Interesting year end article from Home Media Magazine (1 Viewer)

HMM as you may know was always at the forefront of the Digital push. It felt like things began to turn in 2014. The article they just posted really surprised me, as it seems to practically dismiss the future of EST...

http://homemediamagazine.com/tks-take/forever-changes

It is an interesting article, thanks for the link Patrick. I am not sure 4K UHD will be as big as the author thinks.

Keith Cobby said:

It is an interesting article, thanks for the link Patrick. I am not sure 4K UHD will be as big as the author thinks.

Click to expand...

Agreed. I think it could spur EST but for physical I don't see it doing much more than 3D...

One important distinction between the "popularity of Netflix" and the "rise of Blu-quality streaming, including 4K UHD" is that Netflix doesn't need excessive bandwidth to deliver the goods. (Unless you're watching Netflix 3D, which turned out to be a bungled failure for them, and not because of 3D's popularity.)
While tech enthusiasts do, it's reasonable to assume most mainstream users don't lay out $99/mo.+ for ultra-high-speed connection, just to be able to watch movies for an extra purchase charge on top of that. If they want to pay out a monthly investment for just quality disk-free movies, they're more likely to put the money into premium cable or satellite, including VOD, where they know they'll get it.

Netflix delivers its SD movies, and even some degree of 720HD, over what most cable/Internet providers call a "basic" standard 3-5mbps connection that's already in most suburban homes, which makes it populist enough to provide the essential cross-section of their service to the average uncommitted user who just wants a generic TV substitute. (And to echo the immortal words of the Beach Boys, God only knows where I'd be without them. )
Anything past that, like VUDU HDX, doesn't quite come over on 5mbps. And for mildly curious customers to upgrade from there to take on the New Frontier requires a degree of dedication that pushes it into the Tech-Niche zone, where most of the conversation seems to be languishing already.

The article does raise the point that greedy studios, who want as much money as they can get for their titles and they want it now, are causing the "subscription" model to fall--Amazon Prime is barely what it used to be outside of a few TV-network licenses and Hulu Plus seems to have forgotten they have a movie section--but putting the model ENTIRELY into pay-to-play is just going to continue to make the audience say "No way".
If we buy things, we want to buy things, and if we get things free for a one price subscription, we want them free.

Patrick Donahue said:

HMM as you may know was always at the forefront of the Digital push. It felt like things began to turn in 2014. The article they just posted really surprised me, as it seems to practically dismiss the future of EST...

http://homemediamagazine.com/tks-take/forever-changes

Click to expand...

Tom Arnold has been dismissing EST for several years now. He needs to take off his blinders and realize that it's now growing faster than any other HV category, even streaming. For example, check out his denial in this quote:

[color=rgb(91,91,91);font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;]EST promises incredible margins, but if we take off the rose-colored glasses I think we will realize that EST sales will never approach the magnitude of Blu-ray Disc, much less DVD[/color]

Click to expand...

Not only will EST surpass Blu-ray, it will do so as soon as next year (if not next year then certainly in 2016). Blu-ray peaked last year at just over $2.5 billion and will end up around $2.3 billion this year. EST will be close to $1.5 billion this year and is growing at over 30% a year. Meanwhile Blu-ray sales have fallen like a rock since the middle of this year (down 12% since July), even more than DVD. Add those two trends up and it won't take long for EST to generate more revenue than Blu-ray.

So I think he needs to get on board and accept it.

Patrick Donahue said:

HMM as you may know was always at the forefront of the Digital push. It felt like things began to turn in 2014. The article they just posted really surprised me, as it seems to practically dismiss the future of EST...

http://homemediamagazine.com/tks-take/forever-changes

Click to expand...

I dont have faith in this article. The authors opinion changes often about the direction of home entertainment. One week sell thru is praised the next not so much. I don't think the article is heralding the demise of EST it does sound like they need to get some PR and the promotional engine going. Im looking forward to 2015 to see where we are headed.
In the end its not what the author or the studios and makers of gear want to go, we the consumer are in the driving seat and our voice is our purse (or wallet).

