Slashdot Mirror


DVD and Blu-Ray Sales Nearly Halved Over Five Years, MPAA Report Says (arstechnica.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: In its annual Theatrical Home Entertainment Market Environment report, the Motion Picture Association of America described an immensely sharp drop-off of physical media sales over the past five years. According to the data, which was obtained from DEG and IHS Markit, global sales of video disc formats (which in this context means DVD, Blu-ray, and UltraHD Blu-ray) were $25.2 billion in 2014 but only $13.1 in 2018. That's a drop in the ballpark of 50 percent.

Don't expect 8K Blu-rays or other emerging quality-focused formats to turn the tide, either. Market data published by Forbes showed that the aging, low-definition DVD format still accounts for 57.9 percent of physical media sales, and 4K Blu-rays are only 5.3 percent. With drops that sharp, you'd expect apocalyptic financials for companies making and distributing movies. However, while there are certainly losers in this trend, the overall industry actually grew over the same period. Home entertainment spending grew 16 percent in 2018 thanks to surges in consumer spending on digital video services from players like Netflix, Amazon, and Hulu.
The report says that subscriptions to online streaming services grew 27 percent globally to 613.3 million in 2018, surpassing cable subscriptions (at 556 million) for the first time ever. "However, cable still drives more overall revenue than streaming -- it was the highest revenue platform in 2018, with $118 billion globally," Ars notes.

46 of 83 comments (clear)

  1. Well that's not so shocking by PCM2 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    How are you going to sell as much physical media when physical retail stores keep closing, and Amazon keeps trying to push customers to do streaming?

    fp?

    --
    Breakfast served all day!
    1. Re:Well that's not so shocking by markdavis · · Score: 2

      >"How are you going to sell as much physical media when physical retail stores keep closing, and Amazon keeps trying to push customers to do streaming?"

      And when discs are barely offered. And when prices are still too high. And in my case, when I want at least 3D for those movies which were and are still not offered. Jacking up prices by offering 4K discs, which nobody really needs or wants, didn't help either. And make sure to frustrate customers who BUY YOUR STUFF with irritating "previews" and unskippable crap. And offer more expensive "bundles" of DVD/Bluray which gives the customer one potentially useless disc, but at, you guessed it, higher prices (as if it adds value).

      Streaming can be nice- if you never want 'net-less access, and have good and unlimited bandwidth, and don't mind paying forever for content parts that disappear without notice, and don't mind the picture falling apart or suddenly going to 100P for a while, or studdering occasionally. Oh, and don't mind "subscribing" to more and more "services" to get what you used to get from one place.

    2. Re:Well that's not so shocking by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      Why buy new? I buy used copies. They only need to work once for me to successfully rip them. After that, the disc goes on a shelf and we watch the ripped copy from Plex.

  2. Everyone buys LPs here by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 4, Funny

    DVDs and CDs are so last decade.

    Everyone around here buys LPs, except those who realize tape is even better.

    No, I'm not joking.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    1. Re:Everyone buys LPs here by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      Never liked tape. A pop here and there is infinitely preferable to that hiss. (And yes, I'm one of those.)

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    2. Re: Everyone buys LPs here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Personally I love DVDs, if I can't buy a download without DRM then I'll buy the DVD. If I can't do either then I'll pirate it.

    3. Re:Everyone buys LPs here by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

      DVDs and CDs are so last decade.

      Everyone around here buys LPs, except those who realize tape is even better.

      If only someone could figure out a way to get movies onto a tape of some kind. They could call it a video cassette. Or something.

  3. Generation Smartphone with impaired eye-sight? by ffkom · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What I find most disturbing about the trend is how the younger generation seems to have lost the ability to discern the abysmal video quality of streaming services from the usually way better video quality from physical media.

    I can only speculate that when you grow up watching stuff mostly on tiny smartphone displays, you are prone to impaired eye-sight. At my biblical age, I can still see within seconds whether a UHD BluRay conveys a true 4k image or is just a cheap 2k upscale. But many of my younger colleagues seem to not notice any difference, even when I point out the most obvious areas on a paused still image. And even less are they able to see how compression artifacts differ from ordinary motion-blur in high-motion scenes.

    Therefore I expect the downward-spiral of readily available digital video quality will continue, with ever decreasing bandwidths and ever more aggressively "lossy" video codecs replacing actual image details with guesswork.

    1. Re:Generation Smartphone with impaired eye-sight? by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      What I find most disturbing about the trend is how the younger generation seems to have lost the ability to discern the abysmal video quality of streaming services from the usually way better video quality from physical media.

