Evidently it's still cool to hate on Blu-ray: Harris Poll spin
by Ben Drawbaugh 
posted Jun 22nd 2009 at 11:54AM
We'd expect nothing less from some, and honestly 90 percent of the time we just ignore these types of posts, but when our friend CmdrTaco from Slashdot gets in on the fun we just can't help ourselves. It all started with that Harris Poll late last week in which stand-alone Blu-ray players got their own box instead of being grouped in with the PS3. So of course it's more fun to point out that only 7 percent of Americans own a stand-alone Blu-ray player than it is to recognize the fact that twice that many can actually watch Blu-ray Discs thanks to the PS3. So while it is true that HD DVD managed to sell more stand-alone players than Blu-ray, even today, it is still true that Sony's PS3 strategy was successful in selling more Blu-ray Discs than HD DVDs. Which is in the end what really matters.
Filed under: Blu-ray
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Bozster @ Jun 22nd 2009 12:10PM
Well I would disagree.. PS3 wasn't really the reason that Blu-ray won over HD DVD.. it was heavy payouts, connections and deals under the table. Consumer really didn't have a lot of choice.
Did Sony help to sell more units at that point in time than HD DVD..sure.. PS3 did play some roll because people were starving for games so they started buying some Blu-rays. However it's not exclusively because of PS3. It was much more BOGOs and giveaways by Sony then anything else because they could. After all they are a studio alone.
It is without a doubt in my mind that seeing these numbers we can definitely imagine HD DVD being much much more successful with consumers than Blu-ray is today if it had won. Most people were actually buying standalones and even though they were massively outnumbered they were still managing to push 50:50, 60:40 ratios in sales. That was telling us obviously that even with drastically smaller numbers the attachment ratio was off the charts.
Imagine how many people would've owned HD DVD players today when Blu-ray hasn't even surpassed HD DVD today in standalones. That's pretty sad to be honest.
In the end, some people can spin it but when numbers like these come out it becomes obvious that PR and FUD is still very present among BDA supporting companies.
3dpenguin @ Jun 22nd 2009 12:33PM
I find it interesting that the numbers for Blu-ray have pretty much become stagnant around the 10% mark for the dollar sold margins by Neilson, which as we both know thanks to mark up differences between DVD and Blu-ray is actually misleading because the actual units sold hardly ever brakes 10% of the units sold market. It’s gotten so predictable that anybody outside of Home Media Magazine, a company which strongly supports Blu-ray, don't even track the sales figures anymore.
Nick @ Jun 22nd 2009 2:19PM
The format war was unnecessary. It never should have happened. Imagine if there had been a format war over DVD?
Hindsight doesn't do anyone any good though...
I'd be loathe to underestimate the PS3 in the Blu Ray game. Considering how shitty the machine was and still IS for games, I'd imagine that most of the hardcore gamers would have bought xbox instead of bothering with the Playstation. Much cheaper, Much better games, none of this installation shit... Yeah, if I didn't want BD, I'd have bought an Xbox first, hell I had to buy one eventually anyway because the PS3 didn't have half the games I wanted, and they had castrated versions of the games I did want, with all the good DLC going microsoft way.
So you have to expect that a lot of gamers who were just in it for games stayed far away from Sony, but a lot of people who are big gamers already have the HDTV and decent surround sound system, so they could USE the blu ray, why wouldn't they? Besides, the PS3 is still one of the best blu ray players around. It plays everything, in the latest profile, has a great firmware update system, plays Divx and a shitload of other PC file formats, can stream from your computer (I use that as much as I use it for BD), and now you can get hulu and netflix on it. Why the hell would you buy anything else?
Multi-format-mayhem @ Jun 22nd 2009 3:49PM
It is hilarious watching the Blu-ray evangelists making excuses as their beloved format fall flat on it face.
We now have some loopy nutter on here who claims that Harris are "disgruntled HD DVD" fans.
Beyond parody!
I'm still LMAO as every month goes by and Blu-ray fails to gain any 'traction' whatsoever in the true mass-market.
(and it is especially amusing to see with every month that goes by a new alternative means of delivery comes in & chips away at even the small minority-share niche Blu-ray can look forward to)
Blu-ray was the really dumb choice (as later events have been showing only too clearly) and the one way to ensure that high def on disk got stuck as a high margin short-lived niche.
To those that spread the word & worked for this I say well done guys!
Thanks for all the fun.
Multi-format-mayhem @ Jun 22nd 2009 3:54PM
It's already too late.
Blu-ray took less than 4.5% of total disc sales last year and this year the trade expect it to take less than 7%.
With growth rates like that it's already over.
Far too little far too late.
EatingPie @ Jun 22nd 2009 7:38PM
This misinformation needs correction.
Just before the end of the format war, Toshiba payed Paramount to go HD-DVD exclusive, specifically for the HD-DVD only production of Star Trek TOS HD-DVD. When that set was released it sold a total of 2000 copies. Yes, 2000. Total. Also, Toshiba was starting to set up a subsidy program for Chinese companies to make HD-DVD players (analysts thought they were nuts because they were already hemorrhaging cash at this point, and this would only undermine their own sales).
These are both cases of "bribes" or "under the table dealing" that many posters have made against Sony. And let's face it, Warner went BD *after* those horrible numbers on the very much anticipated Star Trek HD-DVD set.
Also of note...
Blu-ray adoption has been FASTER than DVD adoption at the same point in the format's life. That changed in January or February, but that's because of the recession hitting full force.
From the beginning of the year, Blu-ray has sold 10% to 15% of DVD every week. The average is now about 12% of DVD sales, not these deflated "8%" figures you're seeing. The trend has been upwards, as Blu-ray sales have increased during this year.
The cited report mentions none of these things.
I don't understand what people have against Blu-ray, and why they are so adamant about trying to knock it down (see above posts). It is the best Home Video format we have ever had, and it's quite spectacular.
-Pie
Multi-format-mayhem @ Jun 22nd 2009 9:20PM
Eating Pie -
those sales % numbers you're quoting are just the usual cherry-picked garbage.
The facts are (as even this site had to post) that in 2008 Blu-ray took 4.45% of the total movie disk sales.
"Blu-ray software shipments grew .... to 63.2 million units in 2008, from 18 million units in 2007, DEG said.
DVD shipments also were down during the year, declining to 1.4 billion units, an almost 15% drop from 2007 unit shipments."
www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6627437.html?nid=3511
The fact for this year is that even the trade (always guaranteed to be blowing hard for a little PR-boosting optimism) expect sales at less than 7%.
"Although Blu-ray sales were up, Screen Digest said the format “barely made a dent in the missing revenue”.
“We expect Blu-ray to account for 6.9 per cent of international video spending this year – assuming there is strong promotional activity [by the studios],” said Helen Davis Jayalath, senior analyst at Screen Digest."
www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8768baf0-59d5-11de-b687-00144feabdc0.html
Blu-ray's true growth rate has been tiny and have shrunk lately (it has not out-paced DVD even with the huge difference being launched with the PS3 has brought it and a host of movies aimed at the 'PS3 demographic).
No wonder the cheer-leaders for Blu-ray here stopped posting the Nielson numbers.
Last week sales 'grew' to $16 million - up from under $8 million the week before.
That's poor with a capital P.
Time is running out, fast.
For those of us who never believed it would be anything but a short-lived niche format it's ok, we'll probably jump on the next one too, it's no biggee if you have the $.
For those who fooled themselves (and worse, others) less fortunate that it would become 'the next DVD' and take a majority share of the retail movie market it must be a little sickening to watch it all going slowly turning to cr@p heading down the sh*tter.
