Why shouldn't people compare prices? Valid or not, such comparisons are probably the only way to predict where the format is heading. Fact of the matter is, falling prices for DVD have not encouraged a resurrection of its boom-days, on the contrary, DVD's market performance continues to worsen.

I see a trend, a lot on this forum don't.

Pro-B

Well these guys have made good money on predictions so it's a start. They must be watching some numbers because they sure didn't say in 3-4 years it will all be downloading like you read everywhere.

It's comments like this that annoys a whole bunch of people. You see whatever you want to see, then make it sound like everyone who disagrees with you is inferior.

^^^Most accurate statement EVER on this site.

So higher priced movies on a new non-compatable format is supposed to resurrect movie sales?

One thing working against Blu-Ray is the fact that for many people the novelty of collecting movies has worn off. DVD was released and became a very collectable format due to it's durability and price - people went nuts and bought one DVD after another. After a few years many started questioning their collection. Many wondered why they bought bad movies blindly or ones they only needed to watch once, why they have so many unwatched DVDs on their shelf and where they can store all of them. At that point the party was over for many and the hangover started.

I only purchased about 5 DVDs in the 2 years before Blu-Ray was even released. I know many on this and other forums have cut back their DVD purchases long ago as well. Now most of these same people are not going to make the same mistake with Blu-Ray... they are being VERY selective with their purchases - chosing to rent movies they haven't seen first and buying only movies with high re-watchability.

The boom days are over for DVD, and will probably never come back with Blu-Ray (nevermind the other factors that will slow down Blu-Rays adoption).

I think that the trend described in the article could be tagged a realistic observation. A majority of other articles that have surfaced in recent months tend to agree (the two formats are heading in different directions). With other words, it is not a matter of inferior vs. superior, but acknowledging what other people, not me, with a firm grasp on industry events foresee. Ironically, such statements are typically dismissed here as "unrealistic" (they are not debated), hence my comment. So, perhaps such statements annoy some, which is unfortunate, but I am certainly open to hearing and debating all sorts of opinions. Even the unpopular ones.

Pro-B

I used to purchase or burn anywhere from 10-12 DVD's per week years. In the year and 1/2 I've had Blu-Ray I've purchased may 75 or so, plus another 90ish HD discs after the prices dropped like a rock. That may still seem like a lot but is obviously a fraction of my previous purchasing. The vast majority of my movies have been rentals.

I just sent in 16 DVD's to DVDPlanet today and noticed there were several I had never opened and the others I watched once in the several years I owned them. Will not make that mistake again.

Oh, I see a trend alright.

-beebs

I have glasses. Ditched them for contacts. Probably before you were born.

If you simply don't like people who argue, damn....you are on the wrong internet.

Interestingly, in arguments, that usually applies to both sides, not just one.

So we managed to continue the Blu-Ray sales discussion thread afterall.

There are a lot of arguments thrown around against Blu-Ray, and some in favor of Blu-Ray. It's easier to come up with arguments against than arguments for, at least in this case I think. Let's see if I can follow them all:

1. BDs are priced too high.
-(counter-argument: DVDs were priced high during the early years.)
--(counter-counter argument: But current DVD prices have spoiled consumers in purchasing habits.)

2. BDs do not offer enough innovation over DVDs / no obvious benefit.

3. Consumers don't want to collect movies anymore.

1. The original argument fails in the face of original DVD priceing / counter-argument. However, the counter-counter-argument that consumers have been spoiled by cheap DVDs recently is something we have not seen before, and will be very difficult to predict. Also, there is a question of when BDs will drop in price to the point where they are only a couple bucks more than DVD. This will undoubtebly happen eventually. The question is will it occur too late.

2. At first glance, this argument appears to be valid. Consumers loved DVDs because they were portible, more sturdy, better quality, and most importantly...easy to use. Jump to any scene, rewind, etc. much easier than with VHS. Blu-Ray doesn't appear to have these same advantages. However, there are major advantages beyond visual and audio quality that I think will become apparant with time: (a) much increased storage capacity; (b) interactive features that cannot be found on DVD. I think this is a small point, though. As people continue to buy HDTVs (can you even find a non-HDTV at electronic stores anymore?), people will continue to look to newer tech to take advantage of said HDTV. Blu-Ray is being pushed as said tech. I think this will increase with HDTV buying trends.

3. I don't even know how to respond to this point (a poster on this page mentioned it). I think it's completely invalid, not to mention impossible to prove. I think people will continue to collect new releases, whether it's on DVD or other.

None of this analysis factors in the current downturn of the economy. I think that is a legitimate negative power against all tech, incuding Blu-Ray, and I think is the only real threat to Blu-Ray's longterm survival.

We shall see.

Nice summary.

No, I don't like people who make stuff up that isn't there. Wow! Your older than me! Congrats!

Goldblum, here are my quick thoughts on your take on the situation. Point 1, I think that for the average consumer, shopping in Best Buy, or Target, etc., the $20 and up price point on most decent releases is too high.