      Ya, but they're watching things on their phones, tables, laptops, etc... and not 40" - 60" HDTVs so they probably don't even notice how crappy the experience is.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    2. Re:Generation Smartphone with impaired eye-sight? by squiggleslash · · Score: 2

      What I find most disturbing about the trend is how the younger generation seems to have lost the ability to discern the abysmal video quality of streaming services from the usually way better video quality from physical media.

      Younger generation huh?

      I can't tell the difference between Blu-ray and Amazon/VUDU over my Comcast connection unless, for some reason, the bandwidth is constrained and the feed has to drop to a lower resolution. I don't see any artifacts and even back in the days when this was being introduced, I remember seeing people making comparisons between AppleTV's HD services and Blu-ray and finding it hard to come up with examples where there were any real differences - generally the only things that perform badly at 6Mbps are big fiery full-screen explosions.

      Is it me? Well, in addition to poorer resolution, I could always see the artifacts in DVD. Even on a shitty SD CRT. So my eyesight isn't that bad.

      This is not to say that someone with a trained eye can't tell the difference, I'm sure some can. But even among those, I'm fairly sure for most people streaming quality is "good enough".

      I don't think it has anything to do with people being "young", I think you're just a jackass.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    3. Re:Generation Smartphone with impaired eye-sight? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      https://xkcd.com/1683/

      These people hold their phone vertically while panning their child riding a bike. The septembers don't wander from the sign-laden, fenced-in areas of the internet, but the decays wrought (mostly by industries preying on them) by them have.

      This includes audio, any media, any $aaS. And while I hate how it's affected systems, it's hard for me to blame an industry for just making the most lucrative moves. You might say that music has become shitty, has become all image, formulaic, etc etc, but consider that unlike, say, grooming a headphone jack away, the industry did so as a RESPONSE, that the masses had no such taste to begin with. The kardasians are a symptom, rather than causing themselves. We're idiots who buy shit that says "wibbly wobbly is coming" or "may the excelsior be with you" without noticing a thing.

      It's not like I'm paying much attention to the screen anyway. For one, I'm too hopeless to determine any of my own viewing, I'm gonna end up with what the service wants to push. I need to. So now there's some hypesational LC-denominator thing on. Which I only put on because I crave the sensation of social activity in my vicinity. Even if I WAS a person that could be described as "discerning", all I have is dreck not worth HQ anyway.

      So I'll swallow the blocky darks, choppy motion, upscaled shit, and pay to do it.

    4. Re:Generation Smartphone with impaired eye-sight? by Drethon · · Score: 2

      What I find most disturbing about the trend is how the younger generation seems to have lost the ability to discern the abysmal video quality of streaming services from the usually way better video quality from physical media.

      I can only speculate that when you grow up watching stuff mostly on tiny smartphone displays, you are prone to impaired eye-sight. At my biblical age, I can still see within seconds whether a UHD BluRay conveys a true 4k image or is just a cheap 2k upscale. But many of my younger colleagues seem to not notice any difference, even when I point out the most obvious areas on a paused still image. And even less are they able to see how compression artifacts differ from ordinary motion-blur in high-motion scenes.

      Therefore I expect the downward-spiral of readily available digital video quality will continue, with ever decreasing bandwidths and ever more aggressively "lossy" video codecs replacing actual image details with guesswork.

      I had my CRT TV well into the time of LCD displays, just bought a 4k tv a year ago or so because the costs have come down. Honestly I still don't care about BluRay as a crappy show in UHD is still a crappy show and few good shows in standard definition lose much of what makes them a good show. Though I will admit a few documentaries or movies in UHD are fricken gorgeous compared to standard def.

    5. Re:Generation Smartphone with impaired eye-sight? by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      ... as a crappy show in UHD is still a crappy show ...

      Like when TV stations advertise that they have the News in "high-def" -- it's the freaking news people.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    6. Re:Generation Smartphone with impaired eye-sight? by markdavis · · Score: 1

      >"Though I will admit a few documentaries or movies in UHD are fricken gorgeous compared to standard def."

      If by "standard def" you mean (480I/P), sure. I totally agree. But almost nobody at normal 10' viewing distance from a 70" 4K TV upscaling from *quality* 1080P can tell any difference between that and actual 4K (UHD) source material. And by almost nobody, I mean way less than 1%.... and even then, it is probably only due to HDR, not resolution.

      4K Bluray is mostly a marketing scheme without utility... already being rejected by the market mostly because the discs are not backwards compatible and cost more. Also rejected was 3D, although that actually adds something useful and interesting, especially when shot well. And THOSE discs ARE backwards compatible (can be played on any Bluray player through any TV in 2D). Plus, it is still the ONLY way to get quality 3D content.

    7. Re:Generation Smartphone with impaired eye-sight? by n3r0.m4dski11z · · Score: 1

      "the younger generation seems to have lost the ability to discern the abysmal video quality of streaming services from the usually way better video quality from physical media."

      Most people who arent videophiles get used to whatever they are watching within a few minutes.
      The content is what matters most, for most people, and a way to relax. Heck how many people watch straight up cams, or did, back before web rips and the rapid release cycle made me never have to wait more than 6 months for any sort of show or movie in perfect digital quality at any bitrate i want.

      I just got a new 1080p projector (Upgrade from 720 that i had for 10 years) and it looks fantastic. Its all relative man.

      Anyone old, remembers all the shitty formats of the past, from vhs to dvd, so they also would theoretically have no problem with streaming services.. I guess i challenge your premise that this is:
      a) limited to "the young"
      and
      b) actually a problem

      --
      -
    8. Re:Generation Smartphone with impaired eye-sight? by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      What I find most disturbing about the trend is how the younger generation seems to have lost the ability to discern the abysmal video quality of streaming services from the usually way better video quality from physical media.

      Oh the huge manatee!

      It's not the youth, it's more or less everybody. They either can't tell, don't notice or don't care and it simply doesn't bother them. There's no reason they should care either.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    9. Re:Generation Smartphone with impaired eye-sight? by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      The annoying thing with streaming is that the quality varies depending on available bandwidth, and the available bandwidth fluctuates often especially on consumer connections...
      I'd rather download the whole movie at a decent quality, and then watch it, or watch it offline when i'm without connectivity (eg while flying).

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    10. Re:Generation Smartphone with impaired eye-sight? by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      And how much of that upgrade is due to 1080p vs 720p, and how much is due to the projector being newer and having a fresh bulb etc not to mention confirmation bias?

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    11. Re:Generation Smartphone with impaired eye-sight? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I just don't think it matters for most content. For every somber, low-contrast film like Aliens there's ten garish, high-contract flicks like Legally Blonde. Video quality only really matters when there's a lot of detail, or a lot of shades of black (perhaps from blackish, to none more black.) And unless you're in an ideal situation, you might not be able to see the difference either; it might be less significant than dust or reflections on the display. The same is true of audio quality, too. There are certain things MP3 doesn't do well, but unless you have high-end audio gear, you aren't going to be able to tell the difference in most cases — and those cases are few and far between to start with, so you won't even encounter them very often.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    12. Re:Generation Smartphone with impaired eye-sight? by radarskiy · · Score: 1

      I have a projector that is currently throwing a roughly 85" diagonal image. When I hold up my phone about a foot away it completely blocks the screen and has roughly the same number of pixels.

    13. Re:Generation Smartphone with impaired eye-sight? by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      The annoying thing with streaming is that the quality varies depending on available bandwidth, and the available bandwidth fluctuates often especially on consumer connections...
      I'd rather download the whole movie at a decent quality, and then watch it, or watch it offline when i'm without connectivity (eg while flying).

      No, the annoying thing with streaming is you're renting your "owned" copy. At any time the copy can disappear off the streaming site (and it's happened many times).

      Short of outright theft, Disney and company can't take back my Blu-Rays and DVDs of movies I bought so I can continue to watch them. Not so much if you bought those movies off some other service.

      Physical sales means they can't simply remove the content you've paid for.

    14. Re:Generation Smartphone with impaired eye-sight? by Drethon · · Score: 1

      >"Though I will admit a few documentaries or movies in UHD are fricken gorgeous compared to standard def."

      If by "standard def" you mean (480I/P), sure. I totally agree. But almost nobody at normal 10' viewing distance from a 70" 4K TV upscaling from *quality* 1080P can tell any difference between that and actual 4K (UHD) source material. And by almost nobody, I mean way less than 1%.... and even then, it is probably only due to HDR, not resolution.

      4K Bluray is mostly a marketing scheme without utility... already being rejected by the market mostly because the discs are not backwards compatible and cost more. Also rejected was 3D, although that actually adds something useful and interesting, especially when shot well. And THOSE discs ARE backwards compatible (can be played on any Bluray player through any TV in 2D). Plus, it is still the ONLY way to get quality 3D content.

      Yeah, talking 480 vs UHD. I think the video looks smoother between 1080P and UHD, but it could all be in my head.