Bozster @ Jun 23rd 2009 1:34AM
Eating pie..do you have any idea how much Sony paid in order to keep the studios?
Fox and Warner were ready to leave Sony's camp prior to CES only because Sony paid $500 million to Warner Brothers and another $150 million to Fox as Fox was unsatisfied with replication and other manufacturing costs involved with Blu-ray. Not only that they paid them but the deal of the payments was to make announcements and other pricing structures to specifically hurt HD DVD as much as possible which was seen in the way they acted. They first announced the Blu switch while all HD DVD Group members were on the way to CES that year so it would catch them at the worst possible time and they would have no response. That's why Toshiba didn't respond to anything at CES. It was a real back stab. Secondly, they did the early Blu-ray release of movies instead of HD DVD even though they should've respected their agreements until March that year.
Winners write history of course but it was really a power play with cash and deals going down under the table. It was certainly not decided by consumers as we can see by these statistics. But I guess life is like that. I'm glad that we have at least one full HD format anyways. But to say that Sony didn't really pay anything is silly. The future of their company depended on Blu-ray winning so they would've paid anything. If HD DVD won that would've been not only the end of PS3 but they would have no way to recoup the money they spent on Blu so it was really something they wouldn't leave to chance no matter what it cost.
http://formatwarcentral.com/2008/01/04/warner-swayed-by-500-million-from-the-bda/
But this is not the only amount that Sony spent. They've spent through the nose just to get Fox to stick with them to begin with then split the hundreds of millions of dollars with Panasonic to help Disney stay on track with Blu. Officially Panasonic was paying for Disney's tours but Sony took a hit as well on the final balance sheet. Not to mention the MGM purchase that was also another investment you can attribute to Blu-ray because they wanted to secure their library to be exclusive to Blu-ray. The whopping amount to get part of MGM was huge in the overall scheme of things.
Sony was already known to do things like this before as well. They took a similar approach a few years ago to gain exclusivity for its Super Audio CD format. Abkco Records reportedly received a large sum from Sony to re-release the early Rolling Stones catalog in that format. Consumers decided they were happier with iPods and that was it. It wasn't a power play such as we had with format war.
Toshiba's Paramount payoff was nothing but a response to an already existing payoff game Sony has started.
Sony lost over $3 billion dollars alone in payoffs and other expenses just to try to get Blu-ray to win and whether consumers love it or hate it they succeeded. As we can see obviously the format who was not favored by consumers won and unfortunately those of us who do want to get great HD quality are now, still, carrying the sloppy format 3 years into it's existence.
Multi-format-mayhem @ Jun 23rd 2009 8:06AM
The joke of it all is that in many instances Blu-ray on-line prices are at or around DVD levels.
Still sales do not take off and obviously the higher margin that was expected has vanished before things even get going, leaving only the early adopter & the PS3 gang to get screwed - so much for your 'loyalty' eh boys?
The fact that the prospect of there being any money in it is vanishing fast is what gives us all the final guarantee that Blu-ray won't be around for too long.
BTW Bozster
I know you gave some of the losses Sony flushed away on PS3 there
(never to be recouped, even if they do - eventually - start to make money on the PS3 sales price v production costs)
but did anyone ever unearth the figure for the vast amount of R&D spent on this white elephant?
I'd be interested to know just what Sony (and the rest) have flushed down the lav on this one.
How many $ billions?
Multi-format-mayhem @ Jun 23rd 2009 8:18AM
Highest RankedEatingPie
"I don't understand what people have against Blu-ray"
From day 1 the BDA been little more than a bunch of lying liars lying to us about it all.
I suspect that has a lot to do with it.
Sony's arrogance in all of this has been incredible and bound to trun off a lot of people.
Plus the fact that it's primarily a Sony product and in view of Sony's criminal (think root kit, any proibvate person would have been jailed for that stunt) past and their well-known tack-record for proprietary and trouble-some products (that don't like to play nice with anything but a Sony product) it just means a hell of a lot of people wouldn't touch them or their stuff with a barge-pole.
