[*TL]

Originally Posted by goMac 

Yeah, again, $150 is pocket change. It's hardly going to make a difference in Paramount's coffer ....

Wow, high rollers here! Paramount Home Video's net revenues for the last quarter were $545M. Assuming similar revenues for this quarter, an extra 25% in the kitty isn't bad. Heck, net earnings for all of Viacom were "only" $433M last quarter, so this deal has the potential to pad the entire corporation's bottom line by 1/3 without anybody lifting a finger.

Not bad for a day's work.

[climber]

Good point, $150 mil is hardly pocket change.

What bugs me is that even if the race has only just begun, BR is definitely in the lead right now. Without the latest deals, BR could have won the race by the end of this year. That clearly will not happen now. In order for HD-DVD to win they will have to slug it out until at best 2009. However you slice it or dice it this extends this format war. I for one will not purchase anything until it is over. I doubt I am alone.

[wallinbl]

Just get this stupid format war over with already. Get a player in the neighborhood of $100 already! I don't care much about media prices as I only rent.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by *TL 

Wow, high rollers here! Paramount Home Video's net revenues for the last quarter were $545M. Assuming similar revenues for this quarter, an extra 25% in the kitty isn't bad. Heck, net earnings for all of Viacom were "only" $433M last quarter, so this deal has the potential to pad the entire corporation's bottom line by 1/3 without anybody lifting a finger.

Not bad for a day's work.

On the other hand, the average movie costs $100 mil to make. How many movies does Paramount/Dreamworks make a year?

[PaperNotes]

Originally Posted by goMac 

On the other hand, the average movie costs $100 mil to make. How many movies does Paramount/Dreamworks make a year?

A handful compared to Sony and its subsidiaries and even then the best ones are by Spielberg who will continue to see his movies released on Blu-ray too. So the bribes and incentives paid by the HD DVD camp are a waste of money. I see Blu-ray continuing to expand their lead especially in Europe now that the PS3 will have a DVR option.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by PaperNotes 

A handful compared to Sony and its subsidiaries and even then the best ones are by Spielberg who will continue to see his movies released on Blu-ray too.

Yeah, that wasn't exactly what I was noting, but thanks...

[mitchell_pgh]

IMHO This is why Blu-ray will win.

The Numbers - Top-Grossing Distributors 1995 to 2007

If you look at the distributors that are over 1%, this is the breakout.

Blu-ray - 48.62%
Both - 19.32%
HD-DVD - 24.72%

So, if you buy a Blu-ray player, you should have access to over just under 70% of the films... and if you buy a HD-DVD player, you should have access to ~45% of the films.

Granted, not every film will be released, but that's my logic.

[jokell82]

That is, until Warner goes HD exclusive. And Lionsgate goes neutral.

[PaperNotes]

Originally Posted by jokell82 

That is, until Warner goes HD exclusive. And Lionsgate goes neutral.

That won't happen. Their strongest sales have been Blu-ray titles.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by PaperNotes 

That won't happen. Their strongest sales have been Blu-ray titles.

You know, you're right - why would anyone do that? Oh right, Paramount did.

Warner has leaned HD DVD since the beginning - it should shock no one if they went exclusive.

[PaperNotes]

Originally Posted by jokell82 

You know, you're right - why would anyone do that? Oh right, Paramount did.

We never hear such scandalous stories of bribery about Blu-ray...

Paramount and DreamWorks garnered "incentives" valued at $150 million to agree to release their films in high-definition home video exclusively in the HD DVD format, the New York Times and Daily Variety reported today (Wednesday). Both publications said that the HD DVD camp had agreed to "promotional considerations" amounting to $50 million for Paramount and $100 million for DreamWorks over the next 18 months. The Times indicated that an undisclosed amount of cash also exchanged hands. Variety's revelation was buried in an article about director Michael Bay's flip-flop over the two film companies' decision. Bay had originally posted a message titled "Paramount pisses me off!" on his personal website in which he remarked: "I want people to see my movies in the best formats possible. For them to deny people who have Blu-ray sucks!" He vowed not to direct Transformers 2 if it would not be released in the competing Blu-ray format, which currently outsells HD DVD by three to one. By the end of the day, however, Bay had backtracked, writing, "I overreacted. I heard where Paramount i$$$ coming from and the future of HD. ... I like what I heard." Fellow director Steven Spielberg remained unconvinced, balking at the Paramount/DreamWorks deal (as he did with Universal's exclusive deal with the HD DVD camp). A spokesman indicated that his films will continue to be released exclusively in the Blu-ray format, regardless of the studio for which they are made. DreamWorks marketing chief Marvin Levy said Tuesday that Spielberg continues to be a "big supporter of Blu-ray."

HD DVD is smacking of desperation and will have to send in the yakuza next.

Warner has leaned HD DVD since the beginning - it should shock no one if they went exclusive.

Certain people in Warner can lean any way they want. The financial officers and shareholders will be looking at sales.

What happened to your claim that HD DVD has a 51GB format in the labs when the Paramount spokesman said 45GB is the largest HD DVD in the labs? Why did you balk when it was pointed out to you that Blu-ray has a 200GB disc in labs?

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by PaperNotes 

We never hear such scandalous stories of bribery about Blu-ray...

Never heard of Blockbuster or Target then, have you?

Originally Posted by PaperNotes 

HD DVD is smacking of desperation and will have to send in the yakuza next.

So when HD DVD does it it's desperation, but when Blu-Ray does it it's good business? Check back in this thread - the exact same thing was said about HD DVD when they gave away 5 free movies with their players. Oh but then Blu-Ray did it and it was a good idea.

Originally Posted by PaperNotes 

Certain people in Warner can lean any way they want. The financial officers and shareholders will be looking at sales.

Or, they can look at costs and attach rates. Which is something some of the Blu-Ray fans just can't understand.

Originally Posted by PaperNotes 

What happened to your claim that HD DVD has a 51GB format in the labs when the Paramount spokesman said 45GB is the largest HD DVD in the labs? Why did you balk when it was pointed out to you that Blu-ray has a 200GB disc in labs?

Paramount isn't the one working on the discs, and the latest news was 51gb (as a way to one-up BD).

And I didn't balk - the 200gb Blu-Ray disc is not backwards compatible with older players. The TL HD DVD *IS*. That's a big difference between the two.

[PaperNotes]

[quote]

Originally Posted by jokell82 

Never heard of Blockbuster or Target then, have you?

Where is the story of bribery?

So when HD DVD does it it's desperation, but when Blu-Ray does it it's good business?

Where are the desperate sales figures for Blu-ray?

Or, they can look at costs and attach rates. Which is something some of the Blu-Ray fans just can't understand.

Where are figures for the attach rates for HD DVD?

And I didn't balk - the 200gb Blu-Ray disc is not backwards compatible with older players. The TL HD DVD *IS*.

But a Blu-ray drive that supports 200GB+ discs supports older discs. Discs that have outsold HD DVD by a larger margin every month. If you're going to respond that nobody will upgrade to a newer Blu-ray drive in the future, you can expect responses from those who have bought updated DVD drives over the years when new features were added such as support for recordable discs (DVD+RW, DVD-RW, and dual format). Not just stand alones but computer based drives too.

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by PaperNotes 

Where is the story of bribery?
Where are the desperate sales figures for Blu-ray?
Where are figures for the attach rates for HD DVD?

Try reading more of this thread than the last page. Then take part in the discussion. I'm not repeating pages of posts just for you.

Originally Posted by PaperNotes 

But a Blu-ray drive that supports 200GB+ discs supports older discs. Discs that have outsold HD DVD by a larger margin every month. If you're going to respond that nobody will upgrade to a newer Blu-ray drive in the future, you can expect responses from those who have bought updated DVD drives over the years when new features were added such as support for recordable discs (DVD+RW, DVD-RW, and dual format). Not just stand alones but computer based drives too.

That has nothing to do with the fact that Sony will leave all early adopters in the dust if they decide to use those discs. Hell, they're about to make some players obsolete with the 1.1 spec. I don't know how anyone can think that is acceptable.

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally Posted by jokell82 

Or, they can look at costs and attach rates. Which is something some of the Blu-Ray fans just can't understand.

The problem with your "attach rates" comment is you lump all PS3 sales in to that figure when everyone knows that the PS3 is primarily a gaming system, and a first class Blu-ray player second.

Also, cost is a tricky thing considering the cost of most HD TVs. The average cost of a HD TV is still in the $1000+ range. Do you really think someone is going to say "Sure, I'll buy the $2300 TV, but I'm not willing to spend the $200 difference between the lowest end HD-DVD player and the lowest end Blu-ray player..." Especially when Blu-ray currently has more the movies most people want.

HD movies are still in their infancy... call me when even a quarter of the population knows the difference between HD-DVD and Blu-ray.

I'm starting to think that hybrid players will win out.

[PaperNotes]

Originally Posted by jokell82 

Try reading more of this thread than the last page. Then take part in the discussion. I'm not repeating pages of posts just for you.

I have read everything. You conjured up your attachment rates like David Blaine trapped in ice on a bad day, and there are no stories of Blu-ray bribery.

That has nothing to do with the fact that Sony will leave all early adopters in the dust if they decide to use those discs.

Sony will do blah blah blah. If you don't work there this is a conspiracy theory. Future Blu-ray drives will be compatible with older discs. That makes more sense.

Hell, they're about to make some players obsolete with the 1.1 spec.

Source that all Blu-ray discs already shipped will not function?

[jokell82]

Originally Posted by mitchell_pgh 

The problem with your "attach rates" comment is you lump all PS3 sales in to that figure when everyone knows that the PS3 is primarily a gaming system, and a first class Blu-ray player second.

So when it benefits the Blu-Ray camp, the PS3 install base means they have a TON of player sales. But if you bring up attach rates, suddenly they don't count? I don't buy it.

Originally Posted by mitchell_pgh 

Also, cost is a tricky thing considering the cost of most HD TVs. The average cost of a HD TV is still in the $1000+ range. Do you really think someone is going to say "Sure, I'll buy the $2300 TV, but I'm not willing to spend the $200 difference between the lowest end HD-DVD player and the lowest end Blu-ray player..." Especially when Blu-ray currently has more the movies most people want.

Considering Vizio is now the top selling LCD HDTV, I'm not sure you can say the average cost is $1000+. And how do you figure Blu-Ray has more movi