Format War Pricing Aftermath: Blu-ray Up, HD-DVD Down

[admin]

The long awaited end to the format war may help consumers by clearing up some confusion created by choice in HD optical discs, but it is not bringing about better pricing to the consumer. Based on price comparison research performed by TG Daily, the demise of HD-DVD and the industry charge to embrace Blu-ray Disc (BD) does not seem to be increasing market competitiveness that invariably should lead to reduced prices. Worse, current prices for players on the market are not just stagnating, but are actually drifting back up.


Discuss "Format War Pricing Aftermath: Blu-ray Up, HD-DVD Down" here. Read the article.

[JackT]

What a dumb article.

[Johnd]

What a dumb article.

???

Are you for real? This is Audioholics. The mods and editors write articles about electronics. That is precisely what Mr. Waratuke has done, and has compiled a graph with research to back up his story. If you wish to contradict anything written in the story, please tell me you have something more to state than: "What a dumb article." Please.

[JackT]

If you wish to contradict anything written in the story, please tell me you have something more to state than: "What a dumb article." Please.

Ok sure!. The basic gist of the article is that Blu-ray player prices are "too high" whatever that means, and this somehow is indicative of nefarious anti-market forces, specifically the operation of a "cartel."

Here is one reason why the article is dumb: the same whining nonsense could have been written about

-VHS players in 1978. (Crappy VHS still expensive? CARTEL! The market is broken!)
-CD players in 1984. (Too expensive! The consumer will never adopt these! Run for the hills FOR THE LOVE OF GOD!!!!)
-DVD players in 1997. (Players still cost too much!! CAPITALISM NOT WORKING!!!)
-MP3 players in 1998. (How much for a crappy 512MB???? PRICE FIXING AT WORK!!! CONSUMER GETTING screwed!!!)

Seriously, what did the author, who, as you helpfully pointed out, is a professional AV article writer, expect to happen to the price of BR players after the elimination of HD-DVD? I'm guessing BR player manufacturers expected an INCREASE IN DEMAND subsequent to:
1)Increased market share and
2)Decreased disincentive to buy due to format war uncertainty.

So, there is a price bump, and the author posts a ridiculous graph with a line through it, and we are supposed to conclude something is wrong? Really?

Since you asked for explanations, here is one more reason why the article is dumb: the author couldn't help throwing in a little gratuitous "the wrong format won" hand wringing.

But, I figured all of this would be self-evident to any reader, so I just said "This article is dumb."

How's that?

[Johnd]

Ok sure!. The basic gist of the article is that Blu-ray player prices are "too high" whatever that means, and this somehow is indicative of nefarious anti-market forces, specifically the operation of a "cartel."

Here is one reason why the article is dumb: the same whining nonsense could have been written about

-VHS players in 1978. (Crappy VHS still expensive? CARTEL! The market is broken!)
-CD players in 1984. (Too expensive! The consumer will never adopt these! Run for the hills FOR THE LOVE OF GOD!!!!)
-DVD players in 1997. (Players still cost to much!! CAPITALISM NOT WORKING!!!)
-MP3 players in 1998. (How much for a crappy 512MB???? PRICE FIXING AT WORK!!! CONSUMER GETTING screwed!!!)

Seriously, what did the author, who, as you helpfully pointed out, is a professional AV article writer, expect to happen to the price of BR players after the elimination of HD-DVD? I'm guessing BR player manufacturers expected an INCREASE IN DEMAND subsequent to:
1)Increased market share and
2)Decreased disincentive to buy do to format war uncertainty.

So, there is a price bump, and the author posts a ridiculous graph with a line through it, and we are supposed to conclude something is wrong? Really?

Since you asked for explanations, here is one more reason why the article is dumb: the author couldn't help throwing in a little gratuitous "the wrong format won" hand wringing.

But, I figured all of this would be self-evident to any reader, so I just said "This article is dumb."

How's that?

Well, that's a little more descriptive Jack, albeit in a seemingly spiteful manner.

I hear what you're saying, and some subjectivity invariably enters the equation. Judges do it. Writers do it. Reviewers do it. That does not undo the facts.

And this is pertinent. I myself am a newb to high def. I would not have gotten into it but for the price slashing of HD hardware and software. The only way I would ever consider BD is if their prices too were slashed...and I don't think I'm alone on that.

I see your point, but the little bit of inserted subjectivity in no way undoes the facts, nor slants the story to be pure fodder. Not to me. And, imho, nothing is "self-evident." Nothing. That is a myth. Cheers, John

[lonwa]

It just sounds like Jack is not having a good day. Don't be too hard on him though, this week has been kicking my butt (I blame the DST time change...)

[Johnd]

It just sounds like Jack is not having a good day. Don't be too hard on him though, this week has been kicking my butt (I blame the DST time change...)

You may be right. Then I wish you and Jack a better tomorrow.

[birdonthebeach]

And lets not forget - editorials are SUPPOSED to be subjective...

[Johnd]

And lets not forget - editorials are SUPPOSED to be subjective...

Ahhh. The voice of reason. Happy day birdonthebeach.

[dobyblue]

And lets not forget - editorials are SUPPOSED to be subjective...

Yes, you hit the nail on the head.

sub·jec·tive /səbˈdʒɛktɪv/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[suhb-jek-tiv] –adjective
1. existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought (opposed to objective).
2. pertaining to or characteristic of an individual; personal; individual: a subjective evaluation.
3. placing excessive emphasis on one's own moods, attitudes, opinions, etc.; unduly egocentric.