Should we worry? (1 Viewer)

[Bryan^H]

I love Blu-Ray. Why on earth would I not buy them??
I support the format, and if there is a title I want, then it's mine. That simple.
My main thing is catalog titles. It's what I love most about Blu-Ray, and I feel studios may cut back on them due to the economy.
I brought up the $30 price point because it is an issue when so many think it's not an average price for Blu-Ray when it is. And if you want to save $2-$3 buying online, then more power to ya!

 

[Bryan^H]

When it comes to selection, I'm seeing an awful lot of 90's catalog titles on the horizon. And they are titles I wouldn't pay $5 for in bargain bins.

Sometimes the studios confuse me with their odd choice of catalog titles. Just hope they don't forget the 70's were a great time for cinema, and they could put a lot of focus in that direction.

 

[David Wilkins]

Hey, Bryan:

I'm not here to represent Amazon, or any other sales outlet, online or otherwise. People have many reasons for choosing to buy or not to buy online; some concrete, some mere perceptions, pro or con. I'm not here to beat over the head, preach or convert.

However, I've listed some prices that are current as of this morning over at Amazon. These represent a cross section. Of course, there are plenty of discs priced higher, but that's were patience comes in. All of these were significantly higher in the recent past. Some are sale prices, but if so, are not unique, and occur with some regularity.

If it weren't for prices like these, I would have a library of about 12, instead of the current 162. The prices speak for themselves.

Wall-E, $19.99
Batman Begins, $17.99
300, $17.99
Blade Runner (5-disc), $24.99
Reservoir Dogs, $10.99
Goodfellas, $16.99
2001, $17.99
Black Hawk Down, $14.99
American Gangster, $15.49
Casino, $15.49
The Thing (John Carpenter), $15.49
A Clockwork Orange, $13.99
The Shining, $13.99
The Departed, $17.99
The Searchers, $13.99
The Hunt For Red October, $18.99
Into the Wild, $19.99
Unforgiven, $16.99
L.A. Confidential, $18.99
The Aviator, $13.99
Dog Day Afternoon, $13.99

 

[Edwin-S]

I just don't get Amazon. The U.S prices look attractive, but their Canadian sites prices are no better and sometimes worse than buying at a B&M store.

Future Shop was selling the FIREFLY tv series for 79.99. I figured no way, too expensive. Recently, I was in FS and they had the FIREFLY BD set priced at 29.99. At that price, I couldn't resist picking it up. Right now, on Amazon.ca the price for the FIREFLY set is 89.95 not including shipping. Their price is even higher than FS was initially asking. What Canadian would actually bother to order BDs from Amazon.ca? Their prices are definitely no deal over B&M prices.

 

[PaulDA]

I save a hell of a lot more than that (else I wouldn't do it as I'd consider 2-3$ a reasonable price to pay for the convenience of buying something at a local shop). If you refuse to acknowledge that online savings, in the aggregate, are far greater than you suggest (because it would burst your theory), then so be it. Just don't expect much sympathy for your "plight" (one of your own choosing if you refuse to avail yourself of the options for much lower prices).

 

[Ed St. Clair]

"TDK" sold 3 million copies of SD DVD's...
IN ONE DAY!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dark_Knight_(film)
7 million in a wk:
Splash Page ‘The Dark Knight’ DVD And Blu-Ray Sales Breaking Records
So I guessing like 10 million in two wks. That makes 1.5 mil in 2 wks a drop in the bucket. There were 2 mil LD homes when it crashed & burned.
Anyway...
"NO" worries.
Why?
Cause every studio wants too sell you every movie, AGAIN, on Blu.
$$$
Will BD go away someday?
Sure!
Butt not B4 we get our greedy hands on a whole lot of discs!!!
Happy Blu Yr!

 

[Ethan Riley]

I wouldn't worry about the catalog titles. Just look at the release schedule--catalog titles galore are coming in '09. But it's almost the same roll-out as dvd had--the biggest, most popular catalog titles are coming out now. And they should be followed in quick succession by your rank-and-file flicks. Now the problem is that old catalog titles can't just be burped out by the studios--a lot of thought has to go into the remastering of those older films. If they don't, then you get ghastly-looking BD's like "Baron Munchausen..."

 

[Jesse Blacklow]

Blu-ray penetration passed LD a loooooong time ago, so I don't see what relevance it has here.

 

[David Wilkins]

I do grow weary of using this example, used a few times before on this forum, but damn it, it's valid, especially in this particular thread. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see disc prices 30% less than they are right now. But in this area, like so many areas of life: what I want and what I get, differ radically.

My point in giving this example, is to say that where the market sits right now, for BD, is not unusual at all. I know, I know...people are going to come right back at me and say: "well, if they ever want this format to be mainstream...".

Back when DVD was young (remember those dark ages?), Universal released for the first time on DVD (the edition with the orange cover art), the restored 'Vertigo'. The year must have been 1999, or so. I just had to have that disc, and it was hard to find near the release date. I went to a local retailer and paid $32.xx for it, and that was ten-year-ago-dollars. Though the price was considerably higher than I wanted to pay, I bought it, and I don't remember feeling that it was a rip-off.

My point is: we're at roughly the same stage of deployment right now for BD. I don't remember people wringing their hands at that time over that kind of price...not that people were eager to pay it. I don't remember any fretting over whether DVD was going to fail as a format, even though the future of it couldn't have been rock solid at the time.

So, I'm at a bit of a loss over the current anxious state. Where we are at, is far from unique or unprecedented. It's just business, the same old dance routine that we should all be familiar with by now.