Point 2, let's say you work in an office. Take 30 of your co-workers, and show them what VHS used to offer to consumers in interface, video quality, and sound quality. Then show them, a DVD player, and do the same. In a second test, show them the DVD demo, and then bring up blu-ray, and mention to them that blu-ray has a bigger storage capacity and can access a few special features online via a wireless or wired internet connection from your blu-ray player. See which comparison has a bigger impact--I would think you'd get a lot of "so what" in the blu-ray demo if you argued your improvements (improvement in picture quality being a separate issue).

Point 3, it has been well documented that DVD sales have slowed in recent years. And anecdotally, many of us could describe many people we know who never collected DVDs in bulk, and many people who have stopped or slowed down whatever DVD buying they had done over the years.

That's my view--doesn't make either of us right or wrong though. This is an interesting topic.

What's more interesting is that DVDtalkers never fail to impress. Here we are, 165 posts into a discussion where the original article was a mere two sentences long. This thread got far more mileage than I ever thought it would.

OG article:

lol--I remember reading that article before you linked to it here, and thinking the author was off the wall for using those as justifications for calling blu-ray one of the worst technologies of the year, especially when we all know how much it has to offer. But the underlying issues facing blu-ray are very real--hence why I think this thread has legs. Plus, as you say, DVDtalkers are rarely at a loss for words.

Does it really matter how long the article was? In only a few sentences, the writer managed to distance himself quite effectively from any kind of reliability.

He mentioned price, and we effectively retorted he was a dumbass.

Slow-loading times will get better, but this is one of the last things on my list of needed improvements.

I guess I should have complained more about my VHS Rewinder being worthless and useless after I got my DVD Player.

Who's we? There are a vocal bunch that can't take any criticism and it seems there are more than a few that actually agree about the pricing.

This is the quote from the article you used to start this thread. Do you agree with his observation, or disagree?

I'd say, perhaps not using the colorful language DVDPolizei does, that the author is anything but a critic. Hence, Polizei's evaluation of the author's stance, in my opinion, is spot on!

Pro-B

Are they selling blu-ray rewinders yet?

I agree with him. I'm not going to pay $25 to watch Step Brothers.

Really, though, I think the prices are getting more reasonable. There aren't all that many deals on day one, but the window to a price drop seems to be getting shorter and shorter, and someone who picks up a Blu-ray player won't have any problem picking up a stack of quality discs for under $100.

I still don't think the cost of the software is the biggest hurdle Blu-ray has to overcome...I'd point to "disinterest".

In my opinion, the studios should decrease the price of Blu-Rays to encourage more people to purchase Blu-ray players. If I didn't have a Netflix account, I wouldn't have even considered purchasing a player. Twenty dollars (or more) per movie? No thanks.

Ask the smart one who wrote the article. I'm sure he'll use it as a negative blow against Blu-ray.

Yeah, I guess you'll have to wait a few weeks for a sale.

I paid $15 for Iron Man on Blu.

Paid $6.69 for a Bond flick on Blu. Oh wait. I actually bought 6 of them for that price each.

Paid $31.99 for Supernatural S3 on Blu.

Paid $41.99 for The Godfather Trilogy on Blu.

Paid $22.49 for When We Left Earth on Blu.

Paid $17.95 for Mad Men Season 1 on Blu.

Paid $14.99 for Kung-Fu Panda on Blu.

Paid $18.95 for Lonesome Dove on Blu.

Paid $8.99 for The Bank Job on Blu.

Paid $8.99 for Crank on Blu.

Paid $17.95 for the Rambo Trilogy on Blu.

Paid $29.98 for a Romancing The Stone / Jewel Of The Nile Blu-ray combo deal. That's $15 each.

He has one example, and you and a small minority of others are screaming, "AHHHHHHDGHDFHDF! There you go! I told you HD was expensive! It's gonna die if these prices remain so high!"

Oh, and by the way, I'm not even paying $15 to buy Step Brothers on Blu.

This guy has no peripheral vision whatsoever. He needs to actually USE THE DAMN PRODUCT before he has a right to bitch. Just like voting. Participate in the process, not just from the sidelines.

Doubting-Blu folk can try and use the B&M excuse for Blu-ray high prices, but the fact is, it is simply retarded to expect a B&M to give the consumer deals at any moment you decide to drop in. And it is accurately stupid and ignorant to expect Blu-ray consumers to NOT be using online retailers to compensate for these higher prices in B&M stores. But of course, people who don't think Blu is going to work conveniently toss aside the online factor.

I don't really disagree with the original article as well. Just because there are deals to be had once in awhile still doesn't change the fact that the typical price for discs in stores are $25-30 and that's what the typical consumer sees. $25 is a common price to see for movies. And load times are slow compared to DVD (not that I have a problem with it).

I suppose since most people that have upgraded to HD have an uncalibrated 42" LCD attached too high up on the wall and think it is cool, big, and high-quality (none of which are true), you might find that scenario works out as you have stated. However, those with even decent HT systems, let alone truly outstanding systems, will beg to differ.

Pretty sure I won't even Netflix Step Brothers. It's always a bad sign when a blogger picks something stupid to prove a point.