HDTV Expert - Is it time to kill the DVD?

[720pete]

The red laser DVD, that is. With Blu-ray player prices steadily dropping and more aggressive discounts on upcoming releases, it's time to move on.

[url=http://www.hdtvmagazine.com/columns/2010/05/hdtv-expert-is-it-time-to-kill-the-dvd.php]Read Column[/url]

[alfredpoor]

(Yes, my Subject heading is one of my favorite quotes from "Spaceballs".)

Pete, we're not far apart on this one, as I question how much longer the DVD will remain a viable distribution media. But I think you're a bit early calling for the end of DVD players. While most readers of HDTV Magazine appreciate the finer details of home entertainment systems (both literally and figuratively), I have to believe that the majority of the U.S. market cares a lot about whether a product costs $30 or $130. That extra hundred dollars for a BD player is a deal breaker for many households in this country right now. The success of RedBox is strong evidence that there is adequate demand for video technology that is "good enough".

I think the point where our future visions diverge is on the BD itself; I'm not yet convinced that it won't be supplanted by digital distribution long before it can reach penetration numbers that come close to those of DVD today.

Alfred
HDTV Almanac

[720pete]

If price trends are any indication, player costs will drop much faster as we head into the 2010 holiday selling season. That, in turn, will drive demand. I think we will see at least a dozen BD players priced at $99 or less by Christmas, with some dipping as low as $79. The 'el cheapo' $30 models are being usurped by Itunes video and iPod Touches anyway.

There's no telling how successful Blu-ray will ultimately be, as a format. Having the network interface will be very important, though.

The growth in BD player sales this year surprised me, as did the number of Avatar discs sold in the BD format. So it's still a contender.

[ccclvib]

Maybe I'm more of a pessimist than I thought, but the first thing I thought of when I read your article was, "Wait, how many people are there [b]who have no idea what Blu-Ray is?[/b]" For that matter, who know what a DVD is? Maybe that's extreme, but it's still something to consider. You've got to get people educated before you can sell them something. Of course, I'm reminded of all the VCRs that had the time blinking at 12:00 forever while the users went right on playing rented tapes. Maybe it isn't as bad as I picture.

[dlantowski]

The major brands will likely stop producing 99% of their DVD models in the next year or two, but I wouldn't be surprised to see the no name/super budget and store-specific brands (ex: Insignia) continue manufacturing them for the next 4 to 5 years, if not longer.

Despite cassette tapes no longer being mass-produced, car stereo head units and basic home stereo shelf systems are still being produced and sold with cassette players - and that's with digital files (and to an extent, CDs) dominating 100% of the music market here in the West.

I actually wouldn't be surprised if DVDs continue to be produced for 10 more years or so.

A driving force behind that thought is that HD has taken forever to be adopted on a widespread level, and I have a feeling that there is a (surprisingly) larger # of people who, even though they regularly watch shows on the HD versions of their favorite channels, and are aware of the improved quality, they STILL, at the least occasionally, watch some of those shows/programming on the non-HD versions of the channels. Whether it's because the last person who was watching the set was down in the non-HD channel group, or the person accidentially hit 04 instead of 704 (using Time Warner Cable here in NY as an example) and decided to just keep watching in non-HD, it seems like it could happen more often than we'd hope.

With that in the mix, so long as DVDs remain cheaper both new & used versus their Blu-ray counterparts, manufacturers (big and/or small) will keep making the players.

Definitely agreed that for Blu-ray to really take off, you need to stop making the DVD discs. Too bad that it's just highly unlikely that it will happen that way!

[ccclvib]

[quote="dlantowski"]Whether it's because the last person who was watching the set was down in the non-HD channel group, or the person accidentially hit 04 instead of 704 (using Time Warner Cable here in NY as an example) and decided to just keep watching in non-HD[/quote]

I got a first-hand view of this a couple of months ago when I visited a cousin in Virginia. She and her father both - although they were watching a new LCD HD set powered by FIOS - would insist on watching programming on the SD channels, because "that's the channels we know." Even after I would change the channel to the HD alternative, since they "couldn't tell the difference (I could!)", they didn't think twice the next time going back to SD.

