumers and marketing. And if you don't believe that marketing push is working, stop ten people on the street and ask them if they have heard of HDTV. Then ask them if they have heard of SACD.

If my responses aren't worth the effort to bother with, why do you bother? I'll continue to respond to yours, not because I think you will somehow come in contact with reality, but it gives me an excellent opportunity to point out the flawed logic used by Blu-Ray supporters.

Incidently, I can't help point out the reality check that SACD is not more successful than DVD-A and you can take your argument up with the RIAA. Number of titles isn't the measure of success, sales is. Right now, Hi-Res audio formats are at the end of their sales lives, while Hi-Res video formats are just starting. We'll see what sales are like in 2008.
BobY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2007, 06:13 AM   #33  
High Definition is the definition of life.
 
Chris Gerhard's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 10,946
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BobY View Post
Thank you, it is indeed typical of me to check my facts. You could have done so also.

Stringer's statement was made in early November, nearly three months after the Paramount/DreamWorks announcement, and the article begins by noting HD DVD's recent holiday pricing before mentioning anything about Paramount. Clearly Stringer was commenting on the current overall state of the format war and was not responding specifically to the Paramount decision.

Regardless, he doesn't share your opinion. He says it's a stalemate as it is and would probably lose it if Warner went HD DVD exclusive, as he couldn't find any positive spin. Right now, to him, "stalemate" is positive spin!



I have never once referred to SACD/DVD-A as having been intended for tiny, unprofitable, niche status, I said they were doomed to tiny, unprofitable, niche status. They provided improvements over CD in ways few consumers cared about and there was no marketing effort whatsoever to convince general consumers that they should want something like SACD/DVD-A. It's not my fault a whole boatload of CE companies were too naive to realize that.

Blu-Ray is certainly doomed to tiny, unprofitable niche status--with the exception of lining up some exclusive studios, they have done just about everything wrong when it comes to attracting consumers. Then again, as you pointed out, it's a lot of the same people who thought SACD had a chance.

HD DVD may also fall, but the huge, huge, huge difference between HD DVD/Blu-Ray and SACD/DVD-A is there is a huge, huge, huge marketing push for HD. Next year a consumer will not likely even be able to buy a non-HD TV.

If you don't believe that makes a difference, you are the one who has no clue about consumers and marketing. And if you don't believe that marketing push is working, stop ten people on the street and ask them if they have heard of HDTV. Then ask them if they have heard of SACD.

If my responses aren't worth the effort to bother with, why do you bother? I'll continue to respond to yours, not because I think you will somehow come in contact with reality, but it gives me an excellent opportunity to point out the flawed logic used by Blu-Ray supporters.

Incidently, I can't help point out the reality check that SACD is not more successful than DVD-A and you can take your argument up with the RIAA. Number of titles isn't the measure of success, sales is. Right now, Hi-Res audio formats are at the end of their sales lives, while Hi-Res video formats are just starting. We'll see what sales are like in 2008.
Wrong again, the RIAA includes hybrid SACD in the CD totals. There is absolutely no question whatsoever that SACD has outsold DVD-A and by a huge margin. I don't have to take that up with anybody. DVD-A is seeing far fewer releases now and it isn't because it sold at greater quantities. Warner just released the Donald Fagen trilogy in surround in a box set in the US as DVD-V. Last year Warner released the Doors box set as DVD-A. In the US, Warner has the rights to the Genesis box sets, all DVD-V. Overseas the Genesis box sets are SACD.

You continually refer to HD DVD as the better value and consumers can recognize it. One simple question, can you explain why the PS3 has sold over 5,000,000 and HD DVD under 1,000,000? It might just be me, but I assume the product consumers buy is the one they consider the better value. I know ahead of time, the answer will once again be nonsense, but go ahead.

The Stringer statement came after Paramount's defection, without Paramount's defection there wouldn't have been a statement, period.

