Press Release TCFHE Press Release: Family Guy Season 16 and The Orville Season 1 (1 Viewer)

[Kyrsten Brad]

Well on The Orville FB feed, seems to be a lot of public angst over the lack of a Blu-ray release.

 

[Tommy R]

DVDs are cheaper to produce than Blu-rays, but the cost differential isn't as much as it was when Blu-ray was brand new.

I think the larger issue is that there is extremely limited consumer demand for these shows on disc in general, and on Blu-ray specifically. Something like this might have only sold a few hundred copies, if that.

Serious question here: if the demand is so low why even both with DVD releases? Do the numbers really show that DVD releases actually sell well and that there would be a serious drop in sales if the studios went Blu-ray only if releasing anything? As in more people actually are still DVD-only and these people still by these kinds of titles but only on DVD, and the studios would miss out on all these sales if they went Blu-ray only because they wouldn't get these DVD-only demographics of people anymore?

 

[Jesse Skeen]

It's really a conundrum because I care about quality AND care about owning an actual copy of the material, and streaming still can't equal the quality of a good Blu-Ray- I'll admit it gets close sometimes, but not equal. The people who care about quality want Blu-Ray, the people who don't care can go with streaming. Standard DVD really is obsolete, and Blu-Ray has now been around for almost 13 years. VHS got well-established within that amount of time.

For 'political' reasons, given the choice between DVD and streaming I'll pick DVD just because of the ownership issues, but most of the time when these are the only choices I just go with neither.

 

[Ethan Riley]

Well, if collecting physical discs is now such a niche market, you'd think they'd be catering to the connoiseurs of said market--namely us--who prefer blu over dvd. If Joe and Flo Trailerpark are no longer buying discs at all, why introduce stuff onto their preferred, antiquated (two generations back) form of media if they're not buying them in the first place? The studios should just put out the tv shows on blu only and sell them through the collector's market on the internet and stop bothering trying to please those who've moved on anyway.

 

[BobO'Link]

Serious question here: if the demand is so low why even both with DVD releases? Do the numbers really show that DVD releases actually sell well and that there would be a serious drop in sales if the studios went Blu-ray only if releasing anything? As in more people actually are still DVD-only and these people still by these kinds of titles but only on DVD, and the studios would miss out on all these sales if they went Blu-ray only because they wouldn't get these DVD-only demographics of people anymore?

The latest sales numbers show DVD sells well. It's only been in the past few months that combined BR/UHD sales are higher than DVD. Notice that this is the "Top 50 disc sellers" and doesn't include catalog titles which shows there's still a strong market for DVD with new titles.

Well, if collecting physical discs is now such a niche market, you'd think they'd be catering to the connoiseurs of said market--namely us--who prefer blu over dvd. If Joe and Flo Trailerpark are no longer buying discs at all, why introduce stuff onto their preferred, antiquated (two generations back) form of media if they're not buying them in the first place? The studios should just put out the tv shows on blu only and sell them through the collector's market on the internet and stop bothering trying to please those who've moved on anyway.

But they are... Due to lower prices I'd guess that impulse purchases account for a larger portion of DVD sales than BR. That you can still purchase stand-alone DVD only players speaks volumes. For many people DVD is "good enough" and they just don't see enough of a difference to spend the extra $$ - on both players and media. It doesn't help BR that the increase in quality over that of DVD isn't as apparent as that of DVD over VHS.

I purchase BR when it's available *if* the price is not too much more than the DVD. These days it seems that the BR is often either the same price or less expensive than the DVD only option, frequently being BR/DVD/Digital. But I also don't get bent out of shape if a release is DVD only. It helps tremendously that, in many cases, my BR player upscales those DVDs to look quite good.

 

[Kyrsten Brad]

The latest sales numbers show DVD sells well. It's only been in the past few months that combined BR/UHD sales are higher than DVD. Notice that this is the "Top 50 disc sellers" and doesn't include catalog titles which shows there's still a strong market for DVD with new titles.

Both my systems have modern stand alone DVD players for the simple reason that they play my DVDs much easier than my Sony Blu-ray players. I don’t have to fiddle with aspect ratio settings on the DVD players.

Something technical about integrating Sony Blu players with Vizio TVs with respect to aspect ratio.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Serious question here: if the demand is so low why even both with DVD releases? Do the numbers really show that DVD releases actually sell well and that there would be a serious drop in sales if the studios went Blu-ray only if releasing anything? As in more people actually are still DVD-only and these people still by these kinds of titles but only on DVD, and the studios would miss out on all these sales if they went Blu-ray only because they wouldn't get these DVD-only demographics of people anymore?

There's a lot to unpack there, and a lot that I can only provide my best theory as opposed to something that I can say is a 100% proven fact. But if you'll indulge me, I'll try to offer my spin on it as best I can.

I think, historically speaking, ownership of film and TV was not the norm. As long as there has been film and television, there have been hobbyists and private collectors, but they have been vastly outnumbered by casual viewers, who were content to watch a film in a theater or a show on their television once and then move on. When home video became popular and video stores became a thing, that changed the paradigm a little as it allowed people more chances to see something; it was no longer a matter of needing to be at the exact right place at the exact right time in order to not miss your one chance of seeing something. While it made it easier for people to be collectors, the vast majority of the audience was still more casual about their viewing choices; renting a movie or taping a show were more convenient than waiting for a movie to show up on TV, or having to watch a show at a specific time of day, but it didn't make people want to own everything.

When DVD came out, it temporarily changed everything. I think the mass audience will always flock to whatever format is offering the sweet spot of convenience and availability. When DVD was new, it was temporarily cheaper and easier to buy a new release DVD than it was to try to rent one. DVD was also the first time that many TV shows were made available in a format that consumers could directly access at their convenience. While episodes of a show like Star Trek were released on VHS, most shows didn't get VHS releases.

When streaming came out, that changed the game yet again, but in favor of the old status quo: now consumers could have the availability that DVD promised, but without needing to physically own an object to see the content. If you missed an episode of a favorite show, or if your friends told you about a show you might like, you no longer had to buy a complete season DVD set to catch up; you could simply press a button on your TV to watch what you wanted.

For many of us enthusiasts at HTF, the evolution of home media went something like VHS/Laserdisc to DVD to Blu-ray to UHD. For most average consumers, it's gone from VHS to DVD to streaming. The mainstream is on a different path than those of us here when it comes to their entertainment. Many people never made the leap to Blu-ray in the first place; the went from DVD straight to streaming. Most people started on DVD back when it was a 4x3/NTSC world. When the world switched to 16x9/HD, the move for many people was not to buy a new disc player and to rebuy a series of discs they already owned; it was to leave the disc buying behind in favor of streaming content.

As such, TV on Blu-ray has never sold particularly well, and it's sold terribly the more that streaming has become mainstream. Ten years ago, if I wanted to catch up on a previous season of a current show before the new season began, I'd have to go and buy the DVD. Now, if I want to rewatch season 1 episodes of The Orville to get ready for season 2, all I have to do is go to Fox's website and stream the season there for free -- what incentive is there for the average consumer to go out and want to buy a Blu-ray of The Orville Season 1, when it's been available in HD continuously since it aired?

I think DVD remains popular for people who never made the leap to HD streaming. My guess for why TV on DVD remains a viable market but TV on Blu-ray doesn't is because the audience that would be needed to make TV on Blu-ray a success is already being catered to by streaming. So while I don't want to make this so simplistic as to say that people who buy DVDs are luddites who can't figure out streaming, I think it's for a segment of the market that hasn't been interested in upgrading to the world of streaming or Blu-ray.