Sony has been spending like a trophy wife to get Blu-Ray accepted, even though it's as bad a format as it is.

Consumers, consider yourself hoodwinked!

how much Toshiba was offering during renegotiation until they backed off. My guess $375million or so in order to trump such a high price from Sony.

Either way, Narg your format effing lost, since it felt it's own format wasnt worth more than 400million.

Enjoy you expensive upscaling DVD player.

Yeah, stating the obvious. Of course they paid a sheeshload of cash to gain studio preferences, both contenders did at a time (also HDDVD). What I do not get, is to point fingers just to Sony. I know they are capable, but they are part of the BDA, is as silly as saying M$ paid Paramount !!!.

(Pure speculation) I am starting to believe that Toshiba managed to get an agreement to end up this war as well, with the announcement of the Cell factory that was sold to them.

Sounds like a rumor. But would anyone really be surprised if it was true. That's business. Happens to be about the same amount that Exxon Mobil gave their retiring CEO. So the 150 mil HD-DVD gave to Paramount just wasn't enough was it? Well at least the format war is over!

You knew it?
LMAO
From what we've all learned by reading your submittals...you know very little.

Hoodwinked?
LMAO
Wake up and smell the Blu Poppies dude...

Oh Boy, here we go again. The Shit is getting
so deep now i am going to have to get
16 inch extenders for my Cowboy Boots. Bluray won
the battle months ago, this is nothing more
than the Dead Cow going MOOOOOO one last time
before it's head hit's the Floor.

1) TGDaily has done itself a journalistic disservice by taking two sentences out of the cited article and turning that into the crux of their conjecture laden article.
1) I don't think Narg even read the cited article. He just read the TGDaily title and fell hook, line, and sinker. Why? Because that's what he wants to believe and will trump without question any source, credible or not, to support his hypothesis.

"Neither side has confirmed the size of any bids or payments." Did anybody bother to get that when reading the source?

This rumor has been floating around out there since CES, since the HD-DVD camp was left at the alter by Warner needing to rationalize it all somehow. Their solution? Spread this pay-off which has been repudiated by Sony, the BDA, and Warner time and time again.

One of the main sour-grape-sources of this rumor has already been identified. Read:
http://www.tvpredictions.com/journalists012108.htm

Even TGDaily's own Mark "HDDVD slant" Raby reported this from the day of the Warner Defection:
"Warner was also reportedly offered monetary incentives to continue to support HD DVD but declined." - ( http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/35479/113/ )

Finally, Warner's CEO has publically denied that a payoff occurred:
"One source reported that Toshiba had offered to pay more than $100 million, while Sony bid closer to $400 million. But Meyer denied there was a bidding war and said Warner instead looked solely at global sales of both formats in making its decision. 'The window of opportunity for high-definition DVD could be missed if format confusion continues to linger,' he said."
http://www.wnbc.com/money/14991882/detail.html

So this is one of those Occam's Razor moments. You can believe that all these sources are lying and you are being hood-winked in some mass conspiracy.

Or you can choose the simplest conclusion, based on the facts. Blu-Ray outsold HD-DVD handily all of 2007, and Warner put it's money on the winning horse.

Seriously Narg... give it up. It's sad.

Bad format?

Prove it.

For now it is official.

Blu-Ray > HD-DVD

HD-DVD can still win!

...They pointed out 4 reasons why Sony won. The warner fact is one of them. It's certainly an important point, but it's still 1 out of 4.
1. Bigger is better
2. PS3
3. Solid partnership
4. Content is King
So, if this isn't a rumor, it's only 1/4 of a winning strategy. You can weight the 4 points differently, but IMHO without the first 3 points Sony would've never won that absurd war.

You missed out on the other points that caused it to win:

1. DRM
2. Payola
3. Betamax

On your points:

1. Bigger is not better when it causes the format to be physically inferior. This is a plus to the studios and Sony as you'll be forced to re-purchase your movies when the discs die early. Think about it.
2. PS3 is still considered the worst of the current consoles. And, was used incorrectly by Sony to market Blu-Ray to the studios, against the consumer's best interests.
3. Solid? How did you read that? Sounds more like harsh leverage to me. "Follow us or loose out because we can make the consumer pay more..." is more what I read.
4. HD DVD had better content, as shown in many reviews, the article was wrong on that.

The article missed only a few things, but over all was very informative on how Sony used bad business to win a format war that it will never recover from.

This "war" was never absurd. "Wars" like this are always in the consumers best interest. It was the harsh push by Sony to win at all costs that made it bad. Now those costs are going to be paid by un-witting consumers. I'm not going to be one of the dumb ones, are you?

Sony made a format that was only a modification of the original HD DVD format. A modification done to make them look better, when they are not. They moved the data layer of the disc 80% closer to the surface of the media. This allows the fragile data layer to be more likely damaged by scratches and light. Both are a current problem in all optical media, now it's worse with Blu-Ray. Plus, read enlighten's posts http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/36155/118/ about the pit width and depth being so much smaller than other formats, also making the media more easily damaged. And no, the "special coating" that Sony advertised early is not used on Blu-Ray discs as it is too expensive. One of many lies Sony used to buy support for this poor format. The media is designed for profit, and is not good for storing data of any type.

Also, the format specifications are not solidified. And will change again next year. Already older Blu-Ray players are being made obsolete and will require replacement to play newer movies. The changes in the format expected in the next year will cause more older players to be made obsolete.

Also keep in mind that Sony has retained rights to the content of all material placed on the media. They will not license the publication of any content they do not approve of. I know you and I could care less about porno, so that's no bit loss. But what's to keep them from not allowing publication of certain political or social movies?