But tbh it's all immaterial now, the damage is done & quite frankly Blu-ray (compared to the original hopes for it) is f*cked.
L3 @ Jun 22nd 2009 12:27PM
At what percentage of ownership is the 'Early Adopter' moniker surpassed?
3%? 5, 10%?
NorthCranky @ Jun 22nd 2009 12:38PM
Don't ignore the word early.
Kumar @ Jun 22nd 2009 2:29PM
No joke,
You'd think this many years out new releases would stop putting the disclaimer on the disc about 'new technology'....yet they still need to b/c of the firmware updates.
NorthCranky @ Jun 22nd 2009 4:24PM
It is new if your buying it new in a new box. (j/k)
Still, new should last longer than early.
Mr. E @ Jun 22nd 2009 9:23PM
"Early adopter" status is surpassed when your 60+ year old parents buy players, as both of mine have.
At this point, it doesn't make sense to buy a DVD-only player any more, unless you're buying for a specific niche like in-car or portable viewing, or you just like to punish yourself.
Paul @ Jun 22nd 2009 12:36PM
"heavy payouts, connections and deals under the table"? Of course, and most of them coming from Toshiba just to keep HD DVD in the game. But really, let's move on.
This whole report defies logic. The war ended 1.5 years ago. Manufactures essentially stopped making players within a few months. Studios stopped making HD DVD discs, also within a few months. So for the past year, or more, we've had, practically speaking, no HD DVD players being manufactured and no new discs produced. And we're supposed to believe that HD DVD is still a strong seller?
Every industry sales report for the last year and a half refutes the findings of this poll.
Color me not even remotely convinced.
Bozster @ Jun 23rd 2009 1:42AM
Or the truth is actually coming out and we see how strong HD DVD really was in standalone sales and how poorly Blu-ray has been doing.
You know, when you see facts, suddenly the BS you've been drinking from the other side up tot that point now suddenly stops making sense and you start coming out with conspiracy theories.
There's no surprise, HD DVD still sold more standalone player than Blu-ray 3 years intro it's existince and a year and a half since format war ended. It's simple as that.
That's the problem that many here on Engadget HD have been pointing out. Numbers you see in some press (like Home Media Magazine) and similar along even with how Neilsen numbers are presented even here on Engadget tell you a story BDA wants you to believe in, not reality.
Blu-ray is still very much a niche market.
Greg @ Jun 22nd 2009 12:38PM
Given the technological knowledge of both the interrogated persons and the guy who made the analysis and/ or questionning, the poll is obviously bogus.
I mean, putting the PS3 in "other HD DVD players" in the analysis?
Plus it is painfully obvious (with the % and the way things are phrased) that some of the persons interrogated assimilate HD DVD with Blu Ray (as in High Definition DVD), so unless we could ensure with 100% certainty that none of the respondent said "yes" in having a HD DVD player when they actually have a Blu Ray disc player, and that the person doing the poll understands the difference (apparently they don't), this is of absolutely no value and brings no insight what so ever.
3dpenguin @ Jun 22nd 2009 12:43PM
Well from a sales point of view it's the percentage which is considered a stable market, anybody buying in before that is hedging their bets on a market which might fail, these are early adopters. In the home entertainment market which is driven by profit margins for the companies who are releasing, not the format sales per say, you are looking at a market percentage which will give the market enough stability to where the prices can be lowered while still maintaining an acceptable profit margin, this can only be done by increasing the units produced, which is cheaper. Early adoption of DVD was 25% if I remember right. By loose definition an early adopter is anybody who buys into a market before the market has actually become finalized, so changes may be made and bugs may be encountered before the final market is established, these adopters not only have to worry about the sales percentages but the fact that the final version of the technology might not be completely compatible with what they initially bought and that a competing technology might come out and surpass the market before the one they bought actually takes off.
