Anyone know the cost difference between brd discs and dvd?

[jvd]

Just a personal outlook but

If bluray costs were on par or could be cheaper before launch as that site suggests vs hd-dvd why would any studio even be backing hd-dvd ?

There def has to be some price diffrence and a large enough one that these studios are willing ot take a hit on the storage space side. Why else would u go with the less storage option ? If the more storage was as cheap or cheaper they would go with that

 

[Titanio]

If bluray costs were on par or could be cheaper before launch as that site suggests vs hd-dvd why would any studio even be backing hd-dvd ?

The per-disc manufacturing costs may be that low indeed, but you still have a larger upfront investment for new equipment to offset against. So initially, with that cost factored in, your discs are more expensive, but over the longer term as volumes go up, the contribution of that initial investment to costs will become negligible.

The more substantial initial investment in new equipment required for Bluray is what's attracting some to HD-DVD.

 

[mckmas8808]

The per-disc manufacturing costs may be that low indeed, but you still have a larger upfront investment for new equipment to offset against. So initially, with that cost factored in, your discs are more expensive, but over the longer term as volumes go up, the contribution of that initial investment to costs will become negligible.

The more substantial initial investment in new equipment required for Bluray is what's attracting some to HD-DVD

Good explanation. I couldn't have said it better myself.

 

[jvd]

which means per disc the costs will be higher as those producing the discs will have to make back the money

 

[randycat99]

Yah, makes you wonder why they didn't stick with CDROM equipment, as well...think of all the money they could've saved...

 

[jvd]

Yah, makes you wonder why they didn't stick with CDROM equipment, as well...think of all the money they could've saved...

Honestly this adds nothing to the conversation and makes no sense .

 

[MechanizedDeath]

I ask this too much, but are we discussing Day1 costs here? Year1 costs? Or are we looking at the bigger picture? First year costs are always kinda ridiculous, at least for the consumer. I believe DVDs cost over $20 for a simple DVD-R when they first came out. Now I can buy them for under 20 cents a pop in lots of 100. DL DVDs are still about $3 a pop, but DL burners haven't penetrated the market enough for the price to drop yet. By the end of next year, you can probably find them going at bargain basement prices too.

I don't know if the price to the consumer matters either. I'm assuming a single-layer disc is pennies on the dollar right now. A DL probably more, but still dirt cheap (20 cents? 40 cents?). What's a good source for price info on this stuff?

I think initial media price is worthless. The true value of any optical media is in its mass-producability, when you can have lots of players out there and can afford to stamp a ton of discs without worrying about taking huge losses. I think the price war is a petty one compared to the clear technical advantages afforded. I'll gladly eat my words if in 2008, BRD still costs a fortune to make. But I fully expect costs to drop in line with CDs and DVDs. I just don't see what the big fuss is.

aaaa00: On those DVD/HD-DVD plants, is the production capacity when switched to HD-DVD at a good level? Why do I remember reading over at GAF that these retrofitted plants were inferior in production capacity to purpose-built plants? I think retrofitting a plant is a good way of hedging bets against the next-gen format failing against DVDs. But it's almost self-fulfilling b/c I don't see how they can expect to reduce production costs as quickly as if they built new plants that had greater production capacity. Corret me if I'm wrong. Reliable info on the pricing war between HD-DVD and BRD is slim to none. PEACE.

 

[aaaaa00]

On those DVD/HD-DVD plants, is the production capacity when switched to HD-DVD at a good level?

Absolutely.

Better than even a *new* dedicated BD line right now. Panasonic's prototype spin coater BD line's cycle times are currently 4.5 secs, and they don't want to talk about yields yet (which implies they not great) -- they can't make dual layer BD with it either (not until the fall).

(via the CED)

 

[mckmas8808]

I think initial media price is worthless. The true value of any optical media is in its mass-producability, when you can have lots of players out there and can afford to stamp a ton of discs without worrying about taking huge losses.

MechanizedDeath nobody wants to talk about that. That could lead to Sony looking good. Its true many people want to talk about first year cost. Nobody cares about year 3,4,5, etc.

and they don't want to talk about yields yet (which implies they not great) -- they can't make dual layer BD with it either (not until the fall).

aaaa00 you seem to be one of these people. Do you think dual layered BD will be a problem come the year 2006?

 

[aaaaa00]

and they don't want to talk about yields yet (which implies they not great) -- they can't make dual layer BD with it either (not until the fall).

aaaa00 you seem to be one of these people. Do you think dual layered BD will be a problem come the year 2006?

Who knows. It's possible they won't figure it out for a couple years, it's possible they might actually get it working by the fall.

 

[mckmas8808]

and they don't want to talk about yields yet (which implies they not great) -- they can't make dual layer BD with it either (not until the fall).

aaaa00 you seem to be one of these people. Do you think dual layered BD will be a problem come the year 2006?

Who knows. It's possible they won't figure it out for a couple years, it's possible they might actually get it working by the fall.

I'm betting sooner than later. I bet we will hear something soon.

 

[PC-Engine]

Yah, makes you wonder why they didn't stick with CDROM equipment, as well...think of all the money they could've saved...

Honestly this adds nothing to the conversation and makes no sense .

I think it was a failed attempt at finding a valid analogy to downplay HD DVD which is based on DVD manufacturing technology.

...or simply trolling with nothing to back it up..

I'm betting sooner than later. I bet we will hear something soon.

Is this based on reality or just your gut feeling

 

[London Geezer]

Isn't the point of BR the fac that it's 6 times bigger than a DVD? If so, isn't it enough for it to be less than 6 times more expensive than DVD and everyone should be happy?

I mean, if i had to choose between buying 6 DVDs and 1 BR and the BR disc is cheaper than the 6 DVDs, i'd go for the BR one. And that's without even considering the fact that it solves the multi-disc mess too.

So in the end, anything below 6X the price of a DVD should make people happy. Can't believe people are nagging about it being "a whole 10% more expensive than DVD". That's just crazy.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Well not really. If an HDDVD can hold an HD movie in two layers, and a BRD holds it in one layer, the price of one layer BRD needs to be < price 2-layer HDDVD. And if you need two BRD layers for a film, you need to consider that price. But if studios want to add extra features, they need to consider two HDDVD disks vs. 1 BRD with however many layers.

 

[PC-Engine]

Isn't the point of BR the fac that it's 6 times bigger than a DVD? If so, isn't it enough for it to be less than 6 times more expensive than DVD and everyone should be happy?

It's 6 times bigger but the HD movies also need more space. A single SD movie doesn't need 6 DVDs, it only needs 1.

 

[jvd]

Don't forget though that hd-dvd is more than twice as big as a dual layer dvd and it seems that both inital and long term costs are in line with dvd costs . It seems from what i've read through all these postings that hd-dvds currently have a 10% cost increase and can use the existing lines with little retooling of course going foward these prices will drop even more. It seems like bluray on the other hand needs new lines and costs more per disc . Of course these prices wll drop but they are already higher .

Now the question is , whats cheaper a dual layer hd disc of a single layer bluray disc ? I think its the hd disc and not the br disc

 

[MechanizedDeath]

Don't forget though that hd-dvd is more than twice as big as a dual layer dvd and it seems that both inital and long term costs are in line with dvd costs . It seems from what i've read through all these postings that hd-dvds currently have a 10% cost increase and can use the existing lines with little retooling of course going foward these prices will drop even more. It seems like bluray on the other hand needs new lines and costs more per disc . Of course these prices wll drop but they are already higher .

Now the question is , whats cheaper a dual layer hd disc of a single layer bluray disc ? I think its the hd disc and not the br disc

You base this on...?

BTW, thanks aaaaa00. By "new", you mean the current state of BRD production, or what they expect from final, full-production facilities? Google isn't exactly being friendly with this topic. The most I get are forum posts, which aren't exactly concrete info. Both camps claim they have costs close to DVDs, but it's not like either camp is gonna downplay their position in this regard. PEACE.

 

[jvd]

From various articles based on the spin coating , production problems , changes to the machinery or having to make new lines .

Various diffrent articles all of which have been presented on these forums before

 

[aaaaa00]

BTW, thanks aaaaa00. By "new", you mean the current state of BRD production, or what they expect from final, full-production facilities?

Current state of BRD (IE the prototype units).

No one's really sure what final, full production facilities look like yet, because they haven't yet finished working out how BD disks should be made.

 

[Oda]

The Digital Bits said it best awhile ago when he explained why he felt BRD was the superior format to HD-DVD.

He stated quite simply that HD-DVD is a manufacturer's format, and BRD is a consumer's format; each is more beneficial to those groups. He felt HD-DVD simply doesn't have the legs to last long enough to not need yet another new optical format in 8-10 years, and the fact that the few companies/studios left backing HD-DVD is actually a slight against consumers.

To put it simply, HD-DVD is DVD 1.5, and BRD is DVD 2.0.