I don't know about you, but I'd call that a bad format. Stay away from Blu-Ray, or you'll hate yourself.

I was one of the smart ones. I never bought either of the HD players. (I guess I like my upscaling Oppo too much...) Wasn't going to until dual format players were more affordable. I realized the tactics that Sony was using early on, and that Blu-Ray would never loose out 100%. Just like the /- war eventually allowed both formats, it would have been better for consumers to have both this time too. It sad that the "war" ended too early for a true choice to be available to the consumer. Consumers always lose when no choice is available. Fortunately there is a growing new choice in downloadable media. If that grows as much as many folks think it will, I may be in the group of the most smartest in not buying any HD player ever.

I will always contend that HD DVD was a better format. But, dual format would have been the best choice in the long run. I stated that in a post long long ago.

Blu, not to make you an example, but you show how folks here and elsewhere assume way too much these days. They assumed that one format was perfect, when it's obviously not. Now due to the extreme stupidity of consumers and studios, we are hobbled in our choice. There is no reason to be happy about this. None.

If you don't believe that there was a payoff, then you're sad!

Looks a bit like Election 08'.

VHS beat betamax. does that mean vhs was better?

while BD has a slightly larger storage and a slightly better coating on the disk for protection against scratches, hd dvd is made from and at the same factories as regular dvds therefore the cost of making them is much less.

i have a ps3 and a hddvd player so dont flame me for being a "fan" of either.
i would have liked to see hddvd win though becuase it is cheaper/easier to make.

The "better coating" as you call it is not being used on Blu-Ray discs. It's too expensive.

Sony lied. Consumers pay dearly...

I have neither, so I'm not worried either. :)

I, too, didnt buy either formats until the this war gets cleared up. Hell, I p[robably wont buy till price go down, which they will. But from the business standpoint, Blu-Ray was a clear winner from the beginning.

Whether you like it or not, it will never be the consumer who decides what wins, it will be the business politics behind it.

If Toshiba was willing to fork up the cash, we would all be using HD-DVD by now, but guess what they didnt feel the format was worth it.

Yeah narg, you're definitely in the "most smartest" category. Please, stay there. =)

So Narg states that the 0.1mm cover coat on BD does not exist. No one uses it. It's a lie and we're all suckers.

Well... Anyone who takes the time to check their facts would know that his assertion is *patently false*.

Aside from the hard cover coat, there is NOTHING protecting the substrate. The recording medium is 0.1mm away from the surface and the only thing protecting it IS the hard coat.

I recommend Narg to review the published BDA specification for the physical contruction of Blu-Ray discs. I've provided a link below. I would specifically recommend sections 4-3 and and 5-3 covering the specified cover coat construction and the taber abrasion tests.

http://www.blu-raydisc.com/assets/downloadablefile/BD-ROMwhitepaper20070308-13652.pdf

Stop spreading disinformation, Narg. You're wrong. And the more you post unfounded FUD the more people will see through it.

You're predictions have been wrong. Your facts are wrong, and this is now more about you not losing face than it is about an argument you've already lost.

Another conspiracy theorist. The information is out there. Go find us all some concrete evidence to not only support your theory but also those that contradict the facts already presented.

But, really, we won't hear from you. You'll be busy digging for Jimmy Hoffa at the Meadowlands or searching for casings on the grassy knoll.

Everybody knew that
a) Toshiba offered Warner money
b) Sony offered Warner (more) money

Analysts are "throwing around" the 400 million. We still do not know how much it cost sony. How can you even bring yourself to care?

Narg, what are you talking about?!?
I was only reporting the points of the original articles, they are not my points. Did you read the ORIGINAL article from theglobeandmail.com?!?
The 4th point, for example, was about Warner being convinced, not contents in general!!! COME ON!
And that war was absurd and it wasn't in consumer best interest because consumers stayed out of the competition. Consumers really didn't choose any format! Eventually, they bought millions of the new playstation, which Sony cleverly equipped with a BD-player.

Sony made a format that was only a modification of the original HD DVD format.

@Adam please before you make a claim on something please check your research.

FOR THOSE THAT EVEN DECIDED TO DO SOME RESEARCH
they would know that is not the case at all..Blu-Ray was and has always been the older format compared to HD DVD.. THE FIRST Blu-Ray players/recorders on the consumer market for purchase was Apr/10/2003. the first HD DVD player on the consumer market was apr 2006. that's right Blu-Ray was on the market a full 3 years on the market before HD DVD promotional group had their first HD DVD player.

I wish the story were clearer on the money spend. "Costing" 400m and "Paying" 400m are two different things. "Costing" can come in the form of how much the wining and dining cost, concessions made, etc. "Paying" is the cash amount that actually went between the two parties. Of course, there's some grey area between the two, but given what some executives make, if Sony were to include the time of their executives in negotiating the deal as part of the "cost", then a sizable sum of money could be involved. Ifa given executive had 100k in salary, the "cost" to the company could get booked north of 500k.

I'm not sure I'm going to buy Blue-Ray player even if that format won. It is so convinient to download HD movies - you can start watching it on 20-40 minutes if you have fast internet. Unlike waiting next day for movie from Netflix. Netflix already realised it and now allows to download movies. And with coming FIOS and other 10-15-30Mbit speeds, HD can be viewed real time.
Why would you care about discs that are easy to scratch and slow BD players?

What the hell does Bluray have anything
to do with Netflix??? Go ahead and use online
downstreaming for your HD content, it won't
take you long to figure out your waisting your
time. Bluray did win the format battle, and that's
a good thing. Good bye HD-DVD, i won't miss you
and most of the rest of the world won't either.