|
Blu-ray disc sales rise considerably in 2009
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 17 July, 2009
According to the midyear report issued by the Digital Entertainment Group (DEG), sales of Blu-ray titles rose considerably so far in 2009, helping to reduce overall losses to the industry as prerecorded entertainment sales dropped 3.9% over last year. Sales of Blu-ray titles were up 91 percent, totaling $407 million. Additionally, rentals of Blu-ray titles also rose, with revenue from rentals ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
|
ronhondo
Junior Member
|
17. July 2009 @ 18:05 |
Link to this message
|
|
Who really needs this format which will most likely go by the wayside in a couple of years for some other format ? Regular upconverted DVD's are all I need. I rent the DVD's .. Copy Them .. For pennies on the dollar.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
Junior Member
|
17. July 2009 @ 19:11 |
Link to this message
|
I'll stick with DVD's. I just want to watch the movie and could care less about any-other crap stuffed onto the disc.
DVD quality is more than adequate and much more affordable.
|
|
WaltCD
Newbie
|
17. July 2009 @ 20:15 |
Link to this message
|
Blu-ray quality is much better than DVD, even upconverted DVDs. Plus, unpconverted only upgrades the video, not the sound. These uncompressed Blu-ray soundtracks are quite amazing, not to mention the DTS 7.1 and other formats. It is SO crystal clear!
I have been bypassing watching quite a few movies, nowadays, that are only available in the DVD format. Also, I'm catching up on many an older movie that is just now coming out on Blu-ray. Rio Bravo is on our playlist this weekend, for example.
@ronhondo
Quote:
Who really needs this format which will most likely go by the wayside in a couple of years for some other format ? Regular upconverted DVD's are all I need. I rent the DVD's .. Copy Them .. For pennies on the dollar.
I definitely prefer this format. When it costs the same to rent either DVD or Blu-ray, why go with the lesser quality?
I used to copy DVDs as well, til I built up a collection of over 2500! Then I realized I had 1500 movies that I'd never seen before. You know, it will take me over four YEARS to watch all of them, if I just watched one movie a day, and that's not counting all the NEW movies to come out in the next four years, OR the great, even classic, movies that already exist that I still haven't seen.
Oh, and upconverted of many compressed movies is not going to be as good quality as even the original DVD. Depends on the compression (DVD-9 to a DVD-5 :(
@skeil909
Quote:
I just want to watch the movie and could care less about any-other crap stuffed onto the disc.
I, too, just want to watch the movie, and don't care about the Special Features.
Walt D in LV
|
|
SProdigy
Senior Member
5 product reviews
|
18. July 2009 @ 00:01 |
Link to this message
|
Walt you are right on. I stopped copying DVDs a couple years ago, simply because of the compression factor, as most DVD movies are on DVD9 anymore, and I'm too cheap to buy DVD+DL! In some cases, you end up with a VERY compressed movie (60%) and that ruins the experience.
As DVD's went on sale more and more, I built up quite a collection, and was (and still am) happy with my upconvert player. I recently purchased a Blu-Ray player, and already having HD in my home, I was quite familiar with the quality of picture I would receive, but you hit the nail on the head about the uncompressed audio tracks: they are simply amazing. It also appears that my Blu-Ray player is more adept at processing standard DVD audio than my upconvert player, possibly due to bitstream processing.
I was a naysayer of Blu for a long time, but I must say, the prices have dropped if you have a sharp eye, and you can have Blu for the same price as or near DVD. For example, I just nabbed T2 for $10. I've owned it on every format, and each time I "upgrade" I am impressed. The uncompressed DTS EX soundtrack is phenomenal, and I must say, worth every penny to enjoy movies that you truly love.
|
|
lxhotboy
Senior Member
|
18. July 2009 @ 00:18 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Blu-ray quality is much better than DVD, even upconverted DVDs.
I have seen a blue-ray movie at a store. Never in person. I have watched a few HD DVD movies on a xbox360 addon i received for free. I have read that Blueray and HD DVD quality was pretty much identical so i can say i have seen HD movies. Are some HD movies better than others? I ask b/c i havenot been really impressed with the quality of HD movies over an upscaled DVD. Definetly not worth the extra to buy a Blueray to me and dont some places actually charge more to rent Blueray movies than a DVD?
It doesnot seem much better. Better yes, but not mind blowing or really that noticable. My wife doesnot seem to notice the difference either.
Blueray vs. upscaled????
