backtop

Gadgets Blu-ray Players Sales Growing
Shane McGlaun (Blog) - May 7, 2009 11:19 AM
Print E-mail del.icio.us 42 comment(s) - last by adiposity.. on May 11 at 12:05 PM
Blu-ray awareness at all time high

A new report from the NPD Group shows that Blu-ray disc consumer awareness is on the rise. According to point-of-sale tracking data, the Blu-ray format is moving further into the mainstream. Q1 sales of Blu-ray players in the U.S. grew to more than 400,000 units. That number is a 72% gain over Q1 2008, and dollar sales increased 14% to reach $107.2 million.

NPD's Ross Rubin said in a statement, "The rising penetration of high-definition televisions and lower Blu-ray player prices are broadening the format’s market opportunity. Even as options expand for accessing movies digitally, Blu-ray is carrying forward the widespread appeal of DVD into the high-definition marketplace."

Early adopters of the Blu-ray format weren't as concerned with pricing as consumers that are now looking to step up to Blu-ray. Currently, the most influential thing in the purchase of a Blu-ray player is the price.

NPD figures show that the average selling price for a stand-alone Blu-ray player dropped nearly 34% from $393 in Q1 2008 to $261 in Q1 2009. According to NPD, buyers who intend to purchase a Blu-ray player in the next six months can expect to pay $214 on average.

Along with sales going up and prices coming down, the report also shows that Blu-ray awareness among consumers is at an all time high. Over the last six months, awareness of Blu-ray has hit 90%. Consumers saying they are extremely or very likely to buy Blu-ray in the next six months totaled 6% of those surveyed compared to 5% who said the same thing in an August report.


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Ease of use and lower prices FTW?!
By Golgatha on 5/7/2009 12:53:11 PM , Rating: 5
"Over the last six months, awareness of Blu-ray has hit 90%. Consumers saying they are extremely or very likely to buy Blu-ray in the next six months totaled 6% of those surveyed compared to 5% who said the same thing in an August report."

So basically people know about the new technology, they just don't care to spend the money on it? I don't blame them much. DVD still looks very good, I can rip and transcode the data to whatever streaming/portable format I want to with relative ease, I can take the movie on road trips and play it with low cost portable hardware, and Blu-ray is overall very expensive (both hardware and the movies).

I have nothing against Blu-ray, as I own a PS3, a PC Blu-ray drive, and a few Blu-ray movies. I however only buy Blu-rays at around the $15 price point and DVDs for under $10. The Blu-rays I own need to be a movie which really takes advantage of the technology too (aka not a chick flick, comedy, etc.).




RE: Ease of use and lower prices FTW?!
By Gyres01 on 5/7/2009 1:04:30 PM , Rating: 1
I was brainwashed by the BB salesmen a few months ago and picked up a Sumsung BD. 2 days later it went back, I thought it did look pretty good, but I was NOT blown away like the salesdude said I was going to be. So I used the money to buy a nice GTX 260 for the puter and now I am blown away !!!


RE: Ease of use and lower prices FTW?!
By Spivonious on 5/7/09, Rating: 0
RE: Ease of use and lower prices FTW?!
By Lord 666 on 5/7/2009 1:17:33 PM , Rating: 4
Depends on the movie;

1. I am Legend - My wife noticed a huge difference between DVD and BD the first day the Samsung BD-1500 and 46" 630 came home and instantly justified the purchase.

2. Cars - Wow!

3. Wall-E - Amazing

4. Sleeping Beauty - Almost 3D.

5. Planet Earth - Another reference set

However, have to say that Pinocchio was a huge disappointment. Looking forward to the Wizard of Oz and the upcoming new BD discs.

However, the BD-1500 is very slow. Even though I have XBL with Netflix, looking forward to pick up a BD-3600 because the wife thinks it too complicated to go through XBL. Hoping the load times are faster on the newer unit.


RE: Ease of use and lower prices FTW?!
By Sanity on 5/7/09, Rating: -1
RE: Ease of use and lower prices FTW?!
By 91TTZ on 5/7/2009 3:26:34 PM , Rating: 5
Please refrain from posting if you don't know what you're talking about. This is either a joke meant to mislead people or you truly have no clue.