Blu-ray is not necessarily doomed to tiny niche status. I agree if Warner chooses HD DVD, it most likely is set for tiny niche status as is HD DVD. If Warner chooses Blu-ray you can sit on the sidelines and watch Blu-ray attain a successful market. I don't have a crystal ball but I still see it in about half of the households in the US with HDTV within a few years if that is the scenario. I truly don't know what is going to happen with Warner, it appears more likely Blu-ray will be the choice but without inside information, nobody could know now.

You list the four high quality niche formats and claim HD DVD is something hugely different. I agree, of the four, the one in fourth place in terms of hardware sold, hardware manufacturers building players, software released and software sold is the same. The fourth place runner in all categories is HD DVD. All of the others are positioned as high quality more expensive alternatives, while the HD DVD strategy is simple, sell the hardware cheap. We'll see if the rogue approach with HD DVD by Toshiba works, I still doubt it.

Chris

Last edited by Chris Gerhard; 11-26-2007 at 06:34 AM..
Chris Gerhard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2007, 07:38 AM   #34  
My Projector is High Def.
 

Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marlborough, MA
Age: 45
Posts: 7,087
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Gerhard View Post
You continually refer to HD DVD as the better value and consumers can recognize it. One simple question, can you explain why the PS3 has sold over 5,000,000 and HD DVD under 1,000,000? It might just be me, but I assume the product consumers buy is the one they consider the better value. I know ahead of time, the answer will once again be nonsense, but go ahead.
Are you for real?

The simple reason it sold 5 million is because its a gaming console. Had it not had blu-ray, it likely would have sold more units since it would have cost less. You can't seriously believe it sold 5 million BECAUSE it has blu-ray, can you?
mshulman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2007, 07:55 AM   #35  
High Definition is the definition of life.
 
Chris Gerhard's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 10,946
Default

After stepping away from this and by not having to read what you write, I think I better understand what you are trying to say and why you are so far off. You think all of these consumer electronic companies and music and video software providers were incredibly stupid when trying to develop a market for better than CD quality audio but at least some of the very same companies are brilliant when trying to develop a market for better than DVD quality video. Of course I disagree but I am part of the market for both marketing strategies and of course was reached both times. You apparently are only part of the market for better than DVD quality video. I have friends that weren't part of the market for either effort and of course I believe that is the majority of consumers and neither effort could possibly have any strategy that results in replacing the mainstream formats. It just can't happen, the difference between the existing formats, both of which are very good and very inexpensive can't be great enough. The new formats will never be less expensive, the materials and processes required has to forever be more expensive.

When I heard CD, LP was history for me. When I saw DVD, VHS and LaserDisc were both history for me. The market basically agreed with me. When I heard SACD and DVD-A, I continued to purchase and listen to CD. When I saw Blu-ray and HD DVD, I continued to purchase and use DVD. I think once again the market agrees with my feelings, the newer formats are better but can't deliver the knock out blow to push the existing mainstream formats into extinction. I do think with only one of the two, SACD or DVD-A, a successful, smaller than CD market would have been a reality. I believe exactly the same with these two next generation video formats, with only one of the two, the same could happen. The stealth approach or an approach to force acceptance will be doomed to failure in either instance.

A successful approach would have been all consumer electronics companies behind only one new high quality format and all software companies behind only one format and that strategy would have worked for both and anything else will fail for both. In no scenario can CD and DVD be banished, something profoundly different will be required. That was the case with the mainstream formats that preceded them. The Blu-ray strategy of setting itself apart with better quality and higher prices is the correct strategy and without HD DVD would work great, profits attained and a big but less than DVD market would thrive. What we have now with another two tiny niche formats might be the outcome and is probably the most likely outcome, just exactly as we see with DVD-A and SACD.

Some companies may have believed Blu-ray or HD DVD could replace DVD, but not very many.

Chris
Chris Gerhard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2007, 07:59 AM   #36  
High Definition is the definition of life.
 
