2009 Blu-ray Sales Metrics Stats: Nielsen/Videoscan/HMM Charts/Ratios/Bestsellers Etc

[GizmoDVD]

I don't see it as "sneaky". Have you been reading all the doomsday media reports concerning DVD lately? Are you aware that Disney recently fired Dick Cook who was the chairman for Walt Disney Studios?

I think this was more of a test of the home video market more than anything else for Disney. If they view it as successful, expect to see more titles from Disney released first on Blu-Ray with a DVD combo.

Is it sneaky as in a way for them to hit their 'projections' to make it seem like the format is doing better then it really is at the end of the year? Yes.

It just gives all the negative Nancy's something to talk about at the end of the year. When everyone says how awesome Blu-ray did in Q4 and 'beat expectations' they can point to this title and say "how much of that would have been DVD revenue".

[jiggawhat]

I don't see it as "sneaky". Have you been reading all the doomsday media reports concerning DVD lately? Are you aware that Disney recently fired Dick Cook who was the chairman for Walt Disney Studios?

I think this was more of a test of the home video market more than anything else for Disney. If they view it as successful, expect to see more titles from Disney released first on Blu-Ray with a DVD combo.

Most of the people are bought Snow White bought it because it had the Blu-ray. It's not like this title wasn't released before. Hell, take 10% of the revenue out which is the likely number of people buying just for the DVD and you still have a pretty damn good week of sales. Nearly 30M. I don't think that's too shabby...

[ack_bak]

Is it sneaky as in a way for them to hit their 'projections' to make it seem like the format is doing better then it really is at the end of the year? Yes.

It just gives all the negative Nancy's something to talk about at the end of the year. When everyone says how awesome Blu-ray did in Q4 and 'beat expectations' they can point to this title and say "how much of that would have been DVD revenue".

I seriously doubt one catalog title is going to be make or break regarding projections. I believe Blu-Ray was on track to at least meet projections before Snow White.

And you are really missing the bigger picture here as to what Disney is trying to do. And at the end of the day, Disney will be judged on their own projections and overall revenue dollars for home video as a whole. That is much more important to them than BDA projections.

[GizmoDVD]

I think bundling Vudu playback with HDTV's and Blu-Ray players makes a lot of sense. I think the pricing for Vudu HDX, is going to be a deal breaker for a lo of folks though. Especially if they have a Blu-Ray player and a Netflix account (or even better a Blu-Ray player that streams Netflix in HD). No doubt that HDX offers the best quality for streaming, but if you are that anal about PQ/AQ, I suspect you would still rent or buy the Blu-Ray version. If Vudu could get those prices in the $2-3 range they might have a better shot.

From what I have seen on VuDu, only new releases are $5.99 for HDX. It seems after a certain amount of time (I have no idea how long) it drops to $3.99. All other 'catalog' HDX rentals are $3.99...and there might be some $2.99 ones in there I just havn't gone through it fully.

Another point is not every movie is released on Blu-ray (even day and dates) so a HDX rental for $4-6 would be better PQ/AQ (DD+) quality compared to a DVD Rental. They also now have a .99 rental of the day which is available in HDX (Braveheart today!)

VuDu is not 'the' best movie source, Blu-ray is. But I'll gladly rent HDX movies through them if its not available on Blu-ray and I want to see them. (And Netflix is HD on the BD390)

[GizmoDVD]

Most of the people are bought Snow White bought it because it had the Blu-ray. It's not like this title wasn't released before. Hell, take 10% of the revenue out which is the likely number of people buying just for the DVD and you still have a pretty damn good week of sales. Nearly 30M. I don't think that's too shabby...

Do you remember Pinocchio sales? That was also released before on DVD (twice?) and IIRC the DVD had 85% of sales that week. I'll be generous as say 80% bought the DVD given the growing Blu-ray base. The assumption that 90% bought it because of Blu-ray would break everything Kosty has every compiled as that's never happened before. Ever. Not even TDK, Iron Man or Watchmen.

[vikingfan]

When everyone says how awesome Blu-ray did in Q4 and 'beat expectations' they can point to this title and say "how much of that would have been DVD revenue".

Well, when the dvd only version is released a couple weeks from now we'll get an idea from its sales figures if a lot of dvd only owners bought this instead.

[GizmoDVD]

I seriously doubt one catalog title is going to be make or break regarding projections. I believe Blu-Ray was on track to at least meet projections before Snow White.

And you are really missing the bigger picture here as to what Disney is trying to do. And at the end of the day, Disney will be judged on their own projections and overall revenue dollars for home video as a whole. That is much more important to them than BDA projections.

BD revenue was $32 mil this week. Let's say $20mil was Snow White. If we say 80% bought the 'DVD' style that means $16 mil was added to the Blu-ray pool. That's a pretty big amount - enough to move Blu-ray up at the end of the year. And not only is the +$16 mil for Blu-ray but its -$16 mil for DVD which makes a $32mil different for this test-run. Pretty damn substantial. And that's just one week...we still have 6 left.

[GizmoDVD]

Yeah, it clearly isn't the movie that TDK is, but it is big time eye candy, and apparently has reference audio. I was going to rent it first too, but I have a $3 off coupon from Pappa Johns making the total $16.xx on release week at Walmart. Worse case, I watch it and sell it and make most of my money back. But I have a feeling this one is going to be reference, so I will keep it anyway.

TF2 will destroy TDK. The price is low, eye candy and its fits the perfect Blu-ray demographic. (Plus the format has grown buy several million owners since TDK, Iron Man). I'm sure the movie is crap, but hell...it'll look and sound pretty so I'll be buying it with the Papa Johns coupon

[Sbert]

TF2 will destroy TDK. The price is low, eye candy and its fits the perfect Blu-ray demographic. (Plus the format has grown buy several million owners since TDK, Iron Man). I'm sure the movie is crap, but hell...it'll look and sound pretty so I'll be buying it with the Papa Johns coupon

I think snow white does 2 things for the studios. 1) they have a better idea of what the size of their target population is 2) and how well they are reaching them with various pricing models.

So, for example, one can almost assume anyone who wanted Snow White on BD would have purchased it at such a great deal (or just about). So that gives you a theortical population of say 4 million households. If they say sell 1 million copies of up at 23-24 dollars. You're looking at hitting 25 percent of the population probably because of the high prices. Now they can play around with the pricing to find the best ratio. It might be say 15 dollars and grabbing 75 percent of the population $15 x 3 mil, vs $10 x 4 mil, of $23 dollars x 1 mil...or maybe they see $20 x 2.25 mil, which is the same as $15x3 mil, so might as well aim for 19.99 and keep a higher price point...

etc....

[vikingfan]

BD revenue was $32 mil this week. Let's say $20mil was Snow White. If we say 80% bought the 'DVD' style that means $16 mil was added to the Blu-ray pool. That's a pretty big amount - enough to move Blu-ray up at the end of the year.

I can see your point. It's like when Star Trek the original series season one came out only in a HDDVD/combo set. All the people that only wanted the dvd had to purchase that version, so those sales helped push HDDVD up to a 17/83 split for that week.

[GizmoDVD]

I can see your point. It's like when Star Trek the original series season one came out only in a HDDVD/combo set. All the people that only wanted the dvd had to purchase that version, so those sales helped push HDDVD up to a 17/83 split for that week.

...Yes, because a $130 set back in late 2007 is comparable to a $10 Blu-ray in late 2009.

[Dave J]

...Yes, because a $130 set back in late 2007 is comparable to a $10 Blu-ray in late 2009.

Let's compare the MSRP of the remastered Star Trek season sets shall we.

Star Trek: Season One (Remastered) HD DVD/DVD combo $194.99 *
Star Trek: Season Two (Remastered) DVD $99.99 *
Star Trek: Season Three (Remastered) DVD $84.98 *

Looks to me like Star Trek fans who had zero interest in HD DVD were "screwed" to the tune of +/- $100 if they purchased the Season One set.

I hope you also voiced your concern on behalf of the average consumer at the time. I seem to recall there were several HD DVD supporters that were cheering that move by Paramount.

[GizmoDVD]

Let's compare the MSRP of the remastered Star Trek season sets shall we.

Star Trek: Season One (Remastered) HD/DVD combo $194.99 *
Star Trek: Season Two (Remastered) DVD $99.99 *
Star Trek: Season Three (Remastered) DVD $84.98 *

Looks to me like Star Trek fans who had zero interest in HD DVD were "screwed" to the tune of +/- $100 if they purchased the Season One set.

I hope you also voiced your concern on behalf of the average consumer at the time. I seem to recall there were several HD DVD supporters that were chearing that move by Paramount.

Toshiba and CBS Paramount made a deal where Toshiba covered some of the remastering/authoring costs if they made it HD DVD exclusive. I didn't buy the set and neither did very many others. It was (and still is) shitty for them to make the consumers pay that high tag if they didn't have the format. I'm agreeing with you - not cool. I didn't pick up the set until it was $30 or so via Amazon.UK - a price I was willing to pay for (essentially) a blind buy. Though, again, comparing something that was high priced to something that was $10 is hardly a fair comparison.

[zerosaiyaman]

Toshiba and CBS Paramount made a deal where Toshiba covered some of the remastering/authoring costs if they made it HD DVD exclusive. I didn't buy the set and neither did very many others. It was (and still is) shitty for them to make the consumers pay that high tag if they didn't have the format. I'm agreeing with you - not cool. I didn't pick up the set until it was $30 or so via Amazon.UK - a price I was willing to pay for (essentially) a blind buy. Though, again, comparing something that was high priced to something that was $10 is hardly a fair comparison.

It is a completely fair comparison. Why? Because the mathematical effect is going to be identical. If people were buying it for the DVD, and the HD-DVD just tagged along, it would inflate the HD-DVD sales numbers, regardless of its price :P. The principle stands, the price is just a red herring.

None the less, the other thing this Snow White, far more mainstream, classic movie (verses Star Trek box set's natural nitchiness) experiment does is it increases blu-ray awareness. Now people who have bought it just for the DVD have a blu-ray sitting around. So.. might as well get a player?

If, of course, they have an HDTV -- so blu-ray adoption is limited naturally by HDTV adoption, don't forget that.

Also, all your jabs about the economy is kinda ridiculous. If people have an HDTV, they likely are not suffering enough that $128 has any meaning. And there's something called.. I dunno.. SAVINGS? You know.. that radical concept that you put a portion of your money away, per month, in some untouched account till its enough for you to buy what you want? Then, no matter your income, as long as you are not constantly breaking even, you'll eventually be able to afford any target given enough time. (If more people did that, we would never have had this "credit crunch" anyways, sigh...) And $128 you'll get fairly fast. Even a minimum wage job, living in an apartment, paying full utilities and internet, could save up that much in two to three months in this area I live in, or even just one month if they bought REALLY cheap food XD. To note, I bet you I make a third of whatever you do in a year (I typically only have 200 dollars left over after bills for food and everything else per month, and no, that is sadly not an exaggeration), and I have blu-ray fun :P.

So.. enough with the economy crap. Things are not even remotely that dire that $128 is suddenly earth shattering. A whopper value meal is now $6 bucks after tax, and I remember the days when you could get two whoppers for 99 cents! And that was just fifteen years ago or so! Inflation has made $128 pretty chump changey now for the middle class (which I am not, yet).

Finally, taking internet costs out of your factoring on download costs is disingenuous. It is a requirement, it is a per monthly cost added. Yes, the internet has other value, but it's still a /required part/ of the cost of any streaming someone does, period. Just as electricity is part of any movie playback on an HDTV, but since electricity is needed everywhere, being a common denominator, it can be divided out and thus ignored. Not so with the internet when comparing it as a means for HD content verses blu-ray.

[Kosty]

For anyone interested here is the packaging for the Snow White combo packs in both flavors.


Both version packaging make clear a Blu-ray is included and that features are the same. I doubt any consumers buying it did not notice they were getting a Blu-ray.



DVD Packaging



Blu-ray packaging




DVD Back



Blu-ray Back



DVD Features saying both versions include all features



Blu-ray Features saying both versions include all features