 

[TravisR]

Then another option could be to use cash to purchase a Visa giftcard and use that giftcard to buy a disc online*. That way, your debit card isn't used, you get the best price and your credit card bill doesn't build up.

*I've never done it so I can't say for sure that Amazon or other retailers accept those credit giftcards.

 

[RobertR]

I don't find it "ghastly". It has some DNR, but is really quite film-like.

 

[Bryan^H]

What plight do you speak of ? Sympathy for what? You lost me somewhere man.
As I have said, If there is a title I want, I buy it.
My theory isn't a theory at all. It's fact.

Price listlings on newer titles from Amazon:

Eagle Eye-$26.99
Mamma Mia-$29.99
Surfer Dude-$31.49
The Flock-$31.49
Ghost Town-$27.99
The Duchess-$26.99
Death Race-$29.99
Pineapple Express-$27.99

I never said that Amazon wasn't cheaper than buying in stores. I just said a $2-$3 price savings isn't that big a deal to me.
Glad your saving a hell of a lot more though.

 

[PaulDA]

Dark Night--23.99$
Wall*E--19.99$
Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian--19.99$
Shawshank Redemption--19.99$
The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951)--20.99$
X-Files: I Want to Believe--25.99$
The Mask--19.99$

All December releases on Amazon and they include catalogue titles you say are your primary concern regarding expensive prices.

We can play this game all day. In the end, some titles will be close to 30$, some will be more, but the vast majority will be less (with a significant number at 19.99$ and under).

 

[Ed St. Clair]

You're kidding, right?
What do you think those in "The Biz" are comparing Blu too?
Cocoa Puffs?
How 'bout three yrs SD DVD #'s vs. 3 yr BD #'s; is that OK w/you; butt that's just being lazy & not facing reality of the moment.
Of coarse the entertainment industry is looking at current BD sales vs. current SD DVD; they'd be crazy not too.
It would be laughable too just say: 'hey Blu's doing fantastic'.
Two yrs into SD DVD's I was purchasing anamorphic 5.1 titles for ten bucks & three yrs into BD you can purchase HD A/V for ten bucks. That's GREAT. Just there were a LOT more people buying SD DVD's after just three yrs than are buying BD's wither you like it or not.

The LD # is valid too "TDK" sales #, cause its numbers vs. numbers (not format vs. disc as you assumed). It was suggested that 1.5 mil was successful (and it is indeed the most success BD has seen too date). However even tho LD was in 2 mil homes it died. 2 mil in the home entertainment business isn't always enough for long term viability.
(too badd)

Do you really think future Olympic swimmers will not be compared too M. Phelps?
I've got news for you...
shoot even Phelps is going too get compared to Phelps next O games.

Blu's doing OK, by the way. Just 99 buck downloadable HD players are breathing down its neck. The sky is falling Chicken Little!

Enjoy physical media while we can.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Are you sure about what you just wrote? I see some errors.




Crawdaddy

 

[Travis Brashear]

The one factor that cripples a direct comparison of DVD and BD is the fact that DVD never required a major hardware change other than the player itself; BD requires investment in a $1,000-$3,000 specialized TV set along with the player upgrade. That fact alone, if the studios have any wisdom about them, should set their expectations at a lower level than DVD's adoption figures. The fact that BD is, nevertheless, holding its own with those previous adoption figures is nothing less than extraordinary, in my opinion...

 

[Jesse Blacklow]

Thanks for illustrating my Chicken Little example for me! After all, we know that as of September, all DL content (both HD and SD) was a whopping 0.6% of video sales. Let me say that again: six tenths of one percent. Compared to that, even 5% is a enormous advantage. Meanwhile, major DL companies have been struggling even before the economic downturn, while packaged media actually did well for itself. In the meantime, we've seen an implosion in the flash media market as well, limiting that as a factor as well.

So, unless something drastic has happened in the DL world that generated literally 1000% increase in sales, there's at best a slight breeze down physical media's neck.

 

[Ed St. Clair]

I was going too post:
"like a boot on its neck"
just thought it a little too strong...
even for me (ha, ha)!
I think something drastic has happen (IMO):
Roku
now streaming NetFlix in HD (720p) w/announcement hints that Roku is going with Hulu and YouTube and other web video as well. Heck, I even have an inkling that the PS3 will put "a" nail in the coffin of Blu. However, that's the download crowd (of which some of us are as well) & most of us here prefer physical media. How long that will last... I don't know.

I think LD pleased a lot of movie buffs & I think BD will please a lot of movie buffs. I even think "WE" agree on that!!!
Enjoy!

 

[Ed St. Clair]

What would that be?
I'll attempt too clear it up.
Thanks.

 

[Robert Crawford]

It's difficult to clear it up when you're using misinformation in some of your comments. Besides, the internet sales of Reel.com Buy.com and a few others, tell me where did you get those SD DVD for $10 back in 1998? Furthermore, if you read up on some articles that are available on the internet, you can find information in which Blu-ray penetration is deeper than it was at the same time frame during the SD DVD's infancy 10 years ago. I've heard the industry isn't really comparing SD DVD to Blu-ray because they feel that 15-20% of the home video market buys more than 50% of the video software. They feel if they can achieve that same amount of Blu-ray penetration (15-20%) that sales of Blu-ray software would be very profitable without needing the 90% market penetration of SD DVD. As far as downloads versus physical media, who knows what the future really holds, but I suspect that for many consumers such as myself, I will use a combination of both formats to watch my films in HD. For my favorite films, I'll buy them in physical media and for those that are not, I will most likely download them for a viewing when it becomes much more viable for me to do so.





Crawdaddy