Blu-ray player sales (1 Viewer)

[Al.Anderson]

I thought this was interesting: Blu-ray player sales down despite format victory | Tech news blog - CNET News.com

I haven't seen any threads on this topic in a while. What do people think the slow adoption is due to: player cost, media cost, economy, DVD good enough?

I know for me I'm not crazy about paying the extra price of an HD disk, so I just rent. But I'm guessing many people aren't looking to rentals as their primary viewing source.

 

[Chuck King]

I think it's a combination of the state of the economy and media costs. I don't buy the argument that it's player cost. The couple of hundred bucks you pay for a blu-ray player over the cost of a decent DVD player will be overcome by the premium cost of the discs in a hurry.

 

[Scott-S]

Netflix rents Blu-Ray movies.

But I think the big reason for slow sales is that most (like me) are waiting for the 2.0 players.

 

[Ennsio]

If the experiences of my friends with PS3s that have tried Blu-ray discs is any indication, a large reason is that "DVD is good enough". I have several friends who have bought PS3s recently to go with their HDTVs and were eager to see what Blu-rays looked like on their system and came away impressed but said that they did not notice a huge difference from DVD and would definitely not have bought a stand-alone player for blu-ray. Especially for $400 or more.

My brother is the same. I'm helping him put together a great home theatre in his basement and he has a 720p projector and 5.1 sound system but just a non-converting DVD player. The image looks good but could definitely be improved with blu-ray but he is not keen on forking over $400-$500 for a product that is still in its early stages. For him, DVD is good enough for now. Contrast that with when he first bought his home theater. He was one of the first people to buy a DVD player (when the DVD section at the Blockbuster was the size of the current Blu-ray sections) and loved the upgrade that DVD was over video.

I think that unless people are really in tune with what is possible for video quality (such as in discussions here), many people do not see the need to upgrade yet as they are happy with DVD. I don't know whether it takes a drop in the price of players or the price of software or both before people are willing to take the step up from DVD, but I think most people don't see DVD really holding them back at this point.

 

[Mark Zimmer]

Same here. $400 is too much for a player that will be obsoleted by summer or fall. So I'm waiting more or less patiently for the Sony 550.

 

[Goko]

For me it IS player cost. Why should I buy a player now when come X-mas time I could save myself hundreds of dollars and get a better player as well. Till than other HD sources will do just fine.

 

[chuckg]

I'd say all of the above. the players are far more expensive than they need to be....I mean, c'mon, really. The disks cost more, and can't be played on existing equipment. Unless folks get a larger TV ( or sit closer to one of the same size) then the image upgrade won't be noticeable to the average joanne and joe. They also won't notice much of an audio improvement on their tiny-tinny speakers.

Me? I'm waiting for 2.0 with analog audio outs and a price under $500.

 

[Jeff F.]

The hardware and software are WAY TOO EXPENSIVE for the small bump in PQ, in my opinion. I've got a 52 inch Sony 1080p HDTV with an upconverting Sony S-DVD player. It really is good enough for now until those BD prices drop - and I'm normally an early adopter.

 

[TravisR]

I'm sure all the factors discussed are playing a part but the most important aspect has been missed.The format war ended in January so all the people that were sitting on the fence caused a sales increase in January so, of course, sales were going to drop in Febraury. And then the numbers went up slightly in March compared to February.

This story is just twisting figures to manufacture a story.

 

[RickER]

Me too, and for now my Sony BDP 300 is doing fine.

 

[KurtEP]

Blu Ray is still in the early adopter phase. How many homes even have a high definition television at this point? Plus, the shelves aren't exactly groaning with BD releases, and a lot of the local rental places don't carry them. The average person probably just doesn't see a good reason to buy right now, unlike some of us hardcore types.

I never understand those who say the bump is small in quality, though. On my system, and most of the others I've seen, the difference is usually quite apparent. True, some disks are better than others, but most of them are significantly better. I'd be willing to bet that a lot of the same people had a hard time telling between a shelf worn VHS and DVD too.

 

[ReggieW]

Here in lies the rub...