3dpenguin @ Jun 22nd 2009 12:55PM
You can't include the PS3 in the player market, a person that buys a DVD, Blu-ray, HD DVD, LaserDisc, VHS, etc player intends on using it for that purpose, where as there is no guarantee that 100% of the people who bought a PS3 will also buy Blu-ray movies, this was a major argument between HD DVD and Blu-ray back when both were competing because Blu-ray had 10x the number of players thanks to the PS3 but never controlled more than 60% of the market at the height of the competition, so the PS3 was contributing a good portion of the owners of the system but when considering the Blu-ray stand alone player market was also adding to the sales it was far from 100% of the owners.
Were you interviewed for this survey, you can't state how the questions were posed, but often in these surveys they will list the devices before taking an answer, and since Blu-ray is listed separately from HD DVD this would mean they were denoting the differences between the different HD disc players, and assuming that someone who owned a Blu-ray player saying they owned an HD DVD player is an assumption that you can't really make without knowing the precise wording of the questionnaire.
mitchelljd @ Jun 22nd 2009 1:34PM
this harris poll is idiotic, why? according to it more people have hd dvd than blu-ray. if this shows what great statistics they get from the public, what other divine info they have that is wrong?
Jon @ Jun 22nd 2009 2:36PM
Ah... for those halcyon days of better economic conditions and format wars!
Enough reflection- can't afford it anymore. Therefore, allow me to retort:
1. We all know that this war was ended by means of studio bribery, not technical merit or consumer choice.
2. Those numbers are comparing stand-alone players. Toshiba did its best to flood the market with HD-DVD players sold below cost, while BD manufacturers refused to cut prices. Just as the war ended the economy fell off a cliff, leading many to postpone or cancel AV equipment purchases. Looking at it that way it's quite believable that there are still more HD-DVD players out there, regardless of the discontinuation of the format. (My HD-A2 does a noticeably better job of up-converting a DVD than my PS3, so it earns its HDMI plug. Of course YMMV with a different BD player.)
3. Everybody always figured the PS3 was the ace in the hole, but there is a sizable share of that market that didn't buy it with movies in mind. A lot of these hooked up to Junior's 15-year-old 24-inch bedroom TV, not the newer, fancier set in the living room.
4. Merely beating out HD-DVD does not guarantee Blu-Ray's success. Neither format brought a must-have feature to the table the same way VHS and DVD did. Streaming HD video, on the other hand, does. The only way one can see any value-add in BD-Live is through the rose-colored glasses of a movie studio exec, and they don't include those in the case with the movie.
Tim dean @ Jun 23rd 2009 4:12AM
You also have to consider the poll asked only 2,569 people. IMO this poll means nothing.
jaezell @ Jun 22nd 2009 2:09PM
So, I guess that's why the PS3 is selling so well compared to the DS, Wii, XBox 360, and PS2? Successful strategy indeed. It's a shame that Sony was the major player in the Blu-Ray game. I do like the increased size and durability of the Blu-Ray, but everything else I had to give to HD-DVD. I still miss the menus of HD-DVD everytime I try to watch a Blu-Ray and it takes more than a minute (at least) to bring up a menu or to play a movie. Not to mention the Disney must-watch previews! If I took all the tech specs of a Blu-Ray disc and the menu system (and reasonable price) of the HD-DVD; then we'd have it right.
Andy Sullivan @ Jun 22nd 2009 2:25PM
I own a blu-ray player and most of my friends have jumped on board. One criteria has been prevalent in all of our purchases and that is the players ability to up convert SD DVD's. We seldom buy blu-ray movies because of the very poor return on investment. Last night I watched the blu-ray version of "Fantastic Four Return of the Silver Surfer". While the SQ was quite nice, the PQ was at best slightly better than the SD version. Plus, for a movie that has been out for quite some time now the $25 price tag is still way too far above SD prices ($14.99 at release date). If it's not an action adventure movie with lots of big sound then most of the folks I know will buy the SD version. It's not a matter of blu-ray hating, just bang for the buck loving.
Amar @ Jun 22nd 2009 2:17PM
I folded and got a ps3, but I still believe HD DVD was so much better then blu ray. Sony did win cause of backroom deals, not because blu ray was better...
jason w @ Jun 22nd 2009 8:33PM
What i miss about HDDVD is putting in a disc and it playing. I never had a issue with that. I still dont. With BR I can buy a movie (Ironman or Dark Knight) and it will play on my PS3 but not my LG super blu player. Its just the way it is.
But now the battle is over. Lets get cheaper disc. Walmart has had some $10.00 disc. I love those.
DrXym @ Jun 22nd 2009 2:35PM
If people are saying HD DVD it's probably because they're referring to Blu Ray but don't know what the tech is called. It's completely absurd to assume they mean the actual long dead and buried HD DVD. It's a pretty stupid poll really for being so ambiguous.
DrXym @ Jun 22nd 2009 2:44PM
That or more likely the more I think about it is they think that an upscaling DVD player is HD DVD.
harrisiswrong @ Jun 22nd 2009 2:55PM
HD DVD, in its lifetime, sold 600k standalone players and 300k xbox add ons. Bluray standalones sold 400k units alone in Q1 2009. Yet we are supposed to believe that in all of 2008, HD DVD players somehow outsold bluray players, when HD DVD players were gone from the shelves for ~75% of the year? This poll is so flawed it's amazing to me how it made it out the door. Harris should be embarrassed.
NIUHuskie @ Jun 22nd 2009 3:01PM
And if HD-DVD had won, there would be people today posting "HD-DVD won because of backroom deals, not because it was better". Remember, they tried just as hard to win the format war by subsidizing players at an unsustainable level along with paying Paramount a large chunk of cash to be exclusive, among other things.
Both sides had their own advantages and flaws, but BD won and it doesn't matter how. I really don't think the landscape would be all that different had HD-DVD won. We'd still be in a major recession that would be limiting the sale of players and discs. People still wouldn't want to pay any premium over DVD, regardless of the fact that the premium was slightly smaller than on BD. There would still be those that would say that SD is "good enough". And there would still be the camp that swears that internet streaming will kill discs before they get a chance to overtake DVD.
Happy BD Owner @ Jun 22nd 2009 3:46PM
Actually, the landscape would have been slightly different.
If HD-DVD would have won, then the prices would have gone UP dramatically when the Toshiba side would have tried to recuperate the losses the made by selling HD-DVD players drastically below manufacturing prices, especially with the economic downturn.
We would have a lot of (former) HD-DVD enthusiasts moaning all over the place about prices when they realised that the cheap HD-DVD prices where mostly a lie and now they where hit with the real price levels, which where not that different from what BD is today, which by the way is, at least around here, about the same as the prices I paid for DVD's when the format was new.
Bozster @ Jun 23rd 2009 1:57AM
Huskie, it would've been different. Due to it's easier to manufacture and cheaper prices of production relying on DVD technology the profit margin would have been higher not to mention that there would be actually a valid reason to use combos to sell DVD/HD DVDs for a lower price.
HD DVD was so much more consumer and market friendly that there would've been so many ways to push the format. You couldn't do that with Blu-ray. The 2 differences are that HD DVD was HD DVD being much more mainstream friendly. It had hundreds of replication factories already ready because existing DVD replication factories could transform their existing equipment for very very cheap to support HD DVD.
Of course it would've been different. There would've been more competition and would drive prices down. That's how it works. When you have 4 or 5 replication plants for Blu-ray that most of it is Sony's there is no prospect of lower prices on a global level.
It's basic economy.
