post #211 of 1635
1/4/08 at 6:53pm
Be a part of the community.
It's free, join today!
|
Originally Posted by DaViD Boulet
Of course it's monitary gain. My point is that this decision is not comparable to Paramount's "blind" decision to just follow the cash of an exclusive contract (where the BDA weren't even involved until after it was signed). WB's decision, and how they handled it, was quite different.
The two choices were payoff with a future market for HD sales, and a payoff with a future market of stagnating HD sales. Plenty of insiders have had quite a bit to say about this already, for those who cared to listen. Warner would have made as much money had they chosen to go with HD DVD with Microsoft's pay-off. They were courted from both sides with enormous sums and this time Microsoft didn't hide behind the curtain of Toshiba like they did when they helped fund Paramount's pay-off. Warner's decision for Blu over Red was because that's the decision that makes market sense, given that WB was going to get the same payoff no matter which way they chose to go. Warner was smart, and by holding out as long as they did, they raised the stakes on both sides and got a lot more than the measely 150-million Paramount embraced. Choosing Microsoft's payoff for Red would have put money in their pocket but stale-mated the HD market completely. Choosing the BDA's pay-off put money in their pocket and opened up the valve allowing the HD market to flow... giving them increased profit in the future as well. |
| CES HD DVD Event canceled due to Warner announcement I just received an email from the HD DVD Promotion Group stating that the CES 2008 HD DVD press event has been canceled. The recent Blu-ray exclusive announcement from Warner is cited as the reason for the event being canceled. You can find the full text of the notice below. Notice of CES Press Conference Cancellation by North American HD DVD Promotion Group “Based on the timing of the Warner Home Video announcement today, we have decided to postpone our CES 2008 press conference scheduled for Sunday, January 6th at 8:30 p.m. in the Wynn Hotel. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause. We are currently discussing the potential impact of this announcement with the other HD DVD partner companies and evaluating next steps. We believe the consumer continues to benefit from HD DVD’s commitment to quality and affordability – a bar that is critical for the mainstream success of any format. We’ll continue to keep you updated on new developments around HD DVD.” |
|
Originally Posted by Chuck Anstey
So with this announcement what has Blu gained? Nothing. They always had access to the same Warner titles as HD-DVD except a select few. A better announcement for Blu would have been Paramount or better, Universal, going format neutral. Then they would have access to titles they previously did not. So why are so many Blu folks happy? Because they enjoy HD-DVD supporters misery more than improving their own position and having access to a larger (or complete) movie library.
Home theater buffs have access to more movies with better quality and OAR than ever before but some people aren't happy with that. They don't look at their own position and say "HT is great and I am happy with the incredible selection of movies I can watch in the proper presentation" but instead look around see people watching movies "incorrectly" or on the "wrong format" and get angry that such options exist and attempt to eliminate those options for other people. When such options are eliminated they take such joy in the result even though it has no impact for good or ill on their personal HT situation. So freaking sad. As far as Warner's announcement, I don't know which is worse; That they knew they were going format exclusive before Christmas (but not which one) or that they didn't and are prone to capricious, split-second decision making that will have long lasting repercussions. |
|
Originally Posted by Chuck Anstey
So with this announcement what has Blu gained? Nothing. They always had access to the same Warner titles as HD-DVD except a select few. A better announcement for Blu would have been Paramount or better, Universal, going format neutral. Then they would have access to titles they previously did not. So why are so many Blu folks happy? Because they enjoy HD-DVD supporters misery more than improving their own position and having access to a larger (or complete) movie library.
Home theater buffs have access to more movies with better quality and OAR than ever before but some people aren't happy with that. They don't look at their own position and say "HT is great and I am happy with the incredible selection of movies I can watch in the proper presentation" but instead look around see people watching movies "incorrectly" or on the "wrong format" and get angry that such options exist and attempt to eliminate those options for other people. When such options are eliminated they take such joy in the result even though it has no impact for good or ill on their personal HT situation. So freaking sad. As far as Warner's announcement, I don't know which is worse; That they knew they were going format exclusive before Christmas (but not which one) or that they didn't and are prone to capricious, split-second decision making that will have long lasting repercussions. |
|
Originally Posted by Greg-ST
I'd like to see what Ronald Epstein has to say about this. Personally I don't buy it for a second and Ronald seems to know otherwise.
|
|
Originally Posted by Chuck Anstey
So with this announcement what has Blu gained? Nothing. They always had access to the same Warner titles as HD-DVD except a select few. A better announcement for Blu would have been Paramount or better, Universal, going format neutral. Then they would have access to titles they previously did not. So why are so many Blu folks happy? Because they enjoy HD-DVD supporters misery more than improving their own position and having access to a larger (or complete) movie library.