Most of the enthusiasts on this forum will know/research the difference between various Blu-ray profiles. Casual consumers don't know and can really care less as long as the player plays their discs - and of course, some of the early players won't on certain features. I think stand-alone player sales MIGHT rise once the prices come down. The economoy is just too terrible right now, so luxury items are taking a back seat to food and gas. I really don't see people running out to upgrade in this climate when they're already content with the image SD-DVD is putting on their screens for now. I hear time and time again from family members that the transitions from VHS to DVD seemed like a pretty huge step up due to factors we're all aware of, where as going to Blu-ray seems marginal TO THEM. Yes, the picture quality is undoubtedly better, but this is probably not enough alone to win them over at this stage. Unless Blu-ray movie/hardware prices drop to SD-DVD levels in the coming years, I really don't see the format ever replacing it. For now, I will simply enjoy what's released on Blu, but none of us should be surprised if Blu-ray never becomes the phenomenon that SD-DVD is/was.

 

[Zack Gibbs]

Their figures don't count the PS3, which makes them pretty much worthless. I know it's hard, if not impossible, for them to track the number of PS3 sales that were due to Blu-ray, but that doesn't mean you can't count them at all.

 

[Kevin C Brown]

My personal impression is that BD hardware costs actually went up after Toshiba threw in the HD DVD towel. I bet that had some role.

 

[Jeff F.]

The PQ bump from laserdisc to DVD was a huge leap, IMO, and was a no-brainer for me to jump on that band wagon early. I bought the laserdisc player in 1990, so basically I didn't have to put up with watching a lot of movies on VHS past that point. This time around, after viewing and comparing BD and upconverted S-DVD, I just don't feel that it's worth the big bucks to jump on board yet. Don't get me wrong, the picture is stunning, but it is also very good when upconverted, as well. As I said before, when the prices fall for hardware and software, I'm there.

 

[Jerome Grate]

Too expensive for me, heck it took the demise of HD-DVD to jump into it and though I'm scrabbling for HD-DVD discs, I'm happy. But BD at over 300 dollars in most cases, I'm not prepared to pay that. Upconversion through HDMI suits me just fine.

 

[Hartwig Hanser]

Interesting, for me it is the other way round. Recently I compared the only movie I have in all 3 formats (LD, DVD, BD): Close Encounters. Using the Pioneer 919 LD/DVD player for LD, Denon 2910 for DVD, Sharp BD20 for BD; Panasonic AE2000 projector on a 2,55m wide screen with a distance of 3 m.

And while the DVD was sharper than the blurry LD, it also added a ton of artefacts e.g. aroung the text at the beginning ("present day") or about every contour. This made the picture still looking "video".

The BD in contrast was not only much sharper and detailled that the DVD, but was totally free of any data reduction artefact. In short, the pictures was looking like "film".

So, the step from DVD to BD is for me more significant than the step from LD to DVD (as the actual resolution numbers would indicate, too). I guess, the larger your screen, the more you will come to the same conclusion.


back on topic: The player sale are down because of economy, end of special marketing actions and generell Software slump in spring/summer. When DIVX died, DVD player sales did not explode at once. Next holiday season will be the deciding period.

 

[DaveHo]

After I returned my A2 to Walmart, I actually went & bought an Oppo 980 instead of a BD player. Why?

1) I needed an upconverter to replace the A2.
2) I'm waiting for profile 2.0.
3) I will not pay $500 for a player. Prices need to come down.
4) My movie watching practically drops to zero during the summer months.
5) Yes HD looks better, but the upconversion of the Oppo is perfectly satisfactory.

-Dave

 

[Jerome Grate]

Why did you get rid of the A2? Having the A3 I thought the upscaling was better than the Oppo and through HDMI. I was watching Doom DVD and it looked liked HD to me. I certainly agree with you on point #3. Way to expensive. When BD touches the 250 mark, I'll consider it for the T.V. upstairs, but for now as stated earlier, too expensive.

 

[DaveHo]

I primarily got rid of it because it was too slow to boot & load. Why put up with that for S-DVD viewing? Also, due to Walmart's return promotion, I was able to return it after 5 months of use for full price. I had only bought a handful of HD-DVD's & I sold those along with the 5 I got with the rebate offer. In the end, I actually made money on the deal. IMHO, I'd have been a fool to keep a player for a dead format.

-Dave