Chris Gerhard's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 10,946
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mshulman View Post
Are you for real?

The simple reason it sold 5 million is because its a gaming console. Had it not had blu-ray, it likely would have sold more units since it would have cost less. You can't seriously believe it sold 5 million BECAUSE it has blu-ray, can you?
I stated it was a better value so consumers purchased it. That is pretty obvious. Although it should be clear even to you that more consumers bought the PS3 to play Blu-ray than purchased HD DVD players to play HD DVD, just look at software sales, I didn't have to indicate that. It sells at far greater quantities and BobY claims the HD DVD players are a great value, I don't care what the reason is, the PS3 is obviously a better value than an HD DVD player according to the market.

If Sony had sold a stand alone Blu-ray player at $99 it would outsell the $99 HD DVD players, do you have any doubt whatsoever about that?

Chris
Chris Gerhard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2007, 08:12 AM   #37  
My Projector is High Def.
 

Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marlborough, MA
Age: 45
Posts: 7,087
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Gerhard View Post
I stated it was a better value so consumers purchased it. That is pretty obvious. Although it should be clear even to you that more consumers bought the PS3 to play Blu-ray than purchased HD DVD players to play HD DVD, just look at software sales, I didn't have to indicate that. It sells at far greater quantities and BobY claims the HD DVD players are a great value, I don't care what the reason is, the PS3 is obviously a better value than an HD DVD player according to the market.

If Sony had sold a stand alone Blu-ray player at $99 it would outsell the $99 HD DVD players, do you have any doubt whatsoever about that?

Chris
I don't know if we can say it sold because its a better value. I'd say many people bought it because its Playstation. Blu-ray was just an added bonus for many. (EDIT - I guess if you are talking better value in comparison to stand alone players, then I'd agree.)

I also don't think we can really say more people bought the PS3 than HD DVD players for the sole purpose of watching movies. I think the largest number bought it for gaming - they might watch or buy a blu-ray here or there. Another group bought it for gaming and the intention of watching blu-ray's and the final group bought it for blu-ray - whether they game or not doesn't really matter.

How many High Def titles are sold in a week? Do you realize if every single PS3 owner (based on 5 mil) bought a title once over the next year, that would be a little over 96,000 copies sold? Knowing this fact, I don't know how you can think more people bought PS3 for blu-ray than bought into HD DVD.

There is really only one reason Blu-ray is where it is and that is the PS3.

I can of course agree that if blu-ray was $99 it would be ahead. Can you agree that if the PS3 wasn't a blu-ray player, that HD DVD would probably be ahead or at least tied? I would say they'd have been tied much of the year, up until now and HD DVD Would be pulling ahead.
mshulman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2007, 09:29 AM   #38  
High Definition is the definition of life.
 
Chris Gerhard's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 10,946
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mshulman View Post
I don't know if we can say it sold because its a better value. I'd say many people bought it because its Playstation. Blu-ray was just an added bonus for many. (EDIT - I guess if you are talking better value in comparison to stand alone players, then I'd agree.)

I also don't think we can really say more people bought the PS3 than HD DVD players for the sole purpose of watching movies. I think the largest number bought it for gaming - they might watch or buy a blu-ray here or there. Another group bought it for gaming and the intention of watching blu-ray's and the final group bought it for blu-ray - whether they game or not doesn't really matter.

How many High Def titles are sold in a week? Do you realize if every single PS3 owner (based on 5 mil) bought a title once over the next year, that would be a little over 96,000 copies sold? Knowing this fact, I don't know how you can think more people bought PS3 for blu-ray than bought into HD DVD.

There is really only one reason Blu-ray is where it is and that is the PS3.