Home theater buffs have access to more movies with better quality and OAR than ever before but some people aren't happy with that. They don't look at their own position and say "HT is great and I am happy with the incredible selection of movies I can watch in the proper presentation" but instead look around see people watching movies "incorrectly" or on the "wrong format" and get angry that such options exist and attempt to eliminate those options for other people. When such options are eliminated they take such joy in the result even though it has no impact for good or ill on their personal HT situation. So freaking sad. As far as Warner's announcement, I don't know which is worse; That they knew they were going format exclusive before Christmas (but not which one) or that they didn't and are prone to capricious, split-second decision making that will have long lasting repercussions. |
|
Originally Posted by Brandon Conway
That postponement of Sunday's HD-DVD press event is a BIG deal.
I also find this statement interesting: We believe the consumer continues to benefit from HD DVD’s commitment to quality and affordability – a bar that is critical for the mainstream success of any format. (Emphasis mine). That last statement is the first of any wiggle room HD-DVD has allowed itself. Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but it's almost as though they are saying that HD-DVDs advantages could be useful in any future strategy for other formats, and we all know what that other format is. |
|
Originally Posted by Chuck Anstey
So with this announcement what has Blu gained? Nothing. They always had access to the same Warner titles as HD-DVD except a select few. A better announcement for Blu would have been Paramount or better, Universal, going format neutral. Then they would have access to titles they previously did not. So why are so many Blu folks happy? Because they enjoy HD-DVD supporters misery more than improving their own position and having access to a larger (or complete) movie library.
|
|
Originally Posted by Chuck Anstey
So with this announcement what has Blu gained? Nothing. They always had access to the same Warner titles as HD-DVD except a select few. A better announcement for Blu would have been Paramount or better, Universal, going format neutral. Then they would have access to titles they previously did not. So why are so many Blu folks happy? Because they enjoy HD-DVD supporters misery more than improving their own position and having access to a larger (or complete) movie library.
|
|
Originally Posted by Pete-D
While it's true Blu-Ray would've gotten these Warner Bros. movies anyway ... the implications here are far reaching.
It means eventually movies like Jurassic Park and Transformers and Shrek will now also be on Blu-Ray ... there's no way Universal and Paramount can stand alone. The fallout of "Blu Friday" dramatically changes everything. |
| Interesting stuff. I hope Blu-Ray machines are soon released region free (for both HD and SD) out of the box, then I'll definitely buy one later this year! |
|
Originally Posted by Jeff Swindoll
A stupid question perhaps, but is it possible for HD-DVD players to be made to play Blurays or where the technologies designed to be incompatible? I wonder if a future update would allow the HD players to switch to the dominant format. I guess such a failsafe was never considered since each side thought there format would be the dominant one.
I wonder if future Blu-ray machines will be made "backward compatible" with HD-DVD?? I wondered if the two sides were going to pair up with that last line in the cancellation of the press conference by HD-DVD. |
|
Originally Posted by Ronald Epstein
[T]o say that Warner made their decision a long time ago
is totally false. Totally. Without going into specifics, BOTH formats came awfully close to being chosen over the past few days. While I agree that Warner was holding out for the best offer, there was no preconceived notion of which format they were going to choose until the very end. |
|
Originally Posted by DaveF
At the risk of asking foolishly, naive questions about a billion-dollar business decisions: Was WB's decision purely business? About who threw the most money at them and which format was perhaps closest to the tipping point of success? Or was there any consideration of which was a better delivery system for the movies themselves?
|
| While it's true Blu-Ray would've gotten these Warner Bros. movies anyway ... the implications here are far reaching. It means eventually movies like Jurassic Park and Transformers and Shrek will now also be on Blu-Ray ... there's no way Universal and Paramount can stand alone. |
|
Originally Posted by Patrick_S
I certainly hope the Blu-Ray group gets their act together and sets a hardware standard that includes network connectivity. In this day and age adding on board Ethernet cost just pennies a unit and not including it on the hardware standards is ridiculous and rather ironic considering Sony’s initial marketing pitches for Blu that stressed internet connectivity. Adding the connectivity would allow them to be more creative with their extras and would make it easier to update the firmware when needed.
|
|
Originally Posted by mediagy
Read the article on ALL of the HD format problems in the New York Times. It perfectly defines the problem.
