I find it interesting that everybody makes reference to how many SDVD players are out there, and how nobody would abandon SDVD beacuse of that, but ignore the fact that very same thing was done with other format changes in the past.

IIIRC studios made stopped supporting peoples VHS players (by halting new VHS releases) during a time when good quality DVD players (not counting those POS Wal-Mart sold) were not that much less than BD players are now. The number of VHS palyers out there was certainly sizable, and not that much different than the SDVD situation now. And as rdclark and I have pointed out, this should be less of a blow to the public having to switch since the new equipment this time around actually will play the prior format.

i guess it depends on your definition of "not that much less." the average blu-ray player is currently no less than $399. in 1998, when i bought my first DVD player, i paid $299 for a mid-level pioneer. at that time, studios were definitely still releasing on VHS.

the difference is that the VHS sales market then was quite a bit different than the DVD market is today. VHS was never the cash cow for studios that DVD has become. it was primarily a rental format (as evidenced by the "sell-through" pricing structure of new releases on VHS). most people used their VCRs primarily for playing rentals and recording TV. studios will be much more reluctant to completely abandon a format that brings in the kind of cash that DVD does. najma's statement that they won't stop releasing on DVD until blu-ray players become ubiquitous is spot on.

The "sell through" price structure was long past when the hammers started to fall on the format. I should know, I had a ton of them and never paid a sell through price in my life, nor did I buy them used.

I don't disagree with that. I just think that (a) HDVD players will become ubiquitous far faster than most people here seem to believe and (2) part of the reason for that is that both the media companies and the electronics manufacturers will see that it's in their best interests to make that happen asap.

The entire replacement market for TVs has already gone nearly 100% digital and HD. HDTVs are selling by the tens of millions. Disposal of analog TVs is becoming a national problem. And these things cost far more than disc players.

Selling enough $100 HDVD players to support a changeover to HDVD is not going to be that difficult, especially when accompanied by assurances that (1) "your existing DVDs will play and look better than ever" and (b) "new releases will cost no more than they did on DVD."

The $100 players and the disc-price parity are, of course, going to have to be part of the scenario, but that'll happen naturally.

First, those $29 Walmart players worked and a lot of people have them. Hell Phillips makes a decent DVD player that still now sells for something like $49 bucks.

Second, and more importantly, can you quote any facts to back up your statements? I see no facts, nothing, but your wild assertions.

VHS was still being released in at least 2001, as I remember the Phantom Menace being a notable and big release.

Please educate me with some facts. Thank you

I glad you releated that point again because I think it's a biggie. The fact that it's actually TWO big changes happenign seems to get lost.

And I know too well about the analog TV issue. I want to replace two large, and sadly awesome quality, CRT TV's and I'm looking at having to give them away to anybody who will take them.

The DVD rental revenues overtook VHS rental revenues on the week ending 16 March 2003 in the United States. That's the first time in the history of the DVD-format. In numbers of units rented, VHS still beats DVD with its 54 percent share of the market.

http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/3907.cfm

It took six years. And by then, DVD players were

This is both a great feature to consumers but a huge liability to BD itself. If I am going to release something, and I want to maximize my profit, I will release it to as many potential customers as possible. Say BD replaces 50% of DVD players in the next five years (and this is for the sake of argument, because I would put hard cash on the line that they will not). Why would I waste my time developing for that 50% when, because of BC I can hit all 100%?

DVD had fundamental differences from VHS. BD needs to find something more than "better picture" to move the masses. The masses do not care if their FF DVD look weird stretched as long as they fill the screen.

I finally have a 32" tv. I still don't have surround sound speakers. I have hundreds of DVDs. I'm fine, really. I don't see myself changing over for years.

(1) It's years that we're talking about.

(2) A lot of VHS owners felt the same way. What changed their minds was reduced availability of VHS tapes, titles being released DVD-only. That is when we'll know the worm has turned.

Some people think it will happen sooner, some later, others never. Let's all meet back here in 2012 and see who was closest to right.

I'm down. I'm not worried about being too far off.

BTW: Here's a fun little blast from the past I found. Replace DVD for VHS, BD for DVD, and I think the article could read word for word on how IMO the next round will go down. And we all know how quickly things turned in favor of DVD after this article was written.

http://hometheater.about.com/library...supdate02a.htm

I can only speak for myself, but at this point, not releasing a title in HD is a way for them to not make a sale to me. I've passed on many titles, including new releases and catalog SEs, over the past year because they weren't released on BD/HD DVD. I imagine there are others who can't be counted in the 100%.

It took six years for VHS to overtake DVD. And much longer to die. Even though DVD was far superior to VHS, people refused to give up VHS. The jump from VHS to DVD (a GIANT step in technology) is very much different than the jump from DVD to BD (a SMALL technology improvement). Even if you insist that they are the same, it'll still be still be six years.

AND VHS was no where as ingrained in everything like DVD, computers laptops portables etc. Most of these devices will not benefit from the extra resolution of BD because of smaller screen sizes.