I think digital hasn't taken off as strong as some people in the industry had hoped it would. I think the main reason is that most consumers still don't have confidence in buying digital. They want to know when they buy digital that they have a product they can hold on to for a long time. UltraViolet was supposed to achieve that, and is heading that direction, but it's not there yet. There are still too many big retailers that aren't offering it. Amazon, Google Play, and Comcast are the big 3 other than iTunes. Then there's the problem of some independent studios not offering content in the system. People don't want to have to wonder about whether a movie they buy will come with UltraViolet. Then there is the problem with the Common File Format. Once these issues are addressed, I think digital will increase substantially.

Joshua Clinard said:

I think the main reason is that most consumers still don't have confidence in buying digital. They want to know when they buy digital that they have a product they can hold on to for a long time. UltraViolet was supposed to achieve that, and is heading that direction, but it's not there yet.

Click to expand...

Joshua, I dont know if you work for the studios but if you don't they should hire you immediately! Your post was spot on and I have felt this way for a long time but I just dont understand why the "experts" currently working in the tech and studio surrounds don't get this??? Its mind numbing from a consumer standpoint.

I will say that with us now going into 2015 there are many ways to entertain than we used to have in the old days. The studios need to figure the problems out quickly otherwise their audiences will go elsewhere. Hard earned entertainment dollars are just that... hard earned.

(I mentioned 2015 so I want to wish my friends here a very Happy New Year!)

Sarah

It would be interesting to see a demographic breakdown between purchasers of physical discs against downloads/ streaming etc. I would expect that except for newly released films which sell to all age groups, older titles are predominantly bought on disc by the middle-aged (me!) and the younger generation will download/stream and are less inclined to want something they can hold. Much as I like them I think blu-ray has only a few years left and that 4K discs will only happen slowly if at all.

Just anecdotally, as the father of 4 kids ranging from 14 to 22)....this generation is much more "rent" instead of "buy". Much more interested in disposable entertainment they can watch once, then move on to the next thing. I used to buy my old kids DVD's of their favorite movies for Christmas, etc. Now I've been told "don't bother buying me that movie, I can stream or download it on my computer". They look at my 500+ library of BD/DVD's as somewhat of a relic.

atfree said:

Just anecdotally, as the father of 4 kids ranging from 14 to 22)....this generation is much more "rent" instead of "buy". Much more interested in disposable entertainment they can watch once, then move on to the next thing. I used to buy my old kids DVD's of their favorite movies for Christmas, etc. Now I've been told "don't bother buying me that movie, I can stream or download it on my computer". They look at my 500+ library of BD/DVD's as somewhat of a relic.

Click to expand...

^ This is where I stand. I've never thought the problem was digital vs. physical but buying vs. renting. The article said as much too. In the days of DVD and laserdisc if you wanted to see a movie you bought it because Blockbuster either didn't rent them or only had new releases, so building a collection didn't just make sense it was mandatory. That's just not the case today. On top of that are just so many ways to spend one's free time today that $20 on a movie purchase, in whichever format you choose, just doesn't hold the same value to the consumer it once did. I've said it before and am still convinced that for most people it's not about watching a specific movie, but about just having something to watch.Music is the same way. A $9.99 a month subscription to Beats will let you listen to any album you want, devaluing owning one album for the same price.

I am all about subscriptions for on-the-go consumption, such as Spotify/Tidal etc for my music. The problem with movies is, our internet economy and ISP hegemony are doing all they can to make streaming an unpalatable experience. If I can get blu-ray quality streaming at 45mbps, then i'll be the first one to switch.

Price is another problem with digital. You can buy tons of old DVD's for $5 at walmart, even blockbusters, but to buy the same movies on iTunes or vudu would cost between $10 and $15! Some are even more. They really need the drop the price for movies older than 3 years to about 7 to 9 dollars. They would really clean up that way.

But that's the whole point Josh. They don't want to. They are not beholden to middlemen anymore so they can set the price at anything they want and you don't get a say, nor does Walmart. And your favorite system, Ultraviolet, aims at consolidating it even more so that the different walled gardens won't compete on price.