I can of course agree that if blu-ray was $99 it would be ahead. Can you agree that if the PS3 wasn't a blu-ray player, that HD DVD would probably be ahead or at least tied? I would say they'd have been tied much of the year, up until now and HD DVD Would be pulling ahead.
Items that sell are a better value than items that don't sell. I agree the reason the PS3 can sell huge quantities at $500 and HD DVD player only sell minuscule quantities at $200 is because the PS3 does more, a lot more. It plays Blu-ray, PS3 games, PS2 games, SACD and DVD and obviously all of those formats are in higher demand than HD DVD at any comparable price and even in higher demand at substantially greater prices. BobY stated the Toshiba HD DVD players that play upscaled DVD and HD DVD are a great value. I responded that obviously the PS3 sells far greater quanitities and is a better value. Value refers to price and what is offered. HD DVD players are low priced, not good values to my way of looking at things. Obviously so far there is no market for HD DVD. If Warner chooses Blu-ray, there never will be.

Chris
Chris Gerhard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2007, 11:08 AM   #39  
My Projector is High Def.
 

Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marlborough, MA
Age: 45
Posts: 7,087
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Gerhard View Post
Items that sell are a better value than items that don't sell. I agree the reason the PS3 can sell huge quantities at $500 and HD DVD player only sell minuscule quantities at $200 is because the PS3 does more, a lot more. It plays Blu-ray, PS3 games, PS2 games, SACD and DVD and obviously all of those formats are in higher demand than HD DVD at any comparable price and even in higher demand at substantially greater prices. BobY stated the Toshiba HD DVD players that play upscaled DVD and HD DVD are a great value. I responded that obviously the PS3 sells far greater quanitities and is a better value. Value refers to price and what is offered. HD DVD players are low priced, not good values to my way of looking at things. Obviously so far there is no market for HD DVD. If Warner chooses Blu-ray, there never will be.

Chris
PS3 Sells because its a gaming console. I suppose if the PS3 had a Laserdisc player in it, you'd say Laserdisc's were at a higher demand than HD DVD?

What percentage of PS3 owners do you think are using SACD?

It must be nice living in your dilusional world.

What exactly is the PS3 a better value over? Is it a better value over an HD-A3 at $199 with 10 movies? How exactly do you measure this?

You can't reasonably compare the value of two products that are so different.
mshulman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2007, 01:57 PM   #40  
High Definition is the definition of life.
 
Chris Gerhard's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 10,946
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mshulman View Post
PS3 Sells because its a gaming console. I suppose if the PS3 had a Laserdisc player in it, you'd say Laserdisc's were at a higher demand than HD DVD?

What percentage of PS3 owners do you think are using SACD?

It must be nice living in your dilusional world.

What exactly is the PS3 a better value over? Is it a better value over an HD-A3 at $199 with 10 movies? How exactly do you measure this?

You can't reasonably compare the value of two products that are so different.
All of these formats, game consoles and audio/video products compete for our entertainment dollars. HD DVD is an extraordinarily low demand item, all sales of hardware are generated because of a low price. I agree the HD DVD players are a good value as HD DVD players competing against itself. As competition against any other product in the category, the format does poorly, period. I didn't state that LaserDisc was a high demand item, HD DVD beats LaserDisc, it also beats 8-track tape in terms of demand.

The PS3 has shown it can generate sales at a high price, does an awful lot for the price and as a result, I can't say how anybody can state that a Toshiba HD DVD player is viewed as a better value in the market. If it was it would selling better and not at giveaway prices, but it can't even compete at giveaway prices. It is not like the PS3 doesn't have enormous competition in gaming consoles with Nintendo and Microsoft. The PS3 competes against many products in many price ranges and it is a difficult market now. I don't know if the product will ever be a financial success, but to say it is a good value at the current price is hard to dispute in my opinion. If you don't want what it does, then you don't care.

Chris

Last edited by Chris Gerhard; 11-26-2007 at 02:03 PM..
Chris Gerhard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-26-2007, 09:32 PM   #41  
What's all this, then?...
 
