Predicting Blu-ray's Troubles Didn't Take A Crystal Ball
from the that's-gotta-hurt dept
A bunch of regular readers of Techdirt have been sending in Robin Harris' analysis that, despite beating HD-DVD in a drawn out standards battle, Blu-ray DVDs don't seem to be gaining much traction. Harris specifically states: "16 months ago I called the HD war for Blu-ray. My bad. Who dreamed they could both lose?" I guess Harris doesn't read Techdirt. Because we predicted such an outcome 3 years ago when the standards battle delayed adoption, and again when Blu-ray launched over two years ago, and again when HD-DVD dropped out earlier this year. It wasn't exactly rocket science to recognize what would happen, if you just compared the standards battle over DVDs to previous standards battles, and looked at the competitive environment and tech horizon, you could see that an extended standards battle would hurt both sides. That said, I'm actually not as pessimistic as Harris about Blu-ray's chances. I think that it will catch on somewhat and become more widely used -- though, not nearly as widely as if the standard had been set three years ago, before online delivery of movies was a viable option.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: blu-ray, dvds, standards battles
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
blueray
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hey, Hulk did well on Bluray!
18% of total sales were the Bluray version, which is apparently the highest percentage of first week sales for any same day DVD and Bluray release ever.
The average is 12%, and some movies do as low as 3% of their total first week sales on Bluray vs DVD, like Sex & The City.
Obviously, this is because Hulk is a manly man movie with CG that more people would want to see in HD than Sex & The City though.
The real challenge is to get everyone to buy the Bluray version :D
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bluray v dvd
Many people are not willing to pay up to 3 or 4 times as much for a bluray for a slightly better picture. Especially when they know that the extra money is just going into the pocket of the movie companies as there is very little extra cost in producing a bluray over a dvd.
People just don't like being ripped off. If Bluray comes down in price so that it is close to dvd then people will buy Bluray instead of dvd. I think we are beyond the bleeding edge now.
It would up sales in PS3's to :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Bluray v dvd
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Bluray v dvd
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Bluray v dvd
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Bluray v dvd
Granted, SD video on a super-ultra-wide bigscreen TV looks like crap in the displays but honestly, I don't know if I trust that the stores are really showing the true quality difference.
There is a bigger difference between VHS and DVD than DVD and Blu-Ray. Especially when you consider the fact that VHS was analog, required rewinding the movie, didn't support random access, and all the other features of DVDs. The difference between BD and DVD isn't as big, IMO. So, it's still not worth the price.
Plus, I refuse to support Sony anymore, especially because of all the proprietary tech they use that prevents people from using their legally purchased and rightfully owned products.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Heres whats gona happen
Then we will get to see movies and video.
Limits will be capped and if you don't have the movie packages will cost you a fortune for overages.
Congress will make laws so that no one will be allowed to sell all you can use internet access.
Pirates will set up networks, grannies will get sued by the Internicaa.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Heres whats gona happen
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Even if this were not the case, Blu-Ray holds little appeal to me. Expensive players, expensive discs, many of the discs don't have anywhere near the number of extra features as the SD releases, and I'm not sure but aren't the region coding and "copy protection" pretty strong right now? I have no desire to pay more for an inferior package that won't play when and where I want just because the picture and sound are a bit better.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Get Rid of HDCP and We'll Talk
HDCP+HDMI = Screwed Over Consumers
That is why Blu-Ray isn't doing well, any other argument is ignoring the truth.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Get Rid of HDCP and We'll Talk
Not to be pointing fingers here, but it's you who are ignoring the truth of the "failure" of Blu-Ray.
It's the cost. Consumers are frustrated with having to buy expensive HDTVs, then to turn around and spend another $300+ for a player + $30 per movie? That's the reason Blu-Ray isn't taking off.
Add in the economic woes, and this just compounds the problem.
In addition, people aren't going to be happy they'll need to swap out all their DVDs for Blu-Ray. Don't laugh. Consumers don't truly understand the difference and believe their current DVD collection won't work.
It's no wonder. Rarely do "big box" stores cater to education as much as they do sales and pushing their expensive warranties onto consumers.
I'm pretty educated with technology and I've yet to purchase a Blu-Ray player + movies (although I do own an HDTV). Why? Cost. I know eventually prices will come down to a price point which makes it easier for me to obtain. I see absolutely no reason to buy a Blu-Ray player when my SDDVD player looks fine on the HDTV.