Also, once again, studios did not stop producing on VHS to move people to DVD. They stopped VHS because people moved on to DVD.

I can only speak for myself, but I didn't buy a movie collection on tape because (1) the price (although prices came down on VHS movies in the early 90') (2) the bulkiness of VHS tapes themselves (3) the knowledge that the tapes would eventually wear out (4) the fact that CDs and LaserDiscs existed, which showed me that eventually movies would make it on a digital disc that was a decent size (5) the lack of OAR.

DVDs solved all those problems, HD media only increase the qualit y of that presentation....so tell me why I should dump all those DVDS, buy a $400 player, and start collecting over again.

When the price of a HD DVD Player fell to $150, I said OK, thats good enough for me to get into this but currently Blu Ray player prices are out of control for my tastes. When they get down to the same price level - sub 200, I may pick one up..I'm in no hurry now because my upconverted DVD player will do 90% of what my Blu Ray player will do - that is play my upconverted DVD collection.

THe people that don't currently have a large movie collection and could start in Blu Ray, well prices at the retail stores are out of control (save when they have a promo deal) so I don't see HD media being an impulse type of buy (i.e. Anchorman is $8 thats a sweet deal, go ahead pick it up)

For some actual numbers regarding the VHS to DVD transition, I suggest everyone check out this article from 2002.

Of particular note are the following points:
VHS titles purchased, per household with VCR, 2001: 7.5
DVDs purchased, per household with player, 2001: 14.9
November 2001 - Monthly sales of DVD movies surpass those of VHS.

The first two underscore my point that DVD rather quickly transformed the home video purchasing market. Four years into the format, people with players had bought twice as many DVDs as VHS tapes, on average.

That third statement is also very telling. Again, only four years into the format, monthly sales surpassed VHS. Two years into BD, we're comically far from it surpassing DVD.

It ought to be fairly clear that BD will likely not surpass DVD as fast as DVD surpassed VHS and that took about 5+ years. i think we're still at least 5 or more years away from it even being a possibility.

Also what made DVD so successful in terms of sales was the lack of rental window.

Also DVD sales were helped quite a bit by the crazy deals that Web sites were using to punp up themselves....reel.com, bigstar, even amazon to an extent - a whole bunch of smaller ones - familyvideo crazy sales, etc.

I don't think you can underestimate those sales - people were to pick up a lot of $30 MSRP title for like 8-9 bucks easy...and that wasn't studio specific - you pretty much had your choice.

Well, I said five years, so we're not that far from the same page.

What makes this transition so much easier is, of course, all people have to do is upgrade their players, something that will happen normally in due course anyway. Under-$100 HDVD players will change the entire landscape, and I'll be surprised if we don't see them for next Xmas.

A point that for the most part is still being ignored.

We already had sub $100 players.

I don't think it is going to happen at all like VHS vs DVD. That was a quantum leap, this is a tweak. HDM is a tiny niche market.

The average joe will not care to spend more than $50 for a player or $15 for a 2 disc new release.

Back when DVD was overtaking VHS we didn't have VHS players in our cars and computers. Standard DVD is locked in, and we'll get to some other format /method before BluRay gets even close to DVD levels I would guess.

I agree that comparing VHS sales to DVD sales is likely misleading, for this and a number of other reasons.

The world in which DVD flourished was vastly different from the one where VHS first established the home video media market.

But the digital TV world after 2009 will also be very different from the analog TV world that birthed DVD. I'm not sure any of us are quite prepared to grasp how different it may be.

One of the biggest changes bearing down on us like a freight train is universal connectivity. *Everything* will have wireless connectivity, and entire cities will be giant hot spots.

I really do wonder how much the SDVD market will atrophy on its own -- independent of pressure from HDVD -- when it is completely commonplace to be able to watch almost anything you want anytime you want just by punching a few buttons.

Yes, I know some of us can do that (or something like it) now. My point is that at at the dawn of DVD it was a strange, futuristic high-tech medium that only computer nerds understood. Now they sell them at truck stops.

The trickling-down of the technology of streaming/on-demand content to the mass market is happening the same way. The YouTube button on the iPhone was a signpost. So are the TiVo/Amazon and Netflix "Watch Now" plans.

Again, I'm not suggesting HDVD will ever surpass SDVD in numbers. Far from it. The world is changing again, and physical media will be a smaller part of it.

What I'm suggesting is that HDVD will replace SDVD among people who will continue to want to collect physical media. But that other means of distribution, such as VOD, will replace much of the rest of the market now served by SDVD via rentals, impulse buys, budget titles, etc.

Twice in the last month I've heard someone asking for VHS tapes at Wal-mart (once the guy asked if they had Transformers in VHS) What doos that tell you?

A large Biodome recently let a large number of people out in your area?

Yup. I totally agree to that. Also, this was posted on PAGE 2 of this thread, possibly referring to a form of VOD: