2010 Blu-ray Sales Metrics Stats: Nielsen/Videoscan/HMM Charts/Ratios/Bestsellers Etc

[Kosty]

My quick math is as follows:

3,000,000 copies of Blind side sold on DVD. 16.1% of this is 483k, which is Toy story's numbers. 4.1% of that is 19.8k which is AQ's figures.

Looking at the link here:

http://www.homemediamagazine.com/top...ek-ended-32810

AQ failed to make the top 20. #20 is Where the Wild Things Are and that did 2.52% of Blind side's 3 million, which is 75.6k discs sold.

So the best that AQ could have done on DVD was 75.6k DVDs sold, with 19.8k Blu-rays sold. A blu-ray share of about 26% (26.19%). Last I checked, that would be an outstanding figure.

Argue "poor sales" of this title all you want but if this title had poor sales, it affected both formats and this tends to be explained by a lack of interest in the title... not in the format.

The Blind Side 3 million was probably for both DVD and Blu-ray units. So The Blind Side probably did 2,520,000 DVD units by that calculation. (in reality probably a little more because of the Walmart not in the Nielsen Videoscan statistics consideration factor)

Title Date  DVDtop20  DVD%  Totaltop20  BD%  BDtop20  BD/DVD
The Blind Side	03/28/10  2,520,000  84.00%  3,000,000  16.00%  480,00  19.05

[Kosty]

The African Queen did a 30.73% Blu-ray unit marketshare for its release week ending 3/28/10 and was #10 on the BD Title Share chart.

Thats probably a happy medium which implies it also sold a reasonable amount of DVD units as well on top of the previous calculation for Blu-ray units as it sold an additional 2 DVD units for every full price Blu-ray unit sold.



http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/ques...hp#/10/OnePage

[Kosty]

We are in 2010 -- not 2006 or 2007. Stop comparing any release to that of one that came out 3-4 years ago. Should we do the same with DVD since DVD was selling far more 3-4 years ago compared to Blu-ray?

Its context. Deep studio library catalog sales for Blu-ray are in the same relative period of studio expectations as day and date new releases were on the format were in 2007.

You are the person thats equating the sales expectations for a 60 year studio romantic drama with Hepburn and Bogart release with that of new releases on Blu-ray.

Thats fundamentally flawed expectations.

Under no circumstances would we expect a 60 year old release in this genre to behave like a new action release on Blu-ray.

30.67% unit marketshare for this title and a #16 Blu-ray top 20 placement is not bad.

[Kosty]

Deleted a couple of post that were off topic and personal bickering that didn't rise to the level of an infraction - but that doesn't mean repeat posts won't.

Thank you for looking after this long running sticky thread.

[GizmoDVD]

Under no circumstances would we expect a 60 year old release in this genre to behave like a new action release on Blu-ray.

30.67% unit marketshare for this title and a #16 Blu-ray top 20 placement is not bad.

In most cases I would agree with you, but the movie is in the Top 100 of all time and never before available on DVD or Blu-ray. I know they are not the same, but how well did Oz fare? Or Bladerunner? Or Godfather Trilogy? They probably sold more copies on Blu even though they have a much higher price and a lower (at the time of release) BD adoption rate. All 3 were previously available on DVD many times before, had 'collector sets', and a higher price (Blade Runner was something like $28.99 on release week? Been a while. I supposed combining HD+BD would make sense as well for that title).

I guess we won't know the answer until we get some actual numbers. 30% is better number than 4% of Toy Story's 100%, so at least it did something on Blu-ray. Anything sub 15% nowadays for a new release on the format is bad.

[Forge]

... Anything sub 15% nowadays for a new release on the format is bad.

I would challenge that this is not always going to be the case. It has to appeal to today's movie viewers. For new releases, I'd give you that. But for some of these very old classics, that many of the current or previous generation had no exposure to, I don't think we should expect as much of.

It may have been in the top 100 movies list, but that doesn't mean that the movie viewers of today are the same kinds of people who made it a top 100 when that list was created (I accept that I don't know when the list was created and there for could be wrong on that assesment). Tastes change and I don't even think its bold to say they change by generation as well.

[ack_bak]

What was the sales goal? Do you know? I don't think Paramount would release a title never before available on DVD (or Blu-ray), A top 10 film, give it a slip cover and a commemorative boxset, and put 15,000 as it's 'goal'. I think they expected more out of this title, and we will see in coming weeks if it has any legs. My guess is it'll never hit the Top 20 again (unless it has a severe price cut) and will be a bargain bin title by the summer time. I doubt Paramount is pleased with all the time, money and promotion they put in to it and to get some anemic sales. Shame since it only seems like Warner gives a damn about pre 70's films, or just films in general that don't go 'boom'.

The problem is that you don't know Paramount's expectations either. You have spend pages arguing that it did not meet expectations, yet you really don't know Paramount's internal expectations for this title. I don't mind speculating for the sake of conversation, but you seem very hung up on trying to make this out to be a doom and gloom situation with little to no data or facts to backup your argument.

[zerosaiyaman]

In most cases I would agree with you, but the movie is in the Top 100 of all time and never before available on DVD or Blu-ray. I know they are not the same, but how well did Oz fare? Or Bladerunner? Or Godfather Trilogy? They probably sold more copies on Blu even though they have a much higher price and a lower (at the time of release) BD adoption rate. All 3 were previously available on DVD many times before, had 'collector sets', and a higher price (Blade Runner was something like $28.99 on release week? Been a while. I supposed combining HD+BD would make sense as well for that title).

I guess we won't know the answer until we get some actual numbers. 30% is better number than 4% of Toy Story's 100%, so at least it did something on Blu-ray. Anything sub 15% nowadays for a new release on the format is bad.

Top 100 of all time for most people who probably half of are dead now (assuming average age of 20 when they saw it, being that age bracket when a movie will define a generation, and an average life expectancy of 76. This movie is from 1951!). I've never heard of this movie. I don't know of anyone other than my parents who may have (as they are old movie buffs). Ask around all the people you know, how many would be interested in this movie? I know of NO ONE in my generation who would even care. Heck, most don't care about Bob Hope movies, and I love those :<.

Seriously, a movie like that is never going to move volumes, ever. It's long gone ancient movie history; of an era and style completely alien to now a days fast paced plots. Way too slow, subtle, and different comedy form than.. the crap now a days. (Case in point, compare the original, not that long ago, "Death at a Funeral" to the new one coming out soon.. sdgoaihgasdogha HORROR)

But 30% on blu-ray for a movie from 1951? That's crazy good.

[cleeve]

The problem is that you don't know Paramount's expectations either. You have spent pages arguing that it did not meet expectations, yet you really don't know Paramount's internal expectations for this title. I don't mind speculating for the sake of conversation, but you seem very hung up on trying to make this out to be a doom and gloom situation with little to no data or facts to backup your argument.

Not only that, but after all these pages of doom-and-gloom, the BD marketshare for this title ended up being over 30%! .

[bruceames]

Not only that, but after all these pages of doom-and-gloom, the BD marketshare for this title ended up being over 30%! .

A lot of that 30% is because the price point of the DVD being relatively high ($19 at Walmart for example), and that's not an attractive price for a catalog, since DVD catalogs are normally under $10. The BD is about $24, and although a little high for a BD catalog, it's not that much higher than normal. It's the same reason why GWTW and Wizard of Oz also did well on BD marketshare. When you price it high, it only makes sense to buy the BD.

[Kosty]

We are treading into uncharted territory when I'm thinking that the 70% DVD unit marketshare for The African Queen is better news than the 30% Blu-ray unit marketshare. I'll say that because that would triple the number of DVD+Blu-ray units sold above the 4.10% of the leading Blu-ray title bestseller.

Our expectations are just a bit different for an older release. The feedback that I got was that it was considered a retail success for an classic studio library release. In a few weeks we might get some numbers if it showed up in the DVD top 30 units for the week ending 3/28/10 from the DVD top 20 sales report from the-numbers.com.

[ack_bak]

A lot of that 30% is because the price point of the DVD being relatively high ($19 at Walmart for example), and that's not an attractive price for a catalog, since DVD catalogs are normally under $10. The BD is about $24, and although a little high for a BD catalog, it's not that much higher than normal. It's the same reason why GWTW and Wizard of Oz also did well on BD marketshare. When you price it high, it only makes sense to buy the BD.

Except 90 million + homes in the US have a DVD player and probably less than 10 million have a Blu-Ray player.

Price is a major factor no matter the format. I know I am personally not buying this title until I can pick it up for $15 or less (preferably $12 or less). Heck, even Gizmo stated the same thing. We all know the price will drop. It always does. So why not wait.

[Kosty]

Digital edition of Home Media Magazine with the rest of the data from the week ending 3/28/10 is now up.






http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/ques...php#/3/OnePage

[Kosty]

Blu-ray Sells over $330m in Q1 2010

Posted April 5, 2010 05:15 AM by Juan Calonge

According to aggregate weekly estimates from the research department of Home Media Magazine and listed each week on blu-ray.com's sales information posts, revenues from BD sales in the US in the first quarter of 2010 were $331.31 million, 68.5% more than in the same period of 2009.

Blu-ray accounted for 12.3% of packaged-media sales revenue in the first three months of the year (versus 7.0% in Jan-Mar 2009).

Packaged-media sales revenues for the quarter were just short of $2.7 billion, 3.1% up year-on-year.

The biggest-selling week in the quarter was the week ended March 25, with $45.46 million in BD sales. The slowest week was the week ended February 21, with $18.58 million.

During the month of March, Blu-ray sales revenues were $130.36 million, 86% up year-on-year.

http://www.blu-ray.com/news/?id=4390

[Kosty]

Engadget

1st quarter Blu-ray sales up 68 percent over last year

By Ben Drawbaugh posted Apr 5th 2010 11:53AM

These updates are getting rather boring now that Blu-ray has a well established foothold in the packaged media business, but it's still interesting to note that for the 1st quarter of 2010, sales were up 68.5 percent over the same quarter last year.

Overall packaged media was up 3.1 percent, which isn't saying that much since overall sales were hit pretty hard last year.

We're not good enough at calculating percentages to determine if it was our favorite HD format that made up the difference, but Blu-ray did account for 12.3 percent of packaged media in the same time frame, versus 7 percent in 2009.

Ultimately we aren't really that interested in the business side of it, but we know the studios are so if they are happy, then that means we will continue to be able to enjoy Blu-ray discs at home.

http://hd.engadget.com/2010/04/05/1s...ver-last-year/