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 18. July 2009 @ 00:21
|
|
Morreale
Senior Member
|
18. July 2009 @ 00:38 |
Link to this message
|
I think for a mind blowng experience you need a mind blowing setup lol
That's where HD fails. You can't just have the TV, it's gotta be a good one, with a good surround sound and whatever else, even lighting matters to some :P
I think I'm good though, I got the 5.1 surround with a decent 1080P 42" LCD and a PS3. Only one BR movie though, and that's because I got it as a present (and I really liked it, but $20 for a movie is so 10 years ago).
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 18. July 2009 @ 00:39
|
|
pphoenix
Suspended permanently
|
18. July 2009 @ 07:29 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
Blu-ray sales doubled in the first quarter of the year.
2 x 2 = 4
to be frank the sales can only improve from pathetic to barely noticeable.
ah the throw statistics & bar chart marketing "wool over the eyes" tactic to make ppl believe that its a viable format & maybe worth purchasing.
Quote:
Digital Entertainment Group (DEG), sales of Blu-ray titles rose considerably so far in 2009
what year was bluray released........ (btw, rhetorical question company bloggers n fanboys)
Quote:
The Digital Entertainment Group Europe is a pan-industry body that was formed in 2002 and has a remit to promote the DVD and HD formats (HD DVD, Blu-ray and HDTV) and the benefits to consumers and trade across Europe. The DEG Europe is an industry-funded
Quote:
Members of the DEG Europe include, Cinram, Fox Home Entertainment and Paramount Home Entertainment, Sony DADC, Sony Pictures Home Entertainment, Technicolor, Toshiba, Universal Pictures Home Entertainment, Walt Disney Studios Home Entertainment Europe, Warner Home Video Europe.
ah so the DEG is the MPAA scumbags promotion body.
Is afterdawn a technology site or is it PR for the media industry now, whats happened to you afterdawn 5 years ago you would av never ran tosh like this.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 18. July 2009 @ 07:32
|
|
oappi
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
18. July 2009 @ 14:17 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Morreale:
I think for a mind blowng experience you need a mind blowing setup lol
I totaly agree with you! Even if your tv is Fullhd it doesn´t mean the picture is best of the best. My folks bought 32" fullhd samsung and i bought 30" computer monitor from lg, (32" costs ~700€ and 30" 1100€ {€=1.4$ but with electronics 1:1}) and there is HUGE difference on picture quality when i played Blu-ray movies. With samsungs tv you can see that "color map" isnt nearly as good as it is with lg:s computer monitor, and that makes picture look a lot crappier than it really is. Im not saying samsungs tv:s are crappy, nearly all cheap fullhds are compared to more expensive computer monitors.
i was really blown away with bd´s picture quality. If you want to get films with best picture quality you might want to go for new well known movies like newest bond movies, and reading reviews at amazon.com can help alot, But like Morreale said, you need good equipment to get everything out of the blu-ray.
and as wiki can tell us dvd->bd difference is greater than vhs->dvd
330×480 (250 lines): VHS,
720×480 (480/380 lines): DVD (with widescreen movies 380 lines)
1920×1080 (1080 lines): Blu-ray
|
|
Interestx
Senior Member
|
18. July 2009 @ 14:29 |
Link to this message
|
Forget the Blu-ray rise (it's easy to post big growth numbers when you're starting from such a low point).
Check out the report and look at the digital distribution earnings
$1 billion.
DVD continues to dominate massively @ $2.89 billion.
Set this in the context of a recent report which said -
Quote:
The report, ?Adopting Digital Rights Management,? found that broadband-enabled home in the United States download 14 billion videos each year
www.homemediamagazine.com/downloads/report-content-holders-need-better-online-user-experience-16276
Sooner or later the digital distribution model is going to be sorted out properly.
There's $1 billion being made from it right now and, despite the complaints of some, there are 12 billion addition downloads going on (supposedly 'illegally').
Digital distribution is here and is, by far, the largest means of a/v content delivery.
The only debate is how long it'll take for business to adapt to this reality.
Blu-ray is just a small passing niche format.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 18. July 2009 @ 14:30
|
|
Toshibot
Member
|
18. July 2009 @ 14:55 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Interestx:
Check out the report and look at the digital distribution earnings
$1 billion.
How much of that is electronic sell-through/ownership?
How much of that is VOD/rental?
and most important:
How much of that is actually HIGH DEFINITION content?
Compare the revenue of SD digital distribution vs SD DVD.
Compare the revenue of HD digital distribution vs BluRay.
When you have these figures then get back to us.
Quote:
Digital distribution is here and is, by far, the largest means of a/v content delivery.
Not by a long shot.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 18. July 2009 @ 14:57
|
|
Interestx
Senior Member
|
18. July 2009 @ 17:30 |
Link to this message
|
Toshibot
I think you missed my point.
You can sub-devide and high-light the Blu-ray isloated growth but I'm saying that compared to the total market it remains minute.