Films like the Wizard of Oz were filmed on FILM. The resolution of film is higher than the HD that we currently use. An old movie that was filmed on high quality film will have much more detail preserved on that film than a movie filmed in a digital format (meant for standard definition TV) a few years ago.


By tlampen on 5/7/2009 3:42:39 PM , Rating: 2
Well said


RE: Ease of use and lower prices FTW?!
By Chaser on 5/7/09, Rating: -1
By Akrovah on 5/7/2009 5:18:48 PM , Rating: 3
While your argument about suround sound is valid, as there was simply not surround sound back in those days, you comment about black and white video is lacking in basis.

Just because no old B&W movies HAVE been produced on Blu_Ray in 1080p(which I'm not even sure they haven't) does not mean that they CAN'T be. As the previous poster said, 35mm film stock, which they have been using for like 80 some odd years, is so high a resolution as to be virtually resolution independant. Film stock captures an image in much the same way you eyes do. No pixels, simply an image. Given that, you can scan it at a higher resolution and you will get more detail. If this were not true, then even most movies today would not get HD benefit as most films are still captured on film stock rather than digitally. The Dark Knight for example, was filmed on 35mm film stock, not HD video (except for the sequences on 70mm IMAX film stock), and I think you will be hard pressed to claim that that film does not benefit from HD.


RE: Ease of use and lower prices FTW?!
By Akrovah on 5/7/2009 5:31:13 PM , Rating: 3
Oh and in answer to your question, did a little Amazon lookup. While not a list, Casablanca - the ultimate black and white classic released in 1942- is now available on Blu-Ray in 1080p.


RE: Ease of use and lower prices FTW?!
By rockyct on 5/7/2009 7:04:09 PM , Rating: 3
The Longest Day was filmed in B&W and the blu-ray version has 1080p video and DTS HD 5.1 lossless audio.

Here's what DVDtalk said about it:
"The release to Blu-ray of The Longest Day and other Fox and United Artists war movies shot in various formats (Patton, A Bridge Too Far, etc.) may have an impact beyond the movies themselves. They demonstrate once and for all that older library titles can have the same knock-yer-socks-off impact that recent CGI-heavy blockbusters do - even a film shot in black and white 'scope like The Longest Day. Quite simply it's one of the best-looking Blu-ray titles so far, one that lends itself to projection on 150-inch screens. A DVD Talk Collector Series Title. "


By adiposity on 5/11/2009 12:02:49 PM , Rating: 2
This is one of the few Blu-ray titles I own, and it looks amazing.

-Dan


RE: Ease of use and lower prices FTW?!
By Silver2k7 on 5/7/2009 5:56:50 PM , Rating: 2
"Or for that matter if any post 1987 movie had audio tracks engineered with any kind of surround considerations since the technology wasn't even available, certainly not Dolby TrueHD."

How the West Was Won (1962)

Technical Specs:
Blu-ray
2-Disc Set
BD-50 Dual-Layer Discs (Both Discs)

Video Resolution/Codec:
1080p/VC-1
480i/p/VC-1 (Supplements Only)

Aspect Ratio(s:
2.89:1 (Letterbox)
1.95:1 (Smilebox)

Audio Formats:
English Dolby TrueHD 5.1 Surround
English Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround
French Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround
Spanish (Castilian) Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround
Spanish (Latin) Dolby Digital 1.0 Mono
German Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround
Italian Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround


By Silver2k7 on 5/7/2009 5:58:43 PM , Rating: 2
im guessing you meant pre 1987, and not post.


By DrKlahn on 5/8/2009 10:44:01 AM , Rating: 2
The original Day the Earth Stood Still is a fantastic b&w Blu Ray. Looks wonderful on the 32" HD set upstairs and even better on the 8' 1080p projector downstairs.


By rburnham on 5/11/2009 11:43:51 AM , Rating: 1
Young Frankenstein!


By Clauzii on 5/7/2009 6:19:44 PM , Rating: 2
I'd suggest You read this then:
http://pic.templetons.com/brad/photo/pixels.html

When we have TV-sets and media with something like more than 4000x3000 pixels (at least), we are on our way to full resolution.

For home use, 1920x1080 seems to make sense, if the media is a good copy. Also the quality of conversion etc. has a lot to say. I have DVD's that look amazing, even when upscaled to 1920x1200. Others are almost worse than S-VHS.


RE: Ease of use and lower prices FTW?!
By Gyres01 on 5/7/2009 1:47:47 PM , Rating: 2
Oh yea forgot about that.....the 1st time I put in a movie ( Ironman) it took so long to load I turned it off and on a couple times, thought the unit was broken. Then in the instruction manual it stated that most movies take anywhere from 15-45 seconds to load....Strike 2.....


By therealnickdanger on 5/7/2009 2:24:40 PM , Rating: 2
Reminds me of the first DVD player I bought... but that was even slower.

You can speed up most BD players by disabling all the extra web content in the player settings. Most earlier players have firmware updates that greatly reduce load times (but not all of them). Brand new players are almost as fast as DVD players are now.


RE: Ease of use and lower prices FTW?!
By geddarkstorm on 5/7/2009 2:16:24 PM , Rating: 2
Are you sure you had an HDTV, or used the right cables? Also, they do NOT have that long of a load time, unless it's some horribly crappy player. In short, read the reviews.

I gotta tell ya, on a 32` HDTV, the difference is extraordinary. But, everyone has to do their own cost evaluation based on their own preferences, if you don't feel it's worth that, then it isn't for you. Although, players are not that expensive anymore either.

There's also something people seem to constantly forget when talking about blu-ray (or HD-DVD). Blu-ray adoption is predicated upon HDTV adoption. Blu-ray cannot give any increase in image quality on a standard TV, obviously, as the TV's resolution is the limit; there in, blu-ray penetration into the market will require HDTV penetration first hand (or together). So, until HDTVs are the mainstream, blu-ray cannot be (unless people buy a blu-ray player as a long term investiment (hopefully not mistaking and thinking it can work on an SDTV), and use it just as a DVD player at first).

It's better, to me, to look at the percentage of blu-ray sales to HDTV sales, to gain a gauge at how blu-ray is performing.


By Silver2k7 on 5/7/2009 6:06:32 PM , Rating: 2
alot of people keep their tv-set for 10 years or so..

but it should be a gradual transition as more and more people gets new tv's.

It's good that LED starts to appear.. might change to that, still have an old CRT.

also backup for the computer makes me want to get a BD-R untit.. might get that first.

then there is certain titles that makes people buy a BD player.. like 'Lord of the Rings, Extended Editions' is not even avalible yet.


By DrKlahn on 5/8/2009 10:49:16 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Blu-ray cannot give any increase in image quality on a standard TV, obviously, as the TV's resolution is the limit


Actually some people with SD setups have bought a Blu Ray player due to its improved color space. Though certainly not as noticeable of a quality jump as the resolution, it is an improvement. Don't mean to nitpick, just saying Blu Ray will look a little better even on an SD set.


By inperfectdarkness on 5/8/2009 1:28:38 PM , Rating: 2
unless you've got >42" tv...it's doubtful you'll be able to notice a significant difference between blu-ray & dvd.

apart from the cost of the players...the 2-3x cost of the media is atrocious. i'd rather just buy the cheap $10-15 dvd collections/trilogies than pay $30 for just 1 movie.

blue ray has become the hd-cd/dvd-audio of movies for me. i can't justify the cost.


RE: Ease of use and lower prices FTW?!
By Hiawa23 on 5/7/2009 1:11:40 PM , Rating: 2
PS3 sales probably make up most of the Blu ray player sales.


By theflux on 5/7/2009 1:41:23 PM , Rating: 2
If you read the report you would see that the only players counted were "stand-alone" which excludes the PS3. Furthermore, the PS3's sales are down year-over-year, not up 70%+.


