Blu-ray & HD DVD Sales: Pitiful
In reviewing the news related to the high def format war last week, I was struck by the announcement from the Blu-Ray Disc Association (the BDA), that 4 million Blu-Ray discs have been sold in 2007 compared to 2.7 million on HD-DVD. This Blu-Ray release was released in response to one from the HD-DVD camp concerning the uptick in sales of HD-DVD players and that there have been 750,000 HD-DVD players sold in the US to date, including the X-Box 360 add on. As always, you must take the PR releases from all sides in the format war with a huge grain of salt.
However, there was one fact stated in this release which has gotten little notice, namely the quoted sales figures. Let’s for a moment accept them as true. While 4 million Blu-Ray discs sold is better than 2006, it means that all of the BD discs sold in 2007 don’t even total the sales figures for one major DVD release like Transformers or 300. That’s right, ONE DVD release in 2007, just one, has outsold the entire number of Blu-Ray and HD-DVD’s sold in 2007. How pitiful is that? It just shows how small the HDM market is these days and that the real threat to high def optical medium is not the war but DVD. Stop crowing about your sales figures guys. Neither amounts to a hill of beans. Sales figures will continue to be small until the price of the players goes under $100.00 and the price of discs under $20.
My second item is a pet peeve of mine and relates to the use of trailers on Blu-Ray and HD-DVD discs. One must sit there on some discs and toggle through what seems like an endless string of trailers for movies currently in theaters or soon to be in theaters or already released on HD or BD or soon to be released. The worst offender is Disney. My God, it almost takes 5 minutes to toggle ahead of these trailers to get to the menu. which, of course, can take another couple of minutes to come up.
A memo to the folks at Disney: drop the forced trailers. But them in the extras so we can look at them if we want to. Let us watch the movie we paid for first. Have the menu boot up first. Some studios do this with Paramount and Universal being two. The responsiveness of both format players can be slow enough. Why add to the misery, especially when we are only going to fast forward through them anyway?
A memo to the folks at Disney: drop the forced trailers. But them in the extras so we can look at them if we want to. Let us watch the movie we paid for first. Have the menu boot up first. Some studios do this with Paramount and Universal being two. The responsiveness of both format players can be slow enough. Why add to the misery, especially when we are only going to fast forward through them anyway?
Finally, am I the only one sick and tired of the misleading HD ads on TV from the cable companies? Yes you Comcast. They run an ad claiming that they have more HD “at any given moment” than any other provider, including DIRECTV. While that may be true, it is only true because of their HD VOD offerings, most of which could have been recorded off your DVR, or were already shown, or require a fee to be paid or are not very worthwhile at all. What is not true is that Comcast has more linear HD channels than DIRECTV, which would seem to be what most listeners or viewers would assume listening to these ads.
How about less misleading ads Comcast? Tell the viewers or listeners that you don’t have as many HD channels but a lot more HD VOD and crow about the quality of your picture vs. DIRECTV, Just don’t leave the impression that you have more HD channels as that is not true. Take a page from Verizon’s FiOS which now notes it is adding HD VOD and will add more HD channels in 2008. While I would prefer more HD channels now, at least they don’t try to claim that the HD VOD they are adding are the equal to Directv’s growing HD lineup.
For more high-def news and views, please click: TVPredictions.com.
How about less misleading ads Comcast? Tell the viewers or listeners that you don’t have as many HD channels but a lot more HD VOD and crow about the quality of your picture vs. DIRECTV, Just don’t leave the impression that you have more HD channels as that is not true. Take a page from Verizon’s FiOS which now notes it is adding HD VOD and will add more HD channels in 2008. While I would prefer more HD channels now, at least they don’t try to claim that the HD VOD they are adding are the equal to Directv’s growing HD lineup.
For more high-def news and views, please click: TVPredictions.com.

6 Comments:
COMCAST AND HD DVD SUCK AND ARE BOTH MISLEADING
This article is retarded. Blu-Ray and HD-DVD are new technologies that haven't been mass adopted. How can you compare them sales-wise to a technology that's been around for longer than a decade and has been mass adopted for years? This article is as far from objective as you can get. DVD is like VHS to adopters of HDM. Everyone is buying HDTV's and it is only a matter of time before Joe Wal-Mart discovers how much of an upgrade HDM is. It will be better for the avg consumer if there is only one winner. Having this format war only delays mass adoption of a superior product.
Thanks for the kind words. LIke too many out there you totally miss the point. The point is that for all the bluster about the format war and the whinning from both sides about who is winning or who is better, the public does not care. They are happy with DVD. They were not happy with VHS once they saw DVD in action. What does either HD format offer them to run out and pay these prices for it? Will they adopt it, yes, eventually, but not until the product is priced within the parameters.
Couldn't agree more. Although it isn't just disk sales it's also players .. in the week ending Nov 24 there were 11x as many DVD players sold (600,000 vs 57,000) as blu-ray and HD DVD combined.
The parallels with the audio world are interesting. Think CD (=DVD) and the higher quality SACD/DVD-A (=Blu-ray/HD DVD) formats, and how consumers relegated them to niche formats in favour of lower quality but more convenience, i.e. MP3 (=VOD, downloads). If one supposes more efficient codecs and a low-HD (e.g. 720p) level quality for downloads (rather than 1080p) download becomes a viable possibility.
The fact is the bulk of consumers can't benefit from HDM and many that could will reject it for a variety of reasons (confusion, disgust with DRM, DVD is good enough, higher cost, etc), so a niche market is almost certain.
The only thing that can change that is a combination of one HD format being abandoned, and prices for HD players and disks the same as for DVD, and I don't see that happening unless Warner were to abandon HD DVD, and for various reasons I feel the reverse is more likely.
But two formats guarantee the need for dual (or universal) format players and further ensure niche status. And it would set up HDM for higher prices to reflect lower sales of high quality disks (cf Criterion DVDs).
I could go on ... but I'll leave it there. DVD is most likely going to be king until download or some other single HD disk format (e.g. 1440p, 10bit xvYCC) arrives.
Regarding player sales, I have a hard time believing player sales are as poor as this. I've been monitoring Amazon's top seller list for DVD players since Thanksgiving. The Toshiba HD-DVD players have consistently stayed in the top 5, with the A3 maintaining the top spot for that whole time. Currently Toshiba HD-DVD players hold spots 1,2, and 5; while a Samsung BR player is at #3. If Amazon rankings are indicative of the broader market, HD players are making a very strong showing currently.
Agree with the post, hi def DVD's are going to be the laser discs of this decade. The market isn't ready. When DVD's were as old as hi def DVD's are right now, DVD's were already pushing videotapes out of stores. Same goes for CD's and vinyl.
The problem with Blu-Ray and HD-DVD's is that in order to notice any difference between them and a regular DVD you have to have a much better television than 80 or 90 percent of the population has. The market for them right now is the home theater crowd and stupid people who don't realize the pointlessness of HD if you don't own at least a 42" plasma screen.
Post a Comment
<< Home