backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 39 comment(s) - last by rupaniii.. on Mar 18 at 11:26 PM

Contrary to what you've read in the blogsphere, the cost of Blu-ray players has not increased since the demise of HD DVD

This blog was first published on WesleyTech.com.

For some reason, several blogs are writing stories about how Blu-ray player prices have risen since the demise of HD DVD. This is ridiculous. The information is gathered from popular price engines for this story.

Let’s look at this for a minute. It’s being reported that the average cost of the Sony BDP-S300 is $405. This is above MSRP, set by Sony at $399. One retailer lists it for $445 (above the list price), and the rest are at MSRP or below. This is throwing off the average.

We also have to consider that many retailers are not authorized retailers for the product they’re selling. Authorized retailers (Circuit City, Crutchfield, Best Buy, etc.) list the Sony player at MSRP of $399 - as is correct. No Blu-ray player manufacturer has increased the MSRP of their players.

If retailers were selling below retail previously (and authorized ones do not or they will lose their relationship with the company), it was not do to competition against HD DVD. These retailers weren’t on the Blu-ray side trying to compete against Toshiba, they were also selling Toshiba players. Competition between formats would have been championed by the manufacturers, and they did not just now raise their list price. The MSRP now is the same as the beginning of the year.

Consider this my civic duty, exposing the fraud put out on blogs to stir up controversy and gain hits for their advertisers.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Article
By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 3/13/2008 4:45:00 PM , Rating: 3
The article Steven refers to is here:

http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/36428/113/

The flagrant error of using non-consistent data went overlooked even when commenters mentioned it.




RE: Article
By Fnoob on 3/13/2008 7:16:59 PM , Rating: 2
In a virtual rocks/paper/scissors : "non-consistent data" always loses to "agenda driven schelp".


RE: Article
By IGoodwin on 3/13/2008 7:23:29 PM , Rating: 2
Not wanting be difficult, but it come naturally.

Although Sony does list the price on there web site as $399. A quick trim to Amazon shows it for sale for less; however, the list price is $499.


RE: Article
By MrTeal on 3/13/2008 7:38:39 PM , Rating: 2
Sony lists the MSRP as $399, and Amazon sells it at $384. Just because they have an old price of $499 with a line through it doesn't mean the units are retailing for 500 bucks, it means Amazon is trying to convince people they're saving 22% when they could buy it for close to the same price anywhere.

A local jewelery shop up here is advertising gold jewelery being 85% off right now. Great value? Not really, it's always 75-85% off, 365 days a year. The inflated list price is just a selling feature for the gullible.


RE: Article
By SilthDraeth on 3/15/2008 3:16:19 AM , Rating: 2
That local jewelry shop wouldn't happen to be a Kmart would it?


RE: Article
By therealnickdanger on 3/13/2008 7:30:16 PM , Rating: 2
In fact, I just picked up a Samsung UP5000 because it DROPPED in price by $300 at Best Buy ($500)! It does Blu-Ray, HD-DVD, and upconverts like a champ thanks to the HQV REON. My only gripe is the failure of it to properly decode TrueHD, but that will (presumeably) come as a firmware update in May.


RE: Article
By EglsFly on 3/13/2008 9:50:04 PM , Rating: 3
Uh, yea, cause Mark Raby wrote the article!
He is VERY PRO HD-DVD to the point that he promotes FALSE information about the whole HD format war. This is the same person that wrote an article trying to persuade people that the war was still up for grabs and in a dead heat AFTER the Warner announcement.


RE: Article
By bill3 on 3/14/08, Rating: -1
RE: Article
By tallcool1 on 3/14/2008 10:53:45 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
How much does Sony pay you guys anyway?

Do you ACTUALLY read the DT articles???
I have got to believe you are joking, because some of the DT editors where definately pulling for HD-DVD and don't hesitate to bash Sony when given the opportunity. Some of which was deserved. (ie, rootkits)

Here are a few qoutes from DT Editor "MK" to prove my point:
quote:
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 8/20/2007 6:29:34 PM , Rating: 1
Transformers will be absolutely sexy in high def. I just bought an HD-A20 last week... and now this... haha theres a gamble that paid off quite well.
Side note... HD DVD FTW!

By Master Kenobi (blog) on 8/21/2007 8:10:12 AM , Rating: 2
I hope your willing to pay up as Transformers will never be on Blu-Ray, anything to the contrary is wishful thinking.

By Master Kenobi (blog) on 8/21/2007 7:14:37 AM , Rating: 2
Remember those words when more studio's switch to HD DVD exclusive.


RE: Article
By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 3/15/2008 10:51:05 PM , Rating: 2
Just as a clarification, Master Kenobi is just a blogger, not an editor.


RE: Article
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 3/16/2008 11:29:20 PM , Rating: 2
Aye, not an editor, sorry to take the wind out of yer shot at DT :P

Btw, the quotes you so selectively picked, all pre-dated the Warner switch, so given the time frame and all factors present at the time, theres nothing unrealistic about them.


RE: Article
By EglsFly on 3/16/2008 12:54:50 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 8/21/2007 7:14:37 AM , Rating: 2
Remember those words when more studio's switch to HD DVD exclusive.

LOL!
How's that working out for you Kenobi?


RE: Article
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 3/16/2008 11:27:43 PM , Rating: 4
Meh. I pulled for HD, I have no regrets. Some things are outside the control of the consumer, in this game it was high stakes played out on the top level of the electronics and media industries. My projections (and that of many others) were based in logic that was based on determining factors at the time. If you will carefully check the date stamp on the references quotes, that was during the time frame that Paramount/Dreamworks went HD Exclusive, and that momemtum was rolling merrily along until January when Warner went Blu. Up until the Warner switch, everything was still on the table for both sides.


RE: Article
By OMGBS LIES on 3/15/2008 3:37:44 PM , Rating: 2
someone has to pay the WB deal off... and it wont be sony.... bluboys will and brag about it too...


PS3
By Fnoob on 3/13/2008 9:01:23 PM , Rating: 2
Do any of the 'dedicated' ~$400 players offer any video quality improvement over the PS3, or merely features? While I really don't need one, I am having a hard time not considering buying a PS3 unless they offer somehow inferior video playback.




RE: PS3
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 3/13/2008 9:43:57 PM , Rating: 2
PS3 lacks in the sound options department, compared to some of the other stand alones. Video quality is the same across the board.


RE: PS3
By Moishe on 3/14/2008 8:35:46 AM , Rating: 2
What kind of differences are there in the sound? Are we talking just missing codecs like TrueHD and DTS_HD?


RE: PS3
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 3/14/2008 9:31:41 AM , Rating: 2
Not the "difference" but the problems with. Yea, lack of some codecs gets lumped into it, but theres also a sizeable number of people reporting audio problems when pairing the PS3 with some older recievers, specific codecs dont work at all and others have problems (I think it has something to do with bitstreaming). Doesn't seem to be an issue for anyone with a modern setup though. My recently purchased Sony DW995 sound system does just fine.


RE: PS3
By EglsFly on 3/13/2008 9:52:56 PM , Rating: 2
Actually the PS3 is probably the best blu-ray player "currently" available. It has the most powerful processor compared to stand alone players and results in faster time to playback.


RE: PS3
By mmntech on 3/14/2008 11:47:44 AM , Rating: 2
I don't know if I'd call it the best overall but it's certainly the best value. Plays games, stores movies and music, streams media, web enabled, fully upgradable to future Blu-ray standards. The others have a valid point about the audio though.

There is a huge push to force the HDMI standard. While that's ok for people just buying a home theater, the issue comes with people who already own one. Audio has pretty much reached it's peak in the quality it can deliver and if you do have a 10 year old receiver like me, there's little sense in upgrading. That's why stand alone players make sense because they're more backwards compatible. The PS3 though is an entry level BD player so it is going to lack some features on the hardware end. Fortunately the PS3 does allow you to mix and match audio and video standards.


RE: PS3
By DingieM on 3/14/2008 9:19:31 AM , Rating: 2
PS3 is no option for me because my (very good) receiver only supports 6 discrete analogue audio inputs. So I will depend on stand-alone players that have at least 6 DACS to convert Dolby TrueHD or equivalent audio class into analogue.
Pretty good option because then I can listen to the full glory of HD sound with an almost 10 year old receiver. Sound is directly passed to the speakers