And, Happy BD Owner
Where do you pull that nonsense. When was the last time you have seen that any player that goes in RETAIL for a lower price went up. What you are saying doesn't make sense at all and it sounds more as if you are justify flaws and BS that Blu-ray has been faced with since it won. Now since Blu-ray is selling miserably, HD DVD would've been even worse and they would raise price to $1000 per player. I mean please. HD DVD was ALWAYS cheaper then Blu-ray. Almost half the price. First HD DVD player was $500, first Blu-ray player was $1000.
That was the whole point of Toshiba setting the new standard for Chinese territories that relied on HDDVD.
The future would've been much different if HD DVD had won. Much more people would have HD now in their homes.
Happy BD Owner @ Jun 23rd 2009 9:23AM
Bozster, the one talking pure nonsense is you. Of course the prices would have gone up. How long do you think Tishiba could have sold the players at a huge loss? But of course some people, like you apparently, where stupid enough to believe that the prices at which HD-DVD players where put on the market at the end of the format war actually represented real sustainable prices. They where not. And no, I am not justifying flaws. Appart from the fact that BD costs about as much as a DVD (when that format was new) I don't really see that many flaws. The former HD-DVD camp likes to make up flaws though.
DRF @ Jun 23rd 2009 6:57PM
Yes, but at least Toshiba was passing the savings on to the consumer as well as the studios. When did Sony ever do that?
Happy BD Owner @ Jun 22nd 2009 3:31PM
This poll is just a total pile of BS from some disgruntled HD-DVD fan! Not very surprising that people like Bozster a quick to latch onto garbage like this. Wonder when these people are going to get over the fact that BD is doing quite well.
The BD part of places where I buy my discs (like MediaMarkt in Geneva) is steadily enlarging their BD section. So is the supermarkets on the French side. The simple fact is that BD is not really doing bad, especially taken the extrem financial situation into account.
chuckdaly @ Jun 22nd 2009 3:43PM
"Still cool to hate on Blu-ray"?? Someone needs to get their head out of the sand. Blu-ray is floundering and all evidence points to that.
That said, Sony is robbing Peter to pay Paul. Blu-ray needed the PS3 for success, but the PS3 is failing due to its inclusion of Blu-ray. As flawed as the Harris Poll is, it only bring attention to the fact the Blu-ray format is failing.
Happy BD Owner @ Jun 22nd 2009 3:50PM
Blu-ray is floundering? Well I guess you're the one that needs to get your head out of the sand!
chuckdaly @ Jun 22nd 2009 5:35PM
What is the penetration rate for Blu-ray today? How dependent is it still on the PS3? BTW, how well is the PS3 doing? Of 2008s top 100 selling Movie Discs, were any of them Blu-ray discs?
No one is telling you NOT to enjoy your Blu-ray purchases, just to take your BD glasses off before reading or writing posts about the subject.
EatingPie @ Jun 22nd 2009 7:45PM
To answer your questions, check www.blu-raystats.com.
The market penetration of BD is about 12% that of DVD in the last 3 weeks in a row. That number is steadily (but slowly) increasing. And pretty much every major home video release is in that range.
I bought my PS3 for BD playback and it's great. To say "you can't count the PS3" is completely bogus. When it was released, it was very highly rated for BD playback, and cost the same or less than competing players... AND it played games. LOTS of people bought it for Blu-ray.
-Pie
chuckdaly @ Jun 22nd 2009 9:06PM
Blu-ray market share isn't increasing but remains stagnant. Blu-ray had 13% the week ending Oct 5, 2008. That was 8 months ago!!!!
No one says you can't count PS3s, its just that the PS3 is sucking on the console front. What of Blu-ray as its PS3 life boats springs leaks.
3dpenguin @ Jun 22nd 2009 9:34PM
Eating Pie
You need to go and check your facts...
