[Paul_Scott]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060531/...NlYwN5bmNhdA--

wonder if this could mean that MGM will have the flexability to 'swing both ways' so to speak? I realize Fox is Bd only (for the moment), but it would seem that this gives that studio a little more wiggle room, rather than having to slavishly follow a corporate parent who had a vested interest in the licensing involved.

Just wishful thinking from a guy who doesn't want to have to spend another $1K to get some UA film in HD...but a guy can dream can't he?

[Edwin-S]

Why would Fox allow a subsidiary to release on HD-DVD if Fox, as the corporate parent, isn't supporting the format? This just looks like HD-DVD is going to have even less content available for it.

When did Alex Toth die?

[Edwin-S]

I read the article. Sony has a seat on the board of MGM plus a 20% stake in ownership. There is no way that Sony would agree to any release of content on the HD-DVD format. The article also stated that MGM has affirmed its committment to the Blu-ray format. To me, that is just corporate newspeak for "we were told we will support Blu-ray whether we like it or not".

[Paul_Scott]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edwin-S

When did Alex Toth die?

Saturday the 27th. dont have all the details, but he was ill for some time I believe.

[Rob_HD]

Here is another article that lays it out fairly well.

http://www.homemediaretailing.com/in...=2&newsid=9192

"MGM’s vast library of more than 4,000 movie titles and 10,000-plus episodes of TV series was a critical reason why Sony in September 2004 led a consortium of investors, including giant cable firm Comcast Corp., in a $5 billion deal to purchase MGM.

Sony, which wound up with about 20% of MGM, was said to be hungry for more product for its nascent Blu-ray Disc technology, which is slated to materialize later this year as one of two rival high-definition optical disc formats vying to replace DVD as the public’s home viewing format of choice."

Basically, MGM has chosen Fox to handle their Home Entertainment distribution. This is a blow to Sony, who has been managing it for the last year and who have now lost control of it.

[Stan Rozenfeld]

But didn't Warner acquire a large chunk of MGM's pre 1986 catalog?

[Mark Zimmer]

Warner had all the pre-1986 stuff as a result of the Turner acquisition.

I think Fox acquiring MGM/UA would be a good thing; Sony/Columbia obviously doesn't have the first idea of what to do with it, as demonstrated by their deranged treatment of the Midnite Movies line. Fox at least has demonstrated an ability to release the odd cult title and things that (horrors!) were made more than 15 years ago.

[Todd H]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob_HD

This is a blow to Sony, who has been managing it for the last year and who have now lost control of it.

How is this a blow to Sony? The rights go to Fox, an exclusive supporter of Blu-Ray.

[DaViD Boulet]

Not only that... but this bodes well for Blu-ray because FOX is likely to use MPEG4 or VC1 video encoding versus Sony's preference for MPEG2.

Bring on MGM on Blu-ray!

[Nils Luehrmann]

This is great news for newer classic film lovers, Fox, Blu-ray, and even Sony as they never showed any interest in managing this library to begin with, only to insure that these titles would be released on Blu-ray.

With Warner controlling most of the early MGM releases, and Fox distributing the rest, MGM titles are in superb hands! I can't wait to see what Fox has in mind for some of these titles.

[FrancisP]

Nothing has been said about whether MGM will be using Fox as a distributor for hi-def discs. This deal could very well deal with SD only.

60% of MGM is owned by private equity funds and banks. I don't see them as being very patient. If blu-ray does not win a quick victory then these groups may be able to force the issue.