NEITHER HD-DVD nor Bluray offer much of a REAL impressive difference between their formats and standard DVD. Put a standard DVD in an upconverting player or amp and 90 percent of the public is unable to tell whether it is standard or HD. They are BOTH formats that are NOT needed.....and only wanted by we "techies." Laserdiscs went nowhere and the HD disc formats are gonna follow suit. It doesn't matter who wins the format war. The difference is so minimal (except to techie eyes) that the average person just doesn't care. I have BOTH formats and frankly, I can't tell even the SLIGHTEST visual difference between the two, and only a minimally improved image compared to upconversion. |
|
Originally Posted by Carlo Medina
It's funny how polarizing this event is. BD owners are obviously ecstatic, but most (like myself) are trying to be restrained and HDD owners are obviously disappointed. But I've read way too many "ah well it doesn't matter because HD media in general is going to be a niche format" kind of sour grapes mentality. To be fair, those same sour grapes would probably be coming out of BD owners' mouths if WB had gone HDD. They are:
1. Most people can't tell the difference between HDM and DVD 2. People are happy with DVD Frankly, when I bought my DVD player in May 1997 (L.A. was one of the seven test cities for DVD), you could replace "HDM" with DVD and "DVD" with VHS and the same arguments were going around back then. And you know what? In 1997, both points were true! Tons of people loved VHS. And on a normal 25"-32" direct view TV (which was the norm back then) very few of which had s-video and no component video, even I had a hard time telling the difference between VHS and DVD. And don't forget that DVD had other hurdles to overcome: those dreaded black bars. 90% of the public didn't know why they existed, and most didn't like them cramping their already small 25" TV. Another hurdle was the rental model. Back in 1997 no one thought the ownership model would work, people just rented. Well Hollywood dropped the rental model, lowered prices so that movies were affordable by all, and look what happened. Where there is a [corporate] will, there is a way. And we know how that uphill battle turned out, don't we? I'll fully admit HDM has a long way to go. But those who think it's just going away are fully underestimating the power of corporate advertising. Studios need to re-sell their product on a regular basis to stay in business. Disney has mastered it with their "vault" system. But right now, most of the catalog titles that people want are out on DVD, so really most of the sales of DVD are for new releases. With a unified HDM, studios will now have a perfect opportunity to re-sell not just their new, hot, titles, but their catalog as well. I will admit that on lesser TVs, the difference between HDM and DVD is minimal, just like DVDs and VHS were in 1997. My circa 2001 Panasonic 47" HDTV yielded very little difference when I played BD on it. But I just bought a new Sony KDS-60A3000 and the difference is very noticeable. Don't make the mistake of thinking that just because you have an HDTV, most households in America do to. The fact is most do not. Most will, though buy one in the next 5 years. Those new TVs will clearly reveal to the majority of the public the difference in PQ between HDM and DVD. Just like component video connections and early-generation HDTVs clarified the difference between DVD and VHS. Yes HDM has an uphill battle. But no more so than DVD did, arguably less. People now are fine with the ownership model. People are now starting to buy more affordably priced HDTVs which will show the difference between HDM and DVD. And the concept of home theater is now something even the masses contemplate, whereas in the 90s it was something for the rich or obsessed (I fall in the latter category And the most important reason HDM will succeed? Because the corporations need it to. The studios need to re-sell their property. The hardware manufacturers need to move product. The box stores need to sell merchandise with higher profit margins. As soon as a unified format is official, we will all witness the full fury of the corporate advertising power and support behind the surviving HDM and mark my words (or bookmark this thread), HDM will become mainstream. |
|
Originally Posted by Joseph J.D
To think, only a week and a half ago I was pissed off because I missed out on a cheap $99 Toshiba HD-DVD deal on Boxing Day. Boy, did I dodge a bullet right there or what? I feel much better now!
|