Sam, I actually think the opposite is true. A vendor that isn't UV enabled doesn't have to compete with other vendors, because no one else other than them is able to sell a product that will work with their app. UltraViolet vendors, on the other hand, have to compete with all the other vendors, and there are sales all the time. I don't think the studios set the price, because UltraViolet vendors all have different prices. TargetTicket and Vudu are having some incredible sales right now. and they are not the same movies, and not the same prices. If I hadn't already bought almost all the titles I want using Disc to Digital I would be having a field day buying titles for 7 dollars or less. I don't think many people want to have a handful of movies that work with Amazon, some on Google Play, and some on Vudu, I think most people want to keep all their movies on one platform. I buy movies on CinemaNow, Vudu, and TargetTicket for price, but I only use the VUDU app for watching and organizing my movies.

Joshua Clinard said:

Then there's the problem of some independent studios not offering content in the system.

Click to expand...

And then there's the problem of independent studios offering content in EVERY OTHER system--
They've already taken over Playstation Store, it's impossible to find a $0.99 rental on Vudu that you've heard of anymore, the subscription sites are drowning in oceans of direct-to-disk indie found-footage horror, and even Netflix is starting to get complaints about the low ratio of mainstream studio hits.
Nothing will drive viewers away from streaming faster than turning it into the obscure titles that used to puzzle you on your local Blockbuster shelf.

Joshua Clinard said:

Sam, I actually think the opposite is true. A vendor that isn't UV enabled doesn't have to compete with other vendors, because no one else other than them is able to sell a product that will work with their app. UltraViolet vendors, on the other hand, have to compete with all the other vendors, and there are sales all the time. I don't think the studios set the price, because UltraViolet vendors all have different prices. TargetTicket and Vudu are having some incredible sales right now. and they are not the same movies, and not the same prices.

Click to expand...

In other words, they've created their OWN Best Buy bargain bins, and for the same reasons.
Sam's right, the regulator was taken out of the market--Back in the days when you still downloaded a hard copy of your digital movie off of a hard disk, Warner was attracted to Amazon, and Sony was trying to push PlaysForSure, because nobody wanted to play with iTunes, and Apple's one-base-price format. (Some even suing, claiming it was "unfair business practices" to tell them how much/little to charge.)

With studios now allowed to set their own purchase prices for new releases, they're allowed to determine whatever unrealistic price for recouping a movie's theatrical grosses that they can imagine--some bigger than the actual disk shelf price itself--and in the words of Han Solo, I dunno, they can imagine quite a bit.

All I can tell you is there is a reason why new release EST are $20+ and than Blurays come packed with the codes for free.

Patrick Donahue said:

Music is the same way. A $9.99 a month subscription to Beats will let you listen to any album you want, devaluing owning one album for the same price.

Click to expand...

The problem is that most people are not and will not subscribe and rent music. The largest service Spotify has very few renters they prefer the free service instead. Beats isnt a close second with their rental service. It hasnt been considered a success but a disappointment so far (lets see what apple does with it).

atfree said:

Just anecdotally, as the father of 4 kids ranging from 14 to 22)....this generation is much more "rent" instead of "buy". Much more interested in disposable entertainment they can watch once, then move on to the next thing. I used to buy my old kids DVD's of their favorite movies for Christmas, etc. Now I've been told "don't bother buying me that movie, I can stream or download it on my computer". They look at my 500+ library of BD/DVD's as somewhat of a relic.

Click to expand...

atfree is it because the earlier generation doesnt have the money to buy goods like dvds? If you look at unemployment of young people getting out of high school its horrible right now in the USA. Ive read articles from the major newspapers that point this out but also mention that this will change as the economy and jobs market improves. Then the younger generation will begin buying automobiles, homes and other goods (or so the pundits say).
Also while more people prefer to rent, a sell thru market still does and will continue to exist. One or the other may be smaller with the other larger as time goes on but both markets will exist and continue to be catered to.

Ejanss said:

And then there's the problem of independent studios offering content in EVERY OTHER system--
They've already taken over Playstation Store, it's impossible to find a $0.99 rental on Vudu that you've heard of anymore, the subscription sites are drowning in oceans of direct-to-disk indie found-footage horror, and even Netflix is starting to get complaints about the low ratio of mainstream studio hits.
Nothing will drive viewers away from streaming faster than turning it into the obscure titles that used to puzzle you on your local Blockbuster shelf.

Click to expand...

I have been very unhappy recently with selection of Netflix when it comes to hits. Unfortunately, Its becoming the "Section 8" of home video.