Blu-ray is averaging 10-15% of the revenue Home Video market, not 10-15% of the units market, there is a big difference. The revenue for Blu-ray is increasing as the movie industry lowers the retail value of DVD, this is increasing the margin between the cost of DVD and Blu-ray. Right now the market variant between prices for Blu-ray on DVD is between 25% and 50% greater in price, sometimes higher. So for every Blu-ray disc sold DVD has to sell 1.5 discs, so Blu-ray has to sell less volume to make up that 13% pulled down in comparison to DVD which is cheaper, unit market as stated before isn't in the 10% range on a regular basis.
This numbers argument goes the same way that back when HD DVD would release big titles Sony, Disney, and Fox would all hold BOGOs and falsely increase their sales numbers to maintain the 60% margin they would hold on normal weeks.
gold5225 @ Jun 22nd 2009 3:48PM
You also need to realize this poll was just in one place it only asked a few People who lived in Rochester New York it's not gonna be very reliable because of varying incomes and shit.
gold5225 @ Jun 22nd 2009 3:51PM
And OFF TOPIC:
Can i change my password from the weird numbers letters combo it sent to my email?
andy vt @ Jun 22nd 2009 4:02PM
The numbers by income are really interesting. Look at the large/HD tv #s against HDDVD and BD; where is the last column sourcing its HD content?
I would have liked to see the poll questions (in the PDF) broken out by income as well.
matt90 @ Jun 22nd 2009 4:36PM
Out of all the people I know, only a couple have bluray and neither of them buy bluray movies. I don't think bluray will be the norm for at least 10 more years. For me the movies are too expensive. I could buy 4 dvds for the price of one brand new bluray. And to get the full bluray experience you need a nice ass tv and a bad ass surround sound (which most people don't have) or else it is just a glorified DVD.
Fred @ Jun 22nd 2009 4:43PM
Anyone who reads the poll realizes that the poll makes no sense. Your telling me that in 2008 1% had a HD-DVD add on for the 360 and this year it has tripled to 3%. That HD-DVD players are flying off the shelves this year as opposed to last year. Guys, you need to use logic when reading these things and realize two possiblities.
1. That people think HD-DVD is an upscaler DVD, which is not on this list of options. (wierd)
or
2. This list is full of s$*t. possibly made up. not saying it is, but their is a chance.
Now as to everything else. Here we go again. Blu-Ray is doing just fine, all you haters keep believing somthing else, or just leave me alone. I totally agree that Sony helped pull Blu to a win over HD-DVD. And I totally agree that HD-DVD was the better product, and to me the more logical product. Far more advanced than Blu at that time. But Blu cannot take over if it keeps putting these ridiculous price points for their movies.
Doug @ Jun 22nd 2009 5:18PM
The numbers here reflect polls taken at the beginning of each year. So 2009 numbers represent the state of the market at the end of 2008.
Keep in mind that it was in 2008 when Toshiba announced it would be discontinuing HD-DVD, so the prices of the players dropped like crazy. The Xbox 360 add-on went from $179 to $50. I could totally see the market share of the add-on device tripling as a result of a price drop that big.
Harris is a reputable company. I don't think they'd just be making these numbers up just for the fun of it.
With 93% of non-BR owners "not likely" to buy a BR player, I'm not sure that BR really is "doing just fine." The numbers seem to indicate that people are much more interested in downloaded media.
Doug @ Jun 22nd 2009 5:08PM
One thing you missed is that HD-DVD discs outsold Blu-ray discs.
In the prior 6 months, consumers bought, on average, 6 DVDs, 0.7 HD-DVDs, and 0.5 Blu-ray discs. That gives HD-DVD the sales edge for that 6 month period at the end of 2008.
Doug @ Jun 22nd 2009 5:13PM
Another thing the data points out (if you read the original publication)... 93% of people polled who do not currently own a Blu-ray player are "not likely" to buy one in the next year. That is not a good number for the BR camp.
The study goes on to point out that people are moving to, and are more likely to use, downloaded media. The future of Blu is looking a little blue.