Too few care.
I dont see how you can write of 16 billion downloads either.
It seems very clear to me that digital distribution is going on on a vast scale, just because business has proved itself incapable of (so far) adapting to this new reality and really cashing in on it is immaterial (and yet even there the $1 billion they can show is 150% greater than Blu-ray's $400 million).
|
|
Toshibot
Member
|
18. July 2009 @ 17:41 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Interestx:
I think you missed my point.
Way to skirt the issue.
Without the data that I asked in my original post, your point is meaningless.
Compare like to like.
SD digital distribution vs SD DVD
HD digital distribution vs BluRay
Try again.
|
|
Interestx
Senior Member
|
18. July 2009 @ 18:02 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Toshibot:
Way to skirt the issue.
No, I think you're the one trying hard to keep this revolving around a lone focal point when that isn't the only relevant matter here
(and neither was it in the comment I made which, if you remember, you chose to respond to).
'91% increases' always sound great so long as there are no other reference points and it's my view that the info I mentioned gives that reference (and bursts much of that '91%' balloon).
Comparison with the total market is always the sole relevant issue and on that score Blu-rays tiny size is the sole relevant and highly obvious factor.
You can keep ignoring my point if you like but I think anyone can see that in terms of a/v delivery 40 million discs sold this year are a drop in the ocean compared to 14 billion downloads.
Whatever limitations some prefer to focus upon with the existing Internet infrastructure it is perfectly clear that digital distribution is by far the largest means of a/v delivery right now - and that can only grow.
|
|
Toshibot
Member
|
18. July 2009 @ 19:22 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Interestx:
40 million discs sold this year are a drop in the ocean compared to 14 billion downloads.
14 billion downloads = $1 billion revenue
If I'm not mistaken that's about 7 cents per download.
It just doesn't add up. Which VOD or digital distribution service sells downloads at that price?
Apparently you forgot to add the important piece of information that says:
Quote:
of which 85% are illegal
LOL! - You don't play fair.
Compare LEGAL digital distribution vs LEGAL disc based media.
The fact that you included ILLEGAL DOWNLOADS to your figure completely invalidates your argument. I'd bet that majority of those illegal downloads were obtained from disc-based sources.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 18. July 2009 @ 19:39
|
|
Interestx
Senior Member
|
18. July 2009 @ 20:05 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Toshibot:
LOL! - You don't play fair.
I think that concentrating on the dubious legal situation ('illegal'? it's only a breach of copyright, not robbing a bank) is mere semantics.
I'm just stating what ought to be clear as day & obvious.
There's a vast amount of digital distribution going on.
Everything pales into insignificance before it in terms of numbers.
Sooner or later industry will get their heads around how to work with this reality but fundamentally in terms of where people are at right now Blu-ray is minute and the looming tech is so obviously digital distribution (whether SD or HD).
Some say DD is years off but I disagree and think it's perfectly fair to point to those total numbers for DD, clearly it is happening on a truly huge scale right now......the rest is merely a matter of the industry developing a workable business model.
Take it easy. ;)
|
|
varnull
Suspended permanently
|
18. July 2009 @ 20:08 |
Link to this message
|
|
hehehe.. exactly.. a 91% increase over total sales of ONE isn't even 2 sold XD
|
|
oappi
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
18. July 2009 @ 20:18 |
Link to this message
|
Digital distribution would be nice but there are still many problems with it. Like Toshibot pointed out most is illegal. Most ppl would like to be able to watch movie when they buy it (as stream or download it really fast), and in many places that isnt possible even at dvd quality, not to mention hd. I for one dont want to wait hours to get my copy, if i can get it from the store right away. Most likely digital distribution will get blu-ray, but i dont see that happening in the near future, since investing money to get good enought bandhwith to most ppl would cost alot, and at current economy state there wont be any money to spear to something like this.
|
|
Toshibot
Member
|
18. July 2009 @ 20:20 |
Link to this message
|
^^^
A consumer product that's on course to make over $1 billion in revenue this year -in the middle of a recession- is obviously still not good enough for some people.
Just to add more numbers to the debate:
The latest NPD report shows that BluRay/NextGen DVD has overtaken Regular/Upconvert DVD in terms of dollar revenue:
http://www.twice.com/article/307509-Mark...rts+by+category
November 2008 through April 2009
Blu-ray $376.50 million
DVD $315.59 million
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 18. July 2009 @ 21:04
|
|
Interestx
Senior Member
|
19. July 2009 @ 09:50 |
Link to this message
|
Toshibot
I'd look at those numbers from the alternate perspective.
The DVD standalone market is saturated, that's pretty much acknowledged by all, who doesn't have a DVD player in the west by now?
