Blu-Ray wins on Black Friday week.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by DaViD Boulet

Lotus,

I do think that you're an insider. I also think you work for Toshiba/Microsoft.

Wow I've never worked for Toshiba or MS.

So, you're telling me that Universal Studios telling me about the sales figures of another studios titles is "confirmation"???

When WB releases their sales statistics, that would seem the time to talk about "confirmation". Does Universal Studios have access to sales figures on Warner SKUs?

Yes actually they do. They also have access to Paramount, Dreamworks, etc. Why? He handles that information for the HD DVD PRG. So his statement is factual. Not some "guess."

Fascinating prediction. It will be interesting to see what happens at CES/early 2008.

I believe the chances of a change are less than 50% right now. To me it looks like a CES without changes except for possibly New Line. I know LOTR will be HD DVD's huge title announcement (and on TL).

[TheMoose]

Originally Posted by Lotus

I posted on here that Harry Potter sold better on HD DVD after all the outlets were taken into account (something Videoscan can't do and only gets around 60%). Then it gets confirmed.

If you are referring to information supplied in Suzanne Ault's recent Video Business article. I'm hearing She made a correction today indicating that she had it backwards and BD outsold the HD DVD version 55:45.

I'm also hearing the Nielson numbers have been released for this week. It's 61-39 for Blu-Ray with HP5 selling 1.2:1 better on Blu-ray and the boxset selling 1.3:1 better.

Could this be a repeat of Universals lying about the Transformers numbers?

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by TheMoose

If you are referring to information supplied in Suzanne Ault's recent Video Business article. I'm hearing She made a correction today indicating that she had it backwards and BD outsold the HD DVD version 55:45.

I'm also hearing the Nielson numbers have been released for this week. It's 61-39 for Blu-Ray with HP5 selling 1.2:1 better on Blu-ray and the boxset selling 1.3:1 better.

Could this be a repeat of Universals lying about the Transformers numbers?

All she did was take his quote out and then said according to "Nielsen," which reverses it. He didn't take his quote back. She got heat from way too many overly interested BD people.

So 61-39 with BOGOs at Best Buy? Congrats! That's with the Simpsons?

Amazing!

Still aren't really outselling on HP though. Even using Nielsen numbers, Warners is pretty happy with HD DVD. It costs less and they're starting to really sell through now with the new players on the market.

[TheMoose]

Originally Posted by Lotus

All she did was take his quote out and then said according to "Nielsen," which reverses it. He didn't take his quote back. She got heat from way too many overly interested BD people.

So 61-39 with BOGOs at Best Buy? Congrats! That's with the Simpsons?

Amazing!

Still aren't really outselling on HP though. Even using Nielsen numbers, Warners is pretty happy with HD DVD. It costs less and they're starting to really sell through now with the new players on the market.

Actually she got heat for publishing the wrong numbers!!!
Here's what she says,

Just prior to the long Christmas weekend, I posted a story online that carried a mistake. Instead of saying that Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix on HD DVD was selling slightly below its Blu-ray version at a 45 to 55 ratio, I went all dyslexic and inverted the numbers to say HD DVD was actually outpacing Blu-ray at a 55 to 45 ratio. That was wrong.

So when you thought Harry Potter on HD-DVD was out selling Blu-Ray it was a big deal to you, Warners & Universal, but now that the numbers are on the Blu-Ray side your saying it doesn't really matter anymore?

Amazing!

You've been saying that it's a big deal to Warner for HD-DVD to out sell Blu-Ray on a title released in both formats, as a matter of fact you guys are saying those are the only numbers that matter, so what does it mean when Blu-Ray sells the most?

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by TheMoose

Actually she got heat for publishing the wrong numbers!!!
Here's what she says,

Just prior to the long Christmas weekend, I posted a story online that carried a mistake. Instead of saying that Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix on HD DVD was selling slightly below its Blu-ray version at a 45 to 55 ratio, I went all dyslexic and inverted the numbers to say HD DVD was actually outpacing Blu-ray at a 55 to 45 ratio. That was wrong.

So when you thought Harry Potter on HD-DVD was out selling Blu-Ray it was a big deal to you, Warners & Universal, but now that the numbers are on the Blu-Ray side your saying it doesn't really matter anymore?

Amazing!

You've been saying that it's a big deal to Warner for HD-DVD to out sell Blu-Ray on a title released in both formats, as a matter of fact you guys are saying those are the only numbers that matter, so what does it mean when Blu-Ray sells the most?

No she changed it from a QUOTE to a paragraph that says using Nielsens. She mentioned the number of absurd people attacking her and even pointed out how he would have information about Warners but she did what was easiest for her. She said it was her error and moved on.

Nielsen doesnt track Wal-Mart you know that place where the majority of people got a $98 HD DVD player. Warners and Disney have both stated for years that unlike what Nielsen says (That Best Buy is the number one DVD retail outlet) that Wal-Mart is by far where most of their titles are sold.

The real numbers are HP did better on HD DVD. Wal-Mart will never announce their numbers so you'll just keep saying "No No No!"

Doesn't matter. 1.2 to 1 is not 2:1 or 3:1. 1.2 to 1 is actually FINANCIALLY better for HD DVD. Warners profited more on HD DVD this holiday season than BD.

That last sentence is all that matters to them. Yes the 1.2 to 1 is important even if the real number. Because it wasn't 2:1 or 3:1. It was 20% better when it costs more to make BDs.

[DaViD Boulet]

Any confirmed source verify that the HD DVD outsold the BD? Or are we to just rely on second-hand reports about Walmat's supposed/unpublished sales figures?

interesting reversal of the original quote.

http://www.videobusiness.com/article/CA6515097.html