I could care less if I can copy the content or not. Nor do most consumers, so HDCP has no bearing on this "failure" (unless it renders the player useless).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Get Rid of HDCP and We'll Talk
Twinrova - your also wrong about the "big box" stores catering to BlueRay education - Target, WalMart and Best Buy all run non-stop videos about BlueRay.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Get Rid of HDCP and We'll Talk
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Get Rid of HDCP and We'll Talk
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Get Rid of HDCP and We'll Talk
I'm not defending the stupid DRM, however.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Upside
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
blue ray woes
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
HD TV is fine if YOU have Satilite service*
Now if you have HD TV and on cable (like cox ) you do not and wont get true HD TV cause they do not have the bandwith to bring you 1080i and some such as cox can't even give you 720i......
Most who have cable do not know this and buy a nice HD TV thinking they have now got HD via there cable company Ha Ha... Not true
YOU pay extra to have HD tv via cable but YOUR not getting it! Regular TV is 420 and in most cases today on cable and a HD TV your lucky if you can get Discovery channel in 600i where lets say DishNetwork is sending out true HD 1080i:
Cable can't do that cause it takes three regular channels to make one true HD1080i.....
Do your home work and stop paying for what YOUR not getting or going to get Via Cable..........
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: HD TV is fine if YOU have Satilite service*
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: HD TV is fine if YOU have Satilite service*
> digital box. More importantly, OTA HD is available for
> free, which makes it a far better alternative to satellite
> or cable.
...assuming the signal doesn't break up. That can be
a big problem with OTA. That's always been a big problem
with OTA. That's why so many people have cable. That said,
you will probably see higher bitrates on OTA than you will
on either cable or sat. OTOH, the sat providers are using
h264 which helps them pack more channels in. They also
aren't limited to a "single cable".
Then again, I am perfectly content to record a HDTV
signal pulled off sattelite at only 480p. It looks very
respectable (being recorded from a good source) and takes
up a lot less space on the PVR.
Content and convenience are king.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Don't Understand
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Don't Understand
http://thepiratebay.org/
They will level the playing field.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Don't Understand
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Blu-ray downloads?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cost vs. Benefit is the primary problem
Up scaling DVD players are very good. So good in fact, that a few people can't reliably tell the difference between a well scaled DVD and Blu-ray.
Even the majority who can easily tell the difference frequently don't think is so much nicer it should warrant a big extra cost.
During my highly accurate and definitive 5 minuets in a single Best Buy sample, I saw frequently $15 DVDs make $25 Blu-rays, and $19 DVDs made $30 or $35 Blu-rays. That's a huge markup for something that people think is just "a little sharper and nicer".
If Blu-ray titles were just a $5 markup all across the board, the takeoff would be much much faster. The faster it takes off the faster they make back their Blu-ray production costs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
...too expensive...
--Ray
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
physical formats are dying
bill gates even said so about blu-ray years ago: http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/archives/2005/10/14/news/13474.shtml
hard drive based players (flash included) and digital delivery are the future. dvd was the last successful physical video format and if the industry knows what's good for it blu-ray will be the last physical format period.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Now, it is even more astonishing since current executives could see how the mini-disc/DCC battle had turned out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Blu-Ray encryption has been cracked
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Price is the problem
Given that Blu-Ray disc and player prices have remained pretty static since the demise of HDDVD, I doubt that prices will come down quickly enough to ever make it mainstream. Blu-Ray will be like Laserdisc. It will hang around for a long time, fueled by enthusiasts, but it will never be a true DVD replacement. The replacement will be whatever product can change movie viewing as fundamentally as the upgrade from VHS to DVD.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DVDs are old tech...
The only reason for a DVD will be to initially RIP the contents to a real format, then share with all, hey that's going on right now :b
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oh yeah... and the darned protection
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
writer's jargon
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm not that interested in buying Blu-Ray because of both the cost and the DRM, but I do rend Blu-Ray as often as possible. I just watched the Hulk and it's noticeably better than DVD.
I rent romantic comedies from the $1 RedBox instead though.
BD definitely has a big place for me. It's the only way for me to reasonably get HD content right now. I don't see it going anywhere soon, even if I still have plenty of use for other formats.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
While I have to disagree with some folks here regarding the difference between an upscaled DVD and a true HD picture being only "a bit better", I do not feel $35 for a movie is worth the cost.
I rarely bought DVDs at $20, I'm not buying Blu-rays until the price comes down at least that far.
The only exception I'm making is for the "Planet Earth" series, which is DEFINITELY worth watching in full HD glory.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not 1 cent!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
disc prices
$200 to replace my dvd player? Sure. $30 per movie? Not a chance in hell.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
disc prices
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Its all about the Benjamins
As others have pointed out before, consumers will pay a premium price for special effects-filled action movies, but there is little reason to pay extra to see Kathy Bates in high def (my eyes are burning just thinking about it).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Umm...
Although I agree that hard discs and file servers are the way to go (I know my 52" is connected to my 2.5TB file server) the pricing in your scenario has nothing to do with anything. The $125 is for the hard drive only (btw, I just got a refurbished 1TB on ebay for $80), but that doesn't scratch the fee's associated with the actually movie. The example would be better used saying the 500gb hard drive is $125 and a blu-ray player is XXX. If E-books and Itunes are any example, the industry will still charge us the same amount or More for the digital content even though there is no overhead for them.
E-books really irritate me. A book out on hard back is $20 for the hard back and $19.99 for the E-book version that is locked down with every DRM imaginable. I’ve got no problem if you wanted to charge me the same price that you would receive for a hard backed book sale. Minus the Book stores portion, the printing and materials fee, and the shipping. To charge me the same amount though? That’s ridiculous.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
HDMI + HDCP + $$$ Blueray = slow market adoption
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Blue-Gay
Attention all Blue-Gay Fan Boyz! I have an important announcement:
ALL DISK FORMATS ARE DEAD OR DYING. PERIOD. YOU MAY ENJOY YOUR BLUE, OR RED OR PURPLE DISK FORMAT FOR THE TIME BEING, BUT IT WILL BE AT THE EXPENSE OF YOUR REALIZATION THAT HARD MEDIA IS *PLAYED*.
The future is in the cloud, baby. Get used to it now and don't waste your milk money on those shiny coasters.
-CBMHB
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anybody Else Just Plain Hate DVDs?
Sure, the picture is better than VHS, but for me, the advantage stops there.
- I don't have time for bonus features (and those could easily be put on a VHS after the movie anyway).
- With VHS, you put it in, FF the legal crap, and the movie started quickly. With DVDs, you put it in, and are practically forced through previews, ads, crap, legalese. The menu buttons are disabled, you can't skip the junk, etc.
- BTW, wasn't DRM supposed to be about protecting the content? Then why does it lock my "menu" button during the previews? What has that got to do with copy-protecting the content? Why do I have to sit through the Interpol/FBI warning? I paid for the disk, but ironically, anyone who got a pirate version won't have to sit through that warning. Infuriating!!
- With Disney as a prime example, on their DVDs, I am forced through so many ads for other movies that they should be paying ME to buy the DVD. Sadly, the ads are effective on my kids :-(
- Thus, "Throwing in a DVD" for my kids is really a 8 minute exercise in finding the disk, firing up the system, and standing there with the remote to get to the content. How is that convenient? Usually, I'm putting in a disk for them so that I can have a few minutes to get a job done, but now I'm standing in the room with impatient rugrats heckling me on.
- When you stop a VHS and turn off the machine, you can pick up later right where you left off (good for kids who don't watch it all in one sitting). With DVDs, you may lose your spot, you may be forced through all the preview and legalese crap again.
- Young kids like mine tend to watch TV in 15 minute chunks. This is both because they do it while we cook, or clean up the kitchen, and also because they don't want to sit still too long. They also tend to want Nemo today, and Dora tomorrow - even though they didn't finish Nemo. This means we are always changing the disk, and thus have to sit through the pre-roll crap to access our 15 minutes of bought content. Our ratio of pre-roll crap to show is quite high.
- DVD menus have little consistency, so using them is always a pain. Sure, they look cool, but they are not easy to use. Jumping from scene to scene is easier, but I don't do that much.
- DVDs are extremely prone to scratching, damage, and skipping. I've had to replace DVD players that go bad, I've had to replace DVDs that go bad. VHS players were rock solid, and the tapes lasted a long time.
- Rewinding was a small hassle, point scored for DVD. But for the kids content, it's actually better that VHS "remembered" where you paused, even when the tape is removed from the player.
And the above is comparing DVD to VHS (a tech popularized in 1982). When DVD is compared to a DVR, it's a joke. I use a couple of Tivos, one is for the kids. THAT's the way to manage content quickly! When I want to watch a movie, I rent movies from Amazon.com. On their site, I can browse, view previews, read comments, all BY MY CHOICE. If I want a particular film, I can skip all those "discovery and promotion" tools and search directly for the film. Then, I have the content digitally delivered to my Tivo Series 3 in real time. When I choose to watch, there is no crap, no warnings, no previews.
To me, DVD is just plain lousy. Never liked it, never will. I lived through it, but I preferred the VHS, and I am happy to more or less skip forward to DVR/digital delivery.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Neither is appealing enough to me. The switch from VHS to DVD was something very appealing on the other hand because it was noticable.... I have yet to be convinced as to why HD is so much better.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Really
With metered broadband??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]