Studio Support Revisited: Market Share By Format This Decade

[imdaly]

2007 $100M Blockbusters (so far)

Disney
Pirates: AWE
Ratatouille
Wild Hogs

Fox
F4: RotSS
Ghostrider
Live Free or Die Hard
Simpsons Movie

Sony
Spider-Man 3
Superbad




Paramount
Bee Movie
Blades of Glory
Shrek the Third
Transformers

Universal
American Gangster
Bourne Ultimatum
Evan Almighty
I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry
Knocked Up


Warner
Harry Potter: OotP
Ocean's Thirteen
300

New Line
Rush Hour 3
Hairspray

BD Exclusive: 14 (9 Exclusive)
HD DVD Exclusive: 14 (9 Exclusive)

Source


Verrrry interesting!

[imdaly]

2006 $100M Blockbusters

Disney
Cars
Pirates: DMC

Fox
Borat
Devil Wears Prada
Ice Age 2
Night at the Museum
X-Men: The Last Stand

Sony
Casino Royale
Click
Da Vinci Code
Pursuit of Happyness
Talladega Nights


Paramount
Dreamgirls
Mission Impossible III
Over the Hedge

Universal
Break-Up


Warner
Departed
Happy Feet
Superman Returns


BD Exclusive: 15 (12 Exclusive)
HD DVD Exclusive: 7 (4 Exclusive)

Source

MUCH better looking for Blu-ray in 2006!

[*TL]

Interesting data.

However, I think it's skewed by anomalous mega-blockbusters (Star Wars-es, LOTRs, etc.) that are not likely to see release on HDM for years to come (assuming that a standard format emerges).

[divian]

It seems to me that somebody is kind of worried that Warner might go Red.

[HiDeFJunKie]

It seems to me that somebody is kind of worried that Warner might go Red.

Sure seems like it.

[Xyz123]

It seems to me that somebody is kind of worried that Warner might go Red.

Sure seems like it.

If Warner goes Red instead of staying true to their commitment to support both formats (my honest preference) or end the war by going blu, so be it.

One comment I feel comfortable making is that, in IMO, Warner is a much classier and reputable studio than Paramount, and nobody can honestly argue that they haven't taken their time to carefully analyze their HDM decision to determine what is in the best interest of Warner over the long-term (we all know big money was offered from both sides after the Paramount switch).

[Geonosis]

If Warner goes Red instead of staying true to their commitment to support both formats (my honest preference) or end the war by going blu, so be it.

One comment I feel comfortable making is that, in IMO, Warner is a much classier and reputable studio than Paramount, and nobody can honestly argue that they haven't taken their time to carefully analyze their HDM decision to determine what is in the best interest of Warner over the long-term (we all know big money was offered from both sides after the Paramount switch).

Paramount waited a long time too, who says they didn't analyze and give it thought? We already know the reasons they explained for the defection. I think Viacom did release plenty of titles on BD and made a business decision at the end of the day. And who knows that WB hasn't already locked up a deal and received incentives and are just waiting for the agreed upon time to announce it? It's very easy to say "At this time" or "We don't have any plans" but that doesn't equate to "We will NEVER EVER cease our dual stance, nor we will absolutely 100% not announce any exclusivity. We are 100% confirmed to be locked in with both formats." Viacom made comments about a strong Q4 for both formats, including plans to use 1.1 for future releases. I really doubt the decision to switch happened overnight, it was planned and being talked about for weeks.

[Xyz123]

Paramount waited a long time too, who says they didn't analyze and give it thought? We already know the reasons they explained for the defection. I think Viacom did release plenty of titles on BD and made a business decision at the end of the day. And who knows that WB hasn't already locked up a deal and received incentives and are just waiting for the agreed upon time to announce it? It's very easy to say "At this time" or "We don't have any plans" but that doesn't equate to "We will NEVER EVER cease our dual stance, nor we will absolutely 100% not announce any exclusivity. We are 100% confirmed to be locked in with both formats." Viacom made comments about a strong Q4 for both formats, including plans to use 1.1 for future releases. I really doubt the decision to switch happened overnight, it was planned and being talked about for weeks.

Paramount has the worst executive decision makers and PR department in the history of the world (a bit of hyperbole) if the decision wasn't a sudden one (even if they were considering it for some time). Were they not just prior promoting lossless audio on upcoming blu-ray titles? Were they not just prior promoting BOG on blu-ray? Did they make any public comments that indicated they were considering a possible move to exclusivity based on legitimate reason? In the public's mind, Paramount dropped blu-ray support overnight without warning. Plain and simple, it made them look selfish, greedy and anti-consumer, especially with WSJ and NYTimes reports of $150M exchanging hands. Paramount received a lot of unncessary criticism beyond the obvious (and deserved) because of the way the decision was handled.

Warner looks like geniuses in how they are handling the decision from a PR perspective compared to Paramount. They've made several public comments that set the framework for supporting a decision to move to exclusive for either format. And they've allowed time for the possiblity of such a move to sink in to supporters of both formats. Consumers who follow the war know there is a risk that Warner may drop their neutral stance. An exclusivity decision either way will meet with serious disappointment, but I do not believe Warner will face the same kind of harsh criticism and anger as Paramount (precisely because of the way they've handled it publicly).