Surely in those circumstances edging slightly ahead (3yrs in) is really not that much of a feat (not for a video format enormously boosted from launch by the inclusion in the PS3)?
Blu-ray sold 63 million discs in the US last year and took just under 4.5% of the total movie disc market.
These numbers show they have 40 million sales @ 6mths in this year, let's say for the sake of debate that the effects of the recession (which, like in gaming, have been slow to show in this category) don't hit too hard and they defy all expectations and sustain that 91% growth over the whole year.
Let's be even more generous and say they double.
126 million sales.
Verses DVD which is on a slow decline but nevertheless last year took 1.4 billion sales.
It's still drop in the ocean stuff compared to the total market - and remains so even after the big claims about it's recent growth.
Similarly why are you intent on making a big deal out of a niche format which you expect to maybe take $1 billion by the years end when there is already an emergent tech taking that $1 billion already (digital downloads)?
|
|
Toshibot
Member
|
19. July 2009 @ 10:06 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Interestx:
Similarly why are you intent on making a big deal out of a niche format which you expect to maybe take $1 billion by the years end when there is already an emergent tech taking that $1 billion already (digital downloads)?
My question is still valid.
How much of that $1 Billion is actually high-def?
Compare SD digital distribution to SD DVD.
Compare HD digital distribution to BluRay.
Unless you have those numbers your point is meaningless.
You cannot compare SD+HD DD to just BluRay.
...and don't try to sneak in the numbers for illegal downloads.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 19. July 2009 @ 10:07
|
|
error5
Senior Member
|
19. July 2009 @ 10:26 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Interestx:
Sooner or later industry will get their heads around how to work with this reality but fundamentally in terms of where people are at right now Blu-ray is minute and the looming tech is so obviously digital distribution (whether SD or HD).
The industry is starting to realize that coexistence between disc-based and digital distribution is the most likely scenario with disc being the preferred ownership model and digital distribution being the preferred rental model.
This is the reason why more and more Blu Ray players are coming out with media streaming capabilities with support for Netflix, Amazon, YouTube etc.
|
|
Interestx
Senior Member
|
19. July 2009 @ 10:35 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Toshibot:
You cannot compare SD+HD DD to just BluRay.
Sure you can.
Why not?
I thought the point of this article was to say how Blu-ray was doing......is that not really only possible when it's set in the context of the whole market?
Considering the truth that (so far at least) the majority of HD TVs are not used to watching Blu-ray (or other HD content for that matter) I don't see why the comparison is invalid.
People are sticking with SD and seem perfectly happy with SD upscaled on their HD kit.
How many PS3 owners do you know who still buy DVD and will only go the extra for Blu-ray occasionally - usually only on a flash effects laden film?
Originally posted by Toshibot:
...and don't try to sneak in the numbers for illegal downloads.
Why not?
They show just how massive the true potential is (and that is at a point where DD is in it's infancy).
Originally posted by error5:
more Blu Ray players are coming out with media streaming capabilities with support for Netflix, Amazon, YouTube etc.
....and HD TVs too (Sony just announced Netflix for their Bravia TVs, but not for the PS3 which I thought was interesting).
How it all shakes out will be very interesting.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 19. July 2009 @ 10:42
|
|
Toshibot
Member
|
19. July 2009 @ 10:48 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Interestx:
I thought the point of this article was to say how Blu-ray was doing
Well in that case the answer is: BluRay is doing just fine.
A 91% increase in revenue in the middle of a recession is something that not many industry sectors can boast of.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 19. July 2009 @ 10:52
|
|
error5
Senior Member
|
19. July 2009 @ 10:59 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by Interestx:
How it all shakes out will be very interesting.
Yes. When future scenarios are not clear cut, what matters is how well you're doing compared to your previous performance - not on how the other guy is doing.
DVD sales are down, digital distribution is doing well, and Blu Ray is doubling sales year on year. Who knows how it will all pan out but right now I like the way Blu Ray is performing.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
pianoman6
Inactive
|
19. July 2009 @ 12:27 |
Link to this message
|
I am sure there were plenty of people who looked at DVD the same way when it first hit the market and even a few years proceeding its existence. The reality here is that new tech is expensive, and premium hardware to make the best of it is prohibitively expensive, however Blu-Ray format improves over DVD in much the same way that DVD did over VHS. The medium is more robust and durable, and the picture and sound quality have improved several fold. It would be stupid to assume with the huge sales increases in HD TVs that this format will not succeed. I remember quite distinctly seeing DVDs selling for more than 30 dollars. Once the prices equalize on both the equipment and the mediums (both blank and pre-recorded) I am sure Blu-Ray will eliminate DVD in the same way DVD did to VHS.
|