  4. Missing major points by UnknowingFool · · Score: 4, Informative

    While physical sales have declined, overall sales are up by $15B because of digital purchases. The article somehow doesn’t mention that.

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    1. Re:Missing major points by Solandri · · Score: 1

      And that year-over-year revenue increased by 9% (10% in the U.S.), which is far above the rate of inflation. So it isn't just a case of DVD/Blu-ray buyers switching to streaming. Their increase in steaming revenue exceeds what you'd expect if disc-buyers had simply switched to streaming.

    2. Re:Missing major points by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yep, I bet they are not including USED, SECONDHAND and GARAGE sales.
      Some used outlets are thinking about not stocking DVD's and CD's - even the used shops are doing it tough. My motto is never buy retail.

      Well, I am buying up big on those low def DVD's Streaming quality is shit, my internet speed it shit, and I am 100% intolerant of commercials and plugs - so streaming has a way to catch up. The day when streaming companies say, well -you did not use it enough that month, just pay us one dollar, .5 * $10 is a lot of money, when I should be working or doing chores.

    3. Re:Missing major points by luther349 · · Score: 1

      i still put my favrets on good old dvd. 8gb dl-dvd are still cheaper then 400gb of flash meda. also you can store them pretty much forever. of course they are data disk not your normal dvd movie.

  5. Re:Yeah by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 3, Funny

    Pretty sure sales of Betamax, VHS, and Laserdisc movies are down too... what's your point?

    I know, right? And don't get me started on how hard it is to find good phonograph cylinders anymore.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  6. Because all the Blockbusters have closed by jfdavis668 · · Score: 1

    Without Blockbuster, where can you go get a DVD? I mean, I am really finding it hard to rent anything in VHS.

  7. So where is holographic storage? by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

    You know, the supposedly next big thing in "inexpensive" write-once storage.

  8. You have to wonder by bobstreo · · Score: 2

    what percentage of those sales are to Netflix and RedBox video rentals.

    They have no way of tracking sales of "used" Blu-rays and DVDs, which are both pretty healthy, but the MPAA can';t profit off those sales (yet)

    1. Re:You have to wonder by markdavis · · Score: 1

      >"what percentage of those sales are to Netflix and RedBox video rentals."

      Apparently not enough because I have a dozen titles in my Netflix bluray queue that Netflix refuses to replace or the industry refuses to sell to Netflex. I watched 2 of a 3 disc series and the 3rd disc was damaged in shipping and I have now been waiting 2 *YEARS* for Netflix to get at least a SINGLE disc for the entire COUNTRY. And this was a major blockbuster, not something obscure.

  9. Re:Yeah by jmccue · · Score: 1

    Wish I had mod points

    comments like this keeps me coming here

  10. Re:Yeah by No+Longer+an+AC · · Score: 1

    You only get mod points when nobody has anything worth modding or they've already been modded appropriately or you want to join in on the discussion.

    Or you take a few days off and they just expire.

    That's not really true, but sometimes it feels like it.

  11. Re:Yeah by martinX · · Score: 2

    Wish I had mod points, too. Not to mod this up or anything. I just wish I had mod points.

    --
    When they came for the communists, I said "He's next door. Take him away. Goddam commies."
  12. Re:No worries... by Falos · · Score: 1

    You're followed by a post saying overall sales are up.

    And yet you're right. They'll still say it. If not to get their way lobbying, as the familiar pacifier put into the faces of The Holy Shareholders. Sorry I didn't bring you more free money, sirs. I would have, if it wasn't for those meddling pirates.

  13. The MPAA can't see the forest by nehumanuscrede · · Score: 2

    for the trees apparently.

    My guess is this is due to the fact that their executive levels are all staffed with older generations who grew up under different rules.
    Time to hire some new blood if, for nothing else, to learn what needs to be modified with their business model.

    Here's a tip:

    The " new " generations doesn't want to be bogged down with physical stuff. They want the content available to them, on demand and a la carte, with an infinite choice of platforms to experience said content. ( Phones, Tablets, PCs, Consoles, etc )

    They don't want to have to buy*:
    ( * Multiple times every time the format changes. See Betamax -> VHS -> Laserdisc -> DvD -> Blu Ray -> 4K -> Streaming -> ? )

    1) An industry approved Smart Tv.
    2) An industry approved content player.
    3) An industry approved audio system.
    4) A dozen different subscription services because exclusive content can only be found on Service X or Y.

    Your physical media sales are down because the new generation is learning that, most of the time, steaming is " good enough ".
    It doesn't compete with the likes of BluRay or 4K ( streaming video compression sucks and I have yet to see any stream with 7.1 DTS / ATMOS ) but " good enough " is where most of your sales are going to be.

    If you don't do something about the exclusive content being locked into Service X, you're going to start seeing your streaming services die off as well and get replaced with the always reliable Yarr Matey versions.

    The sooner you figure out that non-exclusive streaming is where things are going, the better the odds your business will survive to see the next evolution.

    1. Re:The MPAA can't see the forest by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Most people don't have the hardware to take advantage of higher quality video and audio anyway... Even a lot of people who buy a large tv set tend to use the built in speakers instead of having a decent sound setup.

      Although that brings an annoyance, hdmi being a single cable instead of separate channels for audio and video forces you to upgrade your audio receiver at the same time as your tv set.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  14. Re:The CD and the Damage Done by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    Young's entire argument applies at noticeably low resolutions. There is always a digital resolution at which any given expert will find a digital recording indistinguishable from a clean analog, assuming that such an analog recording exists.

  15. Re:The CD and the Damage Done by Joce640k · · Score: 1

    What a load of pretentious crap.

    --
    No sig today...
  16. Re:The CD and the Damage Done by Joce640k · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Young's entire argument applies at noticeably low resolutions. There is always a digital resolution at which any given expert will find a digital recording indistinguishable from a clean analog, assuming that such an analog recording exists.

    For playback, CD is enough for any human ear.

    There's a half-argument for going to 48kHz because it allows for a more gradual rolloff in the reconstruction filter, and I wouldn't argue against it, but all this 192kHz/24bit stuff being thrown around by "golden ears" is rubbish. 16 bits and 44/48kHz is more then enough for playback.

    --
    No sig today...
  17. I have never held a blu-ray in hands by Vadim+Makarov · · Score: 1

    but am watching high-def videos daily. I've never had a blu-ray disk player either. Had dome DVDs and a player but haven't been using them for the past few years. Who ever buys this physical garbage any more when everything is available over the net?..

    --
    17779 eligible voters in a district, 17779 'vote' as one. This is Russia.
    1. Re:I have never held a blu-ray in hands by Sandman1971 · · Score: 1

      There's advantages and disadvantages to both.
      Sure, services like Netflix have tons of choice, but they rotate their selection. Or movies get pulled to be put on a competing service (IE: Disney+). Heck, even some movies that people bought the viewing rights to on iTunes were pulled, so you could no longer watch the movie that you paid for. There's also the odd time that the internet might go down. With physical media, you never have to worry about where to watch it, what service to register to or if it will get pulled. You'll always have access to that content. And you can do like a lot of folks, rip the movie, put it on a NAS, and get the best of both worlds.

      --
      It's better to burn out than to fade away
    2. Re:I have never held a blu-ray in hands by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Netflix and other streaming services aren't available in many countries. Search engines, torrents and large hard drives are. They are not subject to the limitations you list.

  18. Re:The CD and the Damage Done by jwhyche · · Score: 2

    Wow. That is probably one of the most complex and ignorant things I've ever read on the subject.

    --
    I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
  19. mind candy vs. eye candy by epine · · Score: 1

    At my biblical age, I can still see within seconds whether a UHD BluRay conveys a true 4k image or is just a cheap 2k upscale.

    I can still tell the difference, but I simply don't care. An idiot behind a ludicrously expensive camera is still just an idiot behind a camera. I can almost always tell if there's an idiot behind the camera within five minutes, regardless of video format.

    More generally, camera = script + casting director + DP + director + editor, these being the core of the essential creative team (costumes, sets, and special effects are plus items, but not essential).

    The talent component is complex. You don't always need Tom Hanks. I've seen many productions featuring five people you've never heard of who hit it out of the park (for a small value of "park", minus the preposterous spectacle we're usually sold instead of a competent story).

  20. Streaming is not the product by philmarcracken · · Score: 1

    Bad news bears for us that still want a digital product, but not in streaming form.

    >bad for network infrastructure(creating a peak hour)
    >bad for picking winners and losers(subscription models reward all)
    >bad for quality(reducing bitrate reduces bandwidth costs)
    >bad for accessibility(they locked 4k behind certain intel cpus and windows 10 edge browser)
    >bad for portability(no internet, you're fucked)
    >bad for editing and making the dankest memes(no file)

    All I want is a steam like platform on which they offer full seasons or the movie in AV1 wrapped in mkv for a set price and a similar review system(to stop them fucking with the bitrate).

    Is that so much to ask for?