BobY's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,197
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Gerhard View Post
After stepping away from this and by not having to read what you write, I think I better understand what you are trying to say and why you are so far off. You think all of these consumer electronic companies and music and video software providers were incredibly stupid when trying to develop a market for better than CD quality audio but at least some of the very same companies are brilliant when trying to develop a market for better than DVD quality video. Of course I disagree but I am part of the market for both marketing strategies and of course was reached both times. You apparently are only part of the market for better than DVD quality video. I have friends that weren't part of the market for either effort and of course I believe that is the majority of consumers and neither effort could possibly have any strategy that results in replacing the mainstream formats. It just can't happen, the difference between the existing formats, both of which are very good and very inexpensive can't be great enough. The new formats will never be less expensive, the materials and processes required has to forever be more expensive.

When I heard CD, LP was history for me. When I saw DVD, VHS and LaserDisc were both history for me. The market basically agreed with me. When I heard SACD and DVD-A, I continued to purchase and listen to CD. When I saw Blu-ray and HD DVD, I continued to purchase and use DVD. I think once again the market agrees with my feelings, the newer formats are better but can't deliver the knock out blow to push the existing mainstream formats into extinction. I do think with only one of the two, SACD or DVD-A, a successful, smaller than CD market would have been a reality. I believe exactly the same with these two next generation video formats, with only one of the two, the same could happen. The stealth approach or an approach to force acceptance will be doomed to failure in either instance.

A successful approach would have been all consumer electronics companies behind only one new high quality format and all software companies behind only one format and that strategy would have worked for both and anything else will fail for both. In no scenario can CD and DVD be banished, something profoundly different will be required. That was the case with the mainstream formats that preceded them. The Blu-ray strategy of setting itself apart with better quality and higher prices is the correct strategy and without HD DVD would work great, profits attained and a big but less than DVD market would thrive. What we have now with another two tiny niche formats might be the outcome and is probably the most likely outcome, just exactly as we see with DVD-A and SACD.

Some companies may have believed Blu-ray or HD DVD could replace DVD, but not very many.

Chris
Ah well, I must agree with you that it's essential that you don't read what I write in order to come to the consclusions you do. No argument there at all .

Of course you've completely misunderstood my position repreatedly (or misrepresented it--hard to tell since you seem to have the capacity to understand what I'm saying, even if you don't agree).

Just to be as succinct as possible, I think the CE companies who developed SACD (and DVD-A) were incredibly stupid for NOT developing a market for better than CD quality audio, rather thinking consumers would embrace their formats en masse when all they did was provide improvements that were of no relevance to consumers and at a higher price.

Had they mustered some sort of marketing effort to convince consumers these Hi-Rez audio formats were worth owning, then offered them at a price that made sense to consumers, maybe things would have turned out differently.

I can't think of a single example where a format of marginally higher quality at a higher price beat out a format that was perfectly acceptable to consumers at a lower price--MP3 demonstrates that in spades and your stated lack of understanding of why MP3 is so significant and so popular also speaks volumes.

And here is where HD DVD has the right strategy--build on the enormous marketing push for HD video, offering products that are recognizably superior to SD DVD and at incredibly reasonable prices so it is appealing to general consumers.

The Blu-ray strategy of setting itself apart with better quality and higher prices is the niche strategy and without HD DVD would be exactly where it is now and without the PS3 would already be dead.

If you believe that SACD is a success, I really can't help you and I'm not sure anyone can. If you acknowledge that SACD was a failure, it escapes me how you don't see that Blu-Ray is SACD all over again--make it better than DVD, make it significantly more expensive and just expect consumers to buy into it. Nich. Niche. Niche. Marketing 101.

HD DVD may forever be "more expensive" than DVD, but if you believe that the delta of an HD DVD player over an SD DVD player, or the delta of an HD DVD disc over an SD DVD disc in the future is going to matter to consumers--get real. Based on that, nobody should have ever bought a Hi-Fi VCR or a progressive scan DVD player. Blu-Ray, on the other hand, is simply more expensive to produce and that has been attested to by a number of industry experts.

Then again, you still believe Toshiba is losing a fortune on HD DVD players and Sony didn't lose 2 Billion dollars on the PS3, despite having reported exactly that to the financial community. Since facts don't influence your opinions, there's not really much to say...

Quote:
Some companies may have believed Blu-ray or HD DVD could replace DVD, but not very many.
The unfortunate thing for the BDA is, it is absolutely essential for Blu-Ray to replace DVD in order for it to succeed--something we both apparently agree it cannot do--and SONY is on record as believing that. There simply aren't enough "small" studios that can make money selling 5,000 copies of a movie as there are with small record labels selling much cheaper to create/produce/market audio recordings.

Meanwhile, for the DVD Forum, while it would be nice for HD DVD to replace DVD, if it doesn't, it's no big deal, the royalties for DVD will keep pouring in, giving them a nice war chest to promote HD DVD if they choose to, rather than lose Billions of dollars in another SACD (or Beta/UMD/Micro-MV/Mini-Disc/ATRAC/MemoryStick) debacle.

Last edited by BobY; 11-26-2007 at 09:41 PM..
BobY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2007, 02:41 AM   #42  
noob
 

Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chandler, AZ
Posts: 67
Default

Very nice post BobY. However, I don't think reason works with these guys. Also, just to add to your post regarding the financials, didn't Toshiba post really good earnings recently? Everyone on the blu side keeps saying Toshiba is losing its rear-end by slashing the prices of their players, but their financial statement presents a different picture.

Chris....
1up5dn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2007, 03:02 AM   #43  
Nikopol
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1up5dn View Post
Very nice post BobY. However, I don't think reason works with these guys. Also, just to add to your post regarding the financials, didn't Toshiba post really good earnings recently? Everyone on the blu side keeps saying Toshiba is losing its rear-end by slashing the prices of their players, but their financial statement presents a different picture.

Chris....
It always makes me laugh when Toshiba is being treated like a small startup in danger of running out of money:

http://www.toshiba.co.jp/about/ir/en...ar2007e_02.htm

Imo the interest of Toshiba is to secure these nice HD DVD royalties in the future, which is real money.
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2007, 04:07 AM   #44  
High Definition is the definition of life.
 
Chris Gerhard's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 10,946
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BobY View Post
Ah well, I must agree with you that it's essential that you don't read what I write in order to come to the consclusions you do. No argument there at all .

Of course you've completely misunderstood my position repreatedly (or misrepresented it--hard to tell since you seem to have the capacity to understand what I'm saying, even if you don't agree).

Just to be as succinct as possible, I think the CE companies who developed SACD (and DVD-A) were incredibly stupid for NOT developing a market for better than CD quality audio, rather thinking consumers would embrace their formats en masse when all they did was provide improvements that were of no relevance to consumers and at a higher price.

Had they mustered some sort of marketing effort to convince consumers these Hi-Rez audio formats were worth owning, then offered them at a price that made sense to consumers, maybe things would have turned out differently.

I can't think of a single example where a format of marginally higher quality at a higher price beat out a format that was perfectly acceptable to consumers at a lower price--MP3 demonstrates that in spades and your stated lack of understanding of why MP3 is so significant and so popular also speaks volumes.

And here is where HD DVD has the right strategy--build on the enormous marketing push for HD video, offering products that are recognizably superior to SD DVD and at incredibly reasonable prices so it is appealing to general consumers.

The Blu-ray strategy of setting itself apart with better quality and higher prices is the niche strategy and without HD DVD would be exactly where it is now and without the PS3 would already be dead.

If you believe that SACD is a success, I really can't help you and I'm not sure anyone can. If you acknowledge that SACD was a failure, it escapes me how you don't see that Blu-Ray is SACD all over again--make it better than DVD, make it significantly more expensive and just expect consumers to buy into it. Nich. Niche. Niche. Marketing 101.

HD DVD may forever be "more expensive" than DVD, but if you believe that the delta of an HD DVD player over an SD DVD player, or the delta of an HD DVD disc over an SD DVD disc in the future is going to matter to consumers--get real. Based on that, nobody should have ever bought a Hi-Fi VCR or a progressive scan DVD player. Blu-Ray, on the other hand, is simply more expensive to produce and that has been attested to by a number of industry experts.

Then again, you still believe Toshiba is losing a fortune on HD DVD players and Sony didn't lose 2 Billion dollars on the PS3, despite having reported exactly that to the financial community. Since facts don't influence your opinions, there's not really much to say...



The unfortunate thing for the BDA is, it is absolutely essential for Blu-Ray to replace DVD in order for it to succeed--something we both apparently agree it cannot do--and SONY is on record as believing that. There simply aren't enough "small" studios that can make money selling 5,000 copies of a movie as there are with small record labels selling much cheaper to create/produce/market audio recordings.

Meanwhile, for the DVD Forum, while it would be nice for HD DVD to replace DVD, if it doesn't, it's no big deal, the royalties for DVD will keep pouring in, giving them a nice war chest to promote HD DVD if they choose to, rather than lose Billions of dollars in another SACD (or Beta/UMD/Micro-MV/Mini-Disc/ATRAC/MemoryStick) debacle.
SACD is a tiny niche format, Sony lost a lot of money, that is what I have repeatedly said. Its niche status is huge compared to the DVD-A niche status. Without DVD-A, I believe it would be a higher cost, profitable, but smaller than CD market. You have concluded that Blu-ray must replace DVD to be a success, I sure haven't. Disney sure hasn't, Fox sure hasn't, Matsushita sure hasn't, Philips sure hasn't and the famous quote from Stringer sure isn't that Sony requires it to happen either. There are a lot of uses for Blu-ray in addition to supplementing or replacing DVD so I know for certain you are wrong on that issue.

After over 1.5 years and standing at about 1% of the pre-recorded video disc market, I would conclude that the HD DVD plan to replace DVD has fallen flat on its face. Still a grand total of one hardware manufacturer and no chance of hardware profits to attract a great rush to get involved. You somehow think the plan is going as scheduled, pretty funny. Actual money has been spent promoting HD DVD and this is the result? Low priced players are the only reason HD DVD has sold the pitiful amount of product it has, it would have been far less without that, the marketing has done nothing. If the Blu-ray companies decided to compete on hardware price, that would mean HD DVD couldn't even sell anything because of low prices. Of course that would require the Blu-ray participants to lose even more money, but the result is clear if they did.

The format war continues because of one company, Toshiba, and I hope one company, Warner, decides to end the folly, and does it soon.

Chris
Chris Gerhard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-27-2007, 05:24 AM   #45  
noob
 

Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chandler, AZ
Posts: 67
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Gerhard View Post
The format war continues because of one company, Toshiba, and I hope one company, Warner, decides to end the folly, and does it soon.

Chris
WOW, something we actually agree on! C'mon Warner, do it! You know Paramount and Dreamworks were right and so is Universal.

Now that Phoenix studios (or whatever they are called) has gone HD DVD, the landslide will commence!

Chris....
1up5dn is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Go Back   High Def Forum - Your High Definition Community & High Definition Resource >
AddThis Social Bookmark Button
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


to Upconversion players vs HD DVD, Blur-ray
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Article on HD DVD vs. Blu-ray numbskully Blu-Ray and Ultra HD Blu-Ray Players 11 09-10-2009 11:11 AM
Why I think Blu Ray will win the Format War venomxr8 High Definition Media 82 07-17-2009 06:10 PM
HD DVD Interview with Microsoft HighDeff High Definition News & Informative Articles 5 11-30-2007 02:54 AM
European Impact on Format War bruceames High Definition Media 1 06-15-2007 10:14 PM
Is it really better? david Devonick SD DVD Players and Discs 22 03-03-2005 06:22 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:07 PM.



Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2018, MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands