Warner Exclusive Blu-ray= More PS3 sold?

[one]

Why not? I don't see the difference in Sony promising to subsidize PS3s and Sony promising to subsidize BluRay players.

Even with the crappy attach ratio on the PS3, Paramount signing the HD-DVD contract, the news about Walmart and China, and HD-DVD having a huge increase in userbase over the last four months, Warner still switched to BR.

At the time the format war was in its infancy, they knew Sony+Pioneer+Panasonic is much bigger than Toshiba and want BR to succeed, they knew Sony Pictures would use BR, they knew a PS3 sale is not equivalent to a standalone player (just like with PS2), and they were not disillusioned when the early 20:1 PS3:HD-DVD ratio didn't result in a remotely similar ratio with movie sales.

I don't see why you think a standalone strategy would look unattractive to the studios compared to the PS3 strategy.

That sounds like a strange hindsight to me. You have to show me how Warner switches to Blu-ray without PS3 instead of using the recent result affected by the PS3. "The news about Walmart and China", they were both fake or stillborn. "a huge increase in userbase" in HD DVD didn't bring enough software sales.

So let's assume PS3 had DVD and Sony released a $199 BD player when Toshiba released a $299 player.

Warner is one of the masterminds behind DVD as much as Toshiba, so no chance to support BD. According to my old thread in 2005, Warner was an exclusive supporter of HD DVD along with Paramount and Universal.

Disney. They are the co-developer of iHD, the interactive markup language for HD DVD, with Microsoft. However their audience are younger. I doubt they supported Blu-ray without PS3.

So Blu-ray would have had only Sony/MGM and Fox. Also studios are keen to avoid an unnecessary format war. It'd have ended under the table before Sony releases a $199 player if it's not considered effective enough. This situation is not much different from that of DVD where Sony/Philips MMCD was assimilated into Toshiba/Warner/Panasonic SD.

The next thing they have to consider is the speed of market growth. They were eying on HD media while the lucrative DVD package business was declining. It's not only about a battle with another HD format, but also about a battle with DVD that follows. It's desirable that the new market grows as quickly as possible. The strength of PS3 in this area is its growth is largely unrelated to what's happening in the movie industry. Younger audience who are not at all interested in HD package media buy it and find HDM. It's a huge education process for a new audience that the movie industry lacks. You may compare it with Wii in the games industry. Now imagine that there had been only $199 BD players and $299 HD DVD players, the format war would last years and years without significant growth in the absolute install base.

For Toshiba, DVD and HD DVD are the same, both are good as long as they get royalties. In fact their original plan for HD was putting a MPEG4 file on a DVD just like UMD. If Sony had released a $199 player, it would have been pretty easy to follow in the price for Toshiba with Microsoft backing. Actually the Xbox 360 HD DVD add-on is the most selling HD DVD player. In this case, it's just Sony suiciding itself by killing hardware profit. No other company such as Panasonic would have agreed. Then it goes back to the growth speed, price difference in $50 or so only has diminishing returns, not 2:1 sales advantage. The HD DVD's case is the best possible scenario for standalone players and in reality Warner abandoned it in favor of BD with PS3. You also have to consider non-US markets where standalone players are not selling as much as can sustain a viable market.

 

[Crossbar]

That The next thing they have to consider is the speed of market growth. They were eying on HD media while the lucrative DVD package business was declining. It's not only about a battle with another HD format, but also about a battle with DVD that follows.

I think you are spot on with this comment and I would like to add that it will be a battle with digital download sometime in a future, but not the same type of battle.

In the end the movie industry really wants to have a one single successful media format, not just because it will be simpler and cheaper to only support one format, but it will provide them a more efficient distribution channel for HD content in the future which they have the same control of as the DVD business of today. When digital download of HD content goes mainstream, they don´t want to be too dependent on client services like Xbox Live and PSN. They want a competetive situation to get the best possible deal for downloadable content. If the service providers for downloadable content like Live and PSN try to cut a too high margin on content they can fall back on the physical media to a certain degree if necessary.

I think the movie industry really played this war very well to their advantage, they managed to get paid by Toshiba to support their format, they managed to accelerate the development of some of the features of blu-ray and they probably managed to get good production deals from both sides. They created a situation of uncertainty where it seemed like both formats could become the winner or at least get a sustainable market share. The kind of situation where you can get the best deals and when they achieved good enough deals they axed one of the formats to even save some more money.

Pretty well played in my opinion.

 

[-tkf-]

Looks like Apple just moved passed Microsoft?

http://www.apple.com/itunes/store/movies.html?sr=hotnews

 

[wco81]

Who knows what their notion of HD is though.

The CEO of Fox went on stage, briefly said there will always be a market for "hard media."

Briefly said looks like Blu-Ray will follow DVD, which elicited laughter.

 

[AlphaWolf]

Looks like Apple just moved passed Microsoft?

http://www.apple.com/itunes/store/movies.html?sr=hotnews

Well the iTunes offerings don't seem to be in HD.

When you download movies from iTunes, you get a 640-by-480-pixel image

 

[Laa-Yosh]

Apple TV has HD, although no word on it being 720p or 1080p and at what file size and bitrate...

 

[AlNom]

Apple TV has HD, although no word on it being 720p or 1080p and at what file size and bitrate...

I believe from the keynote this morning, it was described as 720p 5Mbit/s.

From the apple website:

• H.264 and protected H.264 (from iTunes Store): Up to 5 Mbps, Progressive Main Profile (CAVLC) with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps (maximum resolution: 1280 by 720 pixels at 24 fps, 960 by 540 pixels at 30 fps) in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats
• iTunes Store purchased video: 320 by 240 pixels, 640 by 480 pixels, 720 by 480 pixels (anamorphic), or high-definition 720p
• MPEG-4: Up to 3 Mbps, Simple Profile with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps (maximum resolution: 720 by 432 pixels at 30 fps) in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats

 

[SPM]

Even with the crappy attach ratio on the PS3, Paramount signing the HD-DVD contract, the news about Walmart and China, and HD-DVD having a huge increase in userbase over the last four months, Warner still switched to BR.

The movie attach ratio is irrelevant to the movie studios since they are not paying for the console subsidies, so all the movie studios care about is sales period. Besides there is no such thing as an attach ratio for movies when you can play BD movies on any BD player so the movies simply can't be attached to any one manufacturer's product.

What you are saying about the huge increase in HD-DVD userbase is simply not true. What changed Warner's mind was that in the third quarter Bluray standalone players sales (ie. excluding the PS3) outsold HD-DVD players, despite the fact that they cost $100-$200 more than Toshiba's heavily subsidised HD-DVD players.

 

[AzBat]

I believe from the keynote this morning, it was described as 720p 5Mbit/s.

From the apple website:

• H.264 and protected H.264 (from iTunes Store): Up to 5 Mbps, Progressive Main Profile (CAVLC) with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps (maximum resolution: 1280 by 720 pixels at 24 fps, 960 by 540 pixels at 30 fps) in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats
• iTunes Store purchased video: 320 by 240 pixels, 640 by 480 pixels, 720 by 480 pixels (anamorphic), or high-definition 720p
• MPEG-4: Up to 3 Mbps, Simple Profile with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps (maximum resolution: 720 by 432 pixels at 30 fps) in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats

Good find. I like their pricing structure too. Library movies are $2.99 for SD and $3.99 for HD. New releases are $3.99 for SD and $4.99 for HD. That's cheaper than Microsoft's Video Marketplace. The bad thing is you can not get the HD movies without their Apple TV set-top box. At least the box is cheaper than the 360. Hopefully the cheaper hardware and rental fees will cause Microsoft to drop their prices sooner, rather than later.

Tommy McClain

 

[zed]

Good find. I like their pricing structure too. Library movies are $2.99 for SD and $3.99 for HD. New releases are $3.99 for SD and $4.99 for HD.

im curious about movie rental pricing america, here in nz its typically $1nz per film (~80c american) ie 5for $5 or 10 for $10. new releases are quite a bit more i think ( i never get them though). 3-4 $US wont get me salivating

i saw this today by steve jobs
'seven million movies via iTunes., It's more than everyone else put together'

7 million in over a year!!!, i bet thats less than what they shift in a single days video rentals. its gonna be a long long time before digital distribution is really relavent

 

[NavNucST3]

Apple TV has HD, although no word on it being 720p or 1080p and at what file size and bitrate...

If their HD downloads are as slow as their less than DVD quality TV Show downloads I am still willing to spend more from Marketplace.
Do they have streaming for the movies, they didnt with TV shows last I tried. I missed the Keynote so........nvm the webcast just went up....back in awhile....

EDIT: Streaming is a go, but Apple TV is still a no-go for me, with multiple 360s already in-house, I dont think I could rationalize the purchase.

 

[Laa-Yosh]

They are looking at Xbox Marketplace as their main competitor, that seems to be certain from this information...

 

[RobertR1]

Outside of the "ooh! it's an apple product so it's automatically cool to own" I don't see the greatness of this service. With a 360 (and at some point the PS3) I'm able to watch rentals and play games. No way in hell I'd pay $299 for this.

For those into future trends, you can see how many different companies are throwing their hand into the digital distribution hat. New services crepping up all over the place. I have a feeling DD is coming down the pipe much faster than most of us anticipated. Please don't make the "lol! you know how many homes don't even have broadband!?" That is not the target audience. The target audience with broadband service is already present. With Comcast, ATT and Verizon now ramping up the bandwidth wars that will come quickly also. DD cometh, liketh or not.

Now I'm really hoping that managed copy gets approved at some point so I can make copies of my HDM onto a server and not worry about players.

 

[Laa-Yosh]

Yeah, Apple's intentions were pretty well known since the announcement of the appleTV, it's just that both the device and the service were unadequate for the market's expectations.

It took them another turn to get right, and I think they're making a good second attempt - they have more movies available then the Marketplace, and it's all integrated into their iTunes service which is both pretty well known and - as far as I know - has good features. Not to mention a ton of other content, particularly all that music.

Of course the Xbox has the games going for it; and Sony has its own film and music studios, so everyone has something to build upon. It'll certainly not going to end as quickly as the Bluray / HD-DVD format war, but to be honest I could live without a monopoly in this market. That is, when they finally decide to extend it to Eastern Europe as well...

 

[AzBat]

im curious about movie rental pricing america, here in nz its typically $1nz per film (~80c american) ie 5for $5 or 10 for $10. new releases are quite a bit more i think ( i never get them though). 3-4 $US wont get me salivating

That's about like it is here. Usually you can find older titles at $1US and new releases at $3US. But then you have to get your clothes on, get in the car and drive to the store. So for digital downloads you're paying like a $2-$3 convience fee, which is not so bad if you rent the occasional movie. If you're huge movie buff, then NetFlix is probably a much better value.

i saw this today by steve jobs
'seven million movies via iTunes., It's more than everyone else put together'

7 million in over a year!!!, i bet thats less than what they shift in a single days video rentals. its gonna be a long long time before digital distribution is really relavent

I think at that number, it's going to be more than relevant. At least for SD, that is. I just don't see them doing much good with HD titles since it requires their box.

Tommy McClain

 

[acaeus]

Outside of the "ooh! it's an apple product so it's automatically cool to own" I don't see the greatness of this service. With a 360 (and at some point the PS3) I'm able to watch rentals and play games. No way in hell I'd pay $299 for this.

For those into future trends, you can see how many different companies are throwing their hand into the digital distribution hat. New services crepping up all over the place. I have a feeling DD is coming down the pipe much faster than most of us anticipated. Please don't make the "lol! you know how many homes don't even have broadband!?" That is not the target audience. The target audience with broadband service is already present. With Comcast, ATT and Verizon now ramping up the bandwidth wars that will come quickly also. DD cometh, liketh or not.

Now I'm really hoping that managed copy gets approved at some point so I can make copies of my HDM onto a server and not worry about players.

Agreed, but many (myself included) question whether internet infrastructure can support DD, and specially HD DD. Besides, people who work in the internet infrastructure (again myself included) know how oversold and over provisioned most services are. Bandwidth can be tricky to measure. Too many possible bottlenecks that are not evident when you look at your ISP's advertised bandwidth.

Personally I think in the short term (next 1-2 years), DD will (barely) compete with rentals only.

 

[AlphaWolf]

Personally I think in the short term (next 1-2 years), DD will (barely) compete with rentals only.

Well 7 million over a year is more than enough evidence that it's a small market. A single DVD can move more than 20 million units in a week. However, I wouldn't have thought the number would be that high.

The box will certainly be a big limitation on getting their HD content moving. Perhaps they'll try to move it like cable companies move their boxes, by compensating the cost with coupons.

 

[wco81]

That's what I think, the infrastructure won't be there, especially for real HD downloads, for a long time.

What passes for HD downloads are 5 Mbps or lower files, compared to Blu-Ray which has some 40-50 Mbps.

Now, the masses may be satisfied enough with 5 Mbps or lower, because many think DVD is good enough on their flat-screen HDTVs.

You hear about higher bandwidth services in other countries. But apparently, may of them have caps on how much you can download a month.


As for Apple, they probably give most of the download revenues to the content companies, hoping to keep the prices down to encourage people to buy their hardware.

 

[RobertR1]

Agreed, but many (myself included) question whether internet infrastructure can support DD, and specially HD DD. Besides, people who work in the internet infrastructure (again myself included) know how oversold and over provisioned most services are. Bandwidth can be tricky to measure. Too many possible bottlenecks that are not evident when you look at your ISP's advertised bandwidth.

Personally I think in the short term (next 1-2 years), DD will (barely) compete with rentals only.

I'm thinking 4-5years out which is still rather quick. For the next few years all these services will compete, as is usually the case with any new tech, and after a couple of years there will be a handful of established survivors left to reap the rewards.

 

[PARANOiA]

That's about like it is here. Usually you can find older titles at $1US and new releases at $3US. But then you have to get your clothes on, get in the car and drive to the store. So for digital downloads you're paying like a $2-$3 convience fee, which is not so bad if you rent the occasional movie. If you're huge movie buff, then NetFlix is probably a much better value.

Tommy McClain is a nudist

Seriously though, the $2-$3 convenience fee needs to be added to your internet bill too. I believe most/all internet plans in the states are "unlimited downloads", so possibly it not that big a deal for most of you as it would be to others around the world where it's not so nice. I'm paying $AUD80 per month for $40gb, so a, say, 4gb movie would cost, an additional $8 on top of the movie price. Downloading HD films over here just isn't cost-effective when it's effectively cheaper to buy the movie, watch it as many times as you like, and resell it for a lower cost.

This is a big part of the reason I see the DD vs HD Media war being trounced by BR (or combo drives). The global infrastructure doesn't seem to support DD, even though it's a fantastic option if you lived in the States.