As I said in my previous post, you gotta educate the user, and get them convinced there's a difference! Without that, Blu-Ray/Shmu-Ray; even when the price reaches $30 for a BD player. The folks who already have DVD won't feel the need to switch until they can be convinced there's a good reason.

BTW, my BD player up-converts DVD output to 1080 - at least it says it does.

[Roger Halstead]

[quote="720pete"]There's no telling how successful Blu-ray will ultimately be, as a format. [/quote]

It depends on the encoding as CDs are every bit as capable of presenting HD as is BlueRay.As I never purchase, rent, or stream movies for me they could throw out BlueRay tomorrow. As it's from Sony I wish they would.

As CDs are still around and going strong, I think DVDs will be around for a very long time. When BlueRay drives are the same price as DVD readers then I might consider one, but I think by then the method of distribution will either be either streaming, or downloading, for rent or purchase. A 10 to 20 % market penetration still makes if a very small player by comparison with other methods of distribution.

Had Sony dropped the price as soon as they became the main industry standard they could easily have two to three times the present market penetration which would give other methods of distribution a lot more competition. However, Sony chose to get as much as they could out of the market short term and that may eventually prove to be the undoing of BlueRay.

My TV and my computer can stream from the Internet. (I'll wait for general distribution instead of paying a premium) Why would I bother spending all that extra money to gain the ability to do more of what I could already do.

As for first run on BlueRay, If I really wanted to watch something I'd go as high as $5. It's not worth more than that to me.
I like technology and am more or less an early adopter, but this is an exception as I don't see me gaining anything worth while.

[stevekaden]

I hate to be so crass....but the (deadly) stampedes at Walmart didn't start until player prices hit $29.95. Now Walmart does what? $300b a year? So you have to figure they have a finger on the pulse of a big part of the market. My point....BR ain't cheap enough - and 200m people in America wouldn't know a photo from an inkblot. DVD has a place until we bottom certain things out. And since market size drives all...it isn't going anywhere.

For the rest of us, viva la revolution. BR is just gorgeous. And it is growing beautifully even without a porn market - go figure.

[alfredpoor]

[quote="Roger Halstead"]Had Sony dropped the price as soon as they became the main industry standard they could easily have two to three times the present market penetration which would give other methods of distribution a lot more competition. However, Sony chose to get as much as they could out of the market short term and that may eventually prove to be the undoing of BlueRay.[/quote]

I recognize that you're not a fan of Sony. I agree that they made some bone-headed product decisions over the years. (I will never again buy a product that requires Memory Stick!) But I don't think it's fair to saddle Sony with being greedy when it comes to BD player pricing.

I don't know for certain, but I expect that Sony was selling the early BD players at a loss. If you recall, the early blue lasers were made with unobtainium, and demand greatly exceeded the production capacity. I believe that Sony also sold early PlayStations with BD players in them at a loss. (I'm pretty certain that they sold their OLED TVs at a loss.) I have no doubt that Sony is willing to buy market and mind share for new products, rather than simply try to soak the early adopters.

Alfred
HDTV Almanac

[akirby]

And let's not forget that after HD-DVD was killed, plenty of non-Sony mfrs began making Blu-Ray players which is how we ended up with the relatively low prices we see today. It takes time for mfrs to ramp up and supplier parts to catch up.

Anybody who could afford a HDTV 2 years ago could easily afford a $300 BD player. Price had virtually nothing to do with it. The only way BD would have "taken off" is if it could have been sold for the same as DVD players which were as low as $30. Not to mention all of the folks with DVD players built into their vehicles.

Most people simply don't care enough about picture quality to pony up for a BD player. They already have upconverting DVD players and a large library of DVDs and they're happy with it. That's the bottom line.

You also have to consider that in order for streaming or downloading you must have a high speed broadband internet connection AND a device capable of streaming or downloading and playing the content. That automatically cuts out a large percentage of potential buyers.

Then there is the convenience of owning a disc that you can take with you, loan out, play anywhere without an internet connection, etc. It can also yield much higher quality than most streamed versions, at least for now. And BD is affordable now so price isn't the issue.