RE: Ease of use and lower prices FTW?!
By DrKlahn on 5/8/2009 11:21:50 AM , Rating: 2
The PS3 likely accounts for a very small fraction of Blu Ray movie sales. There are 8.5 million PS3's sold in North America and around 5 million standalone players. Look at The Dark Knight, it sold 3 million copies and is probably the formats best seller. So even if you consider that only 1 in 5 standalone player owners (a very low estimation) bought it, then 1 in 4 PS3 owners bought it. But since standalone players are only purchased to play movies, it's more likely they account for a much larger percentage of the sales. It's probably 80% or more. If you do the math for 80% of the sales going to standalone owners, then only 7% of PS3 owners bought it (or about 600,000 copies). Making the number of PS3s being used to play movies a very small fraction (and number) indeed.


By adiposity on 5/11/2009 12:05:33 PM , Rating: 2
He was talking about player sales. And he's wrong--the stats are for standalone players.

-Dan


By dragonbif on 5/7/2009 1:12:30 PM , Rating: 2
I have a blu-ray and I only by my disks from costco or amazon.com. When Bolt came out I looked at Walmart and found that the special edition was $37 and (Blu-ray, DVD, other disk) and normal $29. At costco it was $23 for the special. It is the same with any new blu-ray they always cost $29 but at costco and amazon.com they can cost $5-$10 lest and buy 2 from amazon it is free shipping.
I buy moves that are "ok" on DVD and most of the time they are $5 used ones. I by all my porn on HD-DVD ;) hehe


Love it
By TheNuts on 5/7/2009 2:50:54 PM , Rating: 4
I have a Samsung BPD1400 Blu Ray player and a Samsung 58" Plasma as well as an Onkyo 7.1 system that supports all HD audio.

There is nothing even remotely close that a DVD can offer that comes close to the Picture Quality and Audio quality of a Blu Ray disc.

Granted the load times arent 5 seconds they are getting much faster with the latest generation blu ray players, but its something I am willing to accept to fully enjoy a BR disc




RE: Love it
By bbomb on 5/7/2009 4:04:56 PM , Rating: 2
Studios are now degrading the quality of DVD's to encourage people to buy Blu-Ray. The Dark Knight on DVD looks like complete ass. VHS has better quality than DK on DVD.


RE: Love it
By geddarkstorm on 5/7/2009 4:36:07 PM , Rating: 3
Do you have a reference site and hard data to back up such a "conspiracy theory" sounding claim? It's an interesting notion, and I'd love to see details if others have looked into it extensively.

Taking a movie that came out on DVD before blu-ray (Narnia, or the Matrix, for instance) and comparing it to its blu-ray analogue... the difference is dramatic and striking. So I, personally, certainly have not seen any proof at all to support your idea, unfortunately.


RE: Love it
By CZroe on 5/8/2009 2:32:38 AM , Rating: 2
Your supposed motive for them to do so does not exist. Studios are pushing for Blu-Ray because they have run out of catalog releases to release on DVD and they have double and triple-dipped past releases almost all they can. Their only reason for releasing an intitially inferior DVD is to sell it to you AGAIN when they double-dip it. They don't need to lower the quality because the difference is already night and day.

Idiots are to blame for sub-par DVDs continuing to sell. I own TDK on BD and yet I had to leave it in GA when I moved to CA. I got it back now, but before that I watched it again at a friend's house... played from a DVD in a BD player on a 16:9 HDTV. It was God-awful, but only they were to blame: It was the 4:3 aspect stretched to 16:9 and horribly scaled to fit. They were the idiots for buying the wrong one even with the right setup. At least the EDTV widescreen version would have looked decent.


If the movies were cheaper, I'd buy them over DVD
By Staples on 5/7/2009 5:01:14 PM , Rating: 2
Everyone complains about the price of the players but they are cheap enough to where it is a non issue anymore. The issue I have always had is the price of the actual content. Sure the disk cost more but I doubt that new movies need to be 35, twice that of their DVD counterpart. When they come down to $20 for new movies like the most expensive DVDs, then I and lots of others will buy nothing but BD.




By bighairycamel on 5/7/2009 5:40:05 PM , Rating: 2
New release Blu-rays at Fry's are around $25 where I live. Comparitively, new release DVDs are around $15-18.

Personally, I only buy movies that I know I'll watch more than 2 times and I think the premium is worth it. For everything else I use Netflix, which by the way has been increasing their Blu-ray offerings substantially (used to be a "long wait" on all new releases, now I can actually get new releases when they come out or they are just a "short wait").


By Silver2k7 on 5/7/2009 6:13:22 PM , Rating: 2
over here i saw some title in the store yesturday..

dvd was 179
and blu-ray 279

basically they should cost the same to produce, well a few pennies extra for the scratchproof protective layer on the bd-disc ?

if they did cost the same as dvd or only say 199 instead of 279.. they would probably sell alot more bd movies.


By CZroe on 5/8/2009 2:40:56 AM , Rating: 2
I've read that manufacturing costs are substantially higher. One article even discussed how difficult it was to ramp up production of DL movies at a Sony factory and went into just how much of an investment is needed to justify it. IIRC, the yields on DL movies were VERY low (something like less than half). This was in 2007, so I'm sure that the situation has improved.

More data = more sensitivity.


By Silver2k7 on 5/8/2009 7:14:30 AM , Rating: 2
IIRC after the initial investment to upgrade the machines to handle blu-ray discs, the costs where the same to make a dvd or a bd disc.. if im not missinformed.


No way man...
By cyclonus on 5/7/2009 9:22:15 PM , Rating: 2
There is no competition for Blu-Ray to compete with, So of course sales are growing. So why point it out. It's like having 1 car at a race track & saying you're on the lead, makes no sense to brag about this.




RE: No way man...
By CZroe on 5/8/2009 2:37:33 AM , Rating: 2
I wouldn't say that. Like it or not, they have to compete with DVD, even if it isn't competing within the HD market. They have to compete with Netflix. They have to compete with XBOX Live Marketplace. They have to compete with The Playstation Network. They have to compete with on-demand HD from cable providers. They have to compete with on-demand IPTV (AT&T U-verse, Vudu, and PC-based online streaming).

BD has way more to compete with than DVD did when it was introduced, which is why DVD was so easily able to push VHS aside. BD is simply the sole remaining standard for packaging and selling 1080p HD content on a physical medium, but there are all sorts of alternatives to buying the physical movie.


RE: No way man...
By Silver2k7 on 5/8/2009 7:40:36 AM , Rating: 2
well buying a computer file like somekind of disc image, with full sound and video quality, menues and extras. and without any silly restrictions on the format. you should be able to bring the movie to watch at your friends place etc.

the only problem would be that the average movie geek would need lots of harddrives.. lets say that the average movie file would be 40GB, in theory 100 movies is 4TB. Wich is todays largest HDD x2 wich probably carries a hefty price premium right now. So either that or buying 4x cheaper 1TB hdds.

In say 2 years the idea might be more feasible.. when we hopefully have 5TB harddrives avalible. And hopefully more people will have faster internet to be able to handle getting a 40GB movie in an hour or less.


I got the whole shebang free
By Randomblame on 5/7/2009 7:33:02 PM , Rating: 2
got a 60in 1080i rear projection set free cuz no one wanted to pay money to lug it out of my friends house.
Got a broken p-1500 free because it was broken - rma'd it

Otherwise I sure as hell wouldn't pay the ridiculous cost premium for blue ray. Just buying the movies is almost more than I can stomach.

However as a storage medium it has a lot of promise if only it didn't take 30 minutes to burn a disk - hopefully with time that will be faster




RE: I got the whole shebang free
By CZroe on 5/8/2009 2:42:06 AM , Rating: 2
How did you get your burner for free? ;)


"Intel is investing heavily (think gazillions of dollars and bazillions of engineering man hours) in resources to create an Intel host controllers spec in order to speed time to market of the USB 3.0 technology." -- Intel blogger Nick Knupffer









botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki