HD Format War Conspiracy!
So, this is mainly just for fun. It’s been something that I have been thinking about for a while now, since late July actually. I don’t really believe this is what happened but it makes for an interesting read anyways. Also, it’s not totally out of the picture that this could happen. Anyways onto the conspiracy:
Was the format war all a manipulated plan to subvert the consumer into buying a new product they didn’t need? Over the course of the format war (which continues to rage on today) a few semi-major events cropped up that suggests that Sony, Toshiba, Microsoft, and all movie studios were actually manipulating the format war from the beginning in order in ensure that the HD format would succeed and not flounder. Let’s start with the beginning:
Back in 2005 Toshiba and Sony had both agreed that a format war was not good and that they needed to combine their technology to avoid one.
The media (owned primarily by the movie studios) picked up this story and ran with it citing that a “format war” (over exaggerated mumbo jumbo) would be the worst possible thing for consumers with constant references to the VHS-Beta war. These were reassurances so that the populace would know exactly what would happen in the event of a “war”. In the end, the talks between Sony and Toshiba broke down citing that each one had wanted different things to be included in the disc.
Sony announced that the PS3 would carry a Blu-ray player inside. Microsoft also announced exclusive support for the HD DVD format, thus sealing the videogame crowd into the market. Gamers are one of the few consumers who buy into this kind of crap. . . to many, loyalty is everything.
The 360 launched in 2005, securing a win over the PS3, but without an HD DVD player securing an underdog status for HD DVD.
Both HD DVD and Blu-ray officially launched (HD DVD first) in mid 2006. HD DVD is backed by Weinstein and Universal exclusively and by Warner, Paramount, and Magnolia unexclusively. Blu-ray is backed by Fox, Disney, Sony, Lionsgate, and MGM exclusively as well as Warner, Paramount, and Magnolia unexclusively. HD DVD’s underdog status is officially achieved but it was given enough power so as to present a “challenge” to Blu-ray.
From Summer 2006-Nov 2006 HD DVD is firmly winning the format war due to it’s obvious price advantage, another advantage given to the underdog format. This is done to show that HD DVD actually might be able to win. . .
The PS3 launches, and although it boosts Blu-ray to a 2-1 sales lead in software, it flounders horribly as a video game machine. Perhaps this was in the deal the whole time. Sony gets to have the next gen format but has to secede the video game market to Microsoft (nobody expected Nintendo to do so well at this point).
In order to stave off any consumer overthrow of the Blu-ray format (and it’s very expensive prices) the HD DVD studios are told not to release anything for about 3 months after the PS3 launches. This gives the consumer the idea that Blu-ray has already won.
Weinstein drops out of the HD race. This appears to have not been part of the plan at all. They shut up, step back, and refuse to comment on anything regarding HD or Blu-ray. Perhaps they thought manipulating a war was bad and feared that if consumers found out about what was happening all parties involved would suffer a severe backlash, something a smaller studio like Weinstein couldn’t afford.
July of 2007, HD DVD seems to be very near the brink of death. With only one studio supporting it exclusively the consumers are beginning to waive in their support for the format. Something needs to be done since the war hasn’t gained enough publicity yet. By August, Paramount/Dreamworks are told to release movies exclusively on HD DVD. The media is a riot. They rave on and on and on about how HD DVD was about to die and how this may have saved them. Reports of a “buy-out” swirl in the weeks ahead.
Reports that Microsoft and Toshiba are currently trying to buy Warner circle the rumour parts of media conglomerates for at least 2 months after the Paramount/DreamWorks announcement.
Rumours of an HD DVD equipped Xbox 360 start to crop up, but each time they are firmly dashed with no question on the matter. It’s not part of the deal that Microsoft’s console is to have a built in HD DVD player, which would cause severe headaches for the PS3. Remember: Microsoft gets gaming, Sony gets the next media format.
Sony sells off it’s chip processing to Toshiba, which is now actively making the cell processors for the PS3, their largest “competition” in the format war. Maybe this is payment to Toshiba for wasting so much money on helping to fuel a fraudulent war?
Warner comes out and says that it has to choose a side, after canceling their THD disc program. Citing that stand alone players matter most, they give hope to the consumer that HD DVD will win over Warner exclusivity. After all, at this point HD DVD players were much cheaper than Blu-ray’s, one of the key aspects that made it “consumer friendly.”
HD DVD needs to secure in people’s minds that Warner will go HD DVD exclusively (more publicity) so they launch a deal with Wal-Mart to sell cheap $99 players. 90,000 are sold in one weekend. The consumer is convinced that, based off of Warner’s statements, they will go HD DVD exclusive and HD DVD will win. The media reports all the positive news surrounding HD DVD.
Transformer’s releases to the general public on DVD and HD DVD. Not realizing what a huge flick it would be the companies quickly organize a “Buy One Get One Free” sale for Blu-ray titles. After all, HD DVD can’t win one single week or the consumer might see a shift in the war.
Paramount declares it sold 190,000 HD DVDs in the first week for Transformers, which are disputed by the BDA and Neilson’s Videoscan. Another media shitfest hits, providing more and more publicity to the growing format war.
Every major HD DVD title from then on has a Blu-ray BOGO attached to it just to ensure the master plan does not get thwarted. This includes both Shrek the Third and the Bourne Ultimatum.
Mid-December; HD DVD begins launching it’s own BOGO sales to begin “clearing stock” Warner knows that it’s time to shift to Blu-ray is almost here and thus many of the BOGO sales surround Warner’s titles.
Friday, 2 days before CES 2008 starts Warner is told to go Blu-ray exclusive. A media craze is struck up again. Most touting that Blu-ray has won the “war”.
Toshiba is told to issue a press release hinting at possible legal issues between them and Warner.
Toshiba cancels it’s 2 hour event at CES due to them “not knowing” that Warner was going to make the switch. . .
Is there gonna be more to this conspiracy tale? Universal and P/DW are still exclusive to HD DVD. They could ride this media circus for at least 3-4 more months.
My main point in all of this is that the whole war was manipulated from the beginning so that the HDM wouldn’t flounder like Laserdisc did. It is common knowledge that revolutionary products take hold very fast, evolutionary products often do not. HDM is very much an evolutionary product that builds off the DVD format. Without all the loyalty and bickering in forums and stores would HDM have gotten this far? Is it an interesting enough product that consumers would have been interested if the media didn’t tell us to be interested in it?
Is this a legit conspiracy? Who knows. . . I don’t necessarily believe that this did happen. What I do believe is that this could happen. Hollywood is losing more and more money each year. It’ll only be so long until that they try something as dramatic as this. . .
Anyways, take this for what it is: a fun read. That’s why I wrote it. This is not a bash on Blu-ray or HD DVD. Just a harmless conspiracy theory.
Thanks for reading.
Hillary Wants to Take My Money?
So, take this news with the tiniest bit of salt, but according to WorldNetDaily if Hillary becomes the next President of the United State (a very real possibility at this point) she may impose “mechanisms. . . going after people’s wages, [and] automatic enrollment” for health insurance. Essentially she may, at some point, wish to begin garnishing the wages of people who can’t willingly afford health insurance themselves. Eek. . .
Now before I continue, there are a few things I should note:
- WorldNetDaily is an arguably conservative journalist website. They even have banner ads on their page smearing Hillary Clinton.
- The exact phrases being quoted in this article are cut and edited in such a way as to leave out very meaningful information.
- There isn’t really enough information as pertaining to pricing and amount of insurance to justify any sort of real opposition to this plan just yet.
- I am neither a Democrat or a Republican, so please don’t label me as such for my speculations (you see what I just did there?) on this particular topic.
Ok, so back onto the subject at hand: Hillary wants to take my money to give me health insurance. If you think about it in passing, it makes a lot of sense. The government needs healthy people, healthy people need medical attention, medical attention requires money (i.e. insurance). However, if you were to look at the people in our country who essentially can’t afford health insurance now, I think you’d also see how disastrous it would be to begin garnishing their wages to give them it. I have first hand experience at being poorer than poor. Every single penny counts when you are living on a tight budget and sometimes you just have to rely on home remedies and hope when you get sick. It’s a sad state, and as a socialist (my political affiliation, please don’t burn me at the cross) I fully believe in universal healthcare being paid with taxes. Anyways, I digress. Again, let me reiterate, as coming from somebody who has been in this situation, garnishing the wages of the poor is not the right answer to this problem.
Like I said above, I don’t have all the information concerning the proposed solution to healthcare for Americans. This plan may very well be the best solution to keep the conservatives happy while at the same time giving most citizens healthcare. However, when looking at the equation right now, there are still far too many variables that would make this solution viable, and were they to hand it off to me I’d throw the entire idea out the window. I just don’t see any realistic way of getting this plan to work. . .
Prove me wrong, Hillary.
Here’s the thing about the HD format war. . .
HD media (Blu-ray, HD DVD, HD VMD, etc.) probably won’t ever beat out DVD. Shocking, I know. It’s just not likely to happen due to the “requirements” of enjoying such HD films.
Now, before I start on to the “why”, let me say that I am not saying they will fail. HD media formats could very well succeed without taking over the entire market. It can reach critical mass, and it can become a huge money generator along-side of DVD. Now onto the “why”:
HDM has requirements to enjoy. These requirements are relayed throughout almost every retail chain across the market. In order to enjoy HDM you need an HDTV. Bam! HDM already has a cap on how many units it can sell.
Now, according to this study (LINK) as of November 20th, 2007, about 25% of U.S. homes have an HDTV in them. Given the usual research study groups it probably has a +/- 5% error range. So let’s say 20%-30% of U.S. Homes in the U.S. right now have HDTVs in them. This means that if HDM players were to sell like gangbusters right now, they could only take about 25% of the marketplace, leaving DVD with 75%.
So I know what you are already thinking. HDTVs are reaching mass adoption and eventually everybody will have an HDTV. Yes, you are correct. Eventually everybody will own an HDTV in the U.S., there is no doubt about it. As more and more CE companies stop selling/making SDTVs consumers will have no choice but to adopt HDTVs. However, despite this being true there are a couple of conditions that go along with it:
First, HDTVs will not be reaching complete penetration in the next 2 years (date when the BDA says Blu-ray will completely dominate the market, 3 years from last March) . Hell, I’d be surprised if HDTVs reached 40% penetration in 2 years. If you look at the timeline for HDTVs you can tell that the trend for buying HDTVs in not exponential like DVDs sales were. There won’t be a short period time where there is a mass adoption of HDTVs. It happened with DVDs because Chinese manufacturers came in and slashed prices on a format that had no competition, didn’t need an upgraded player to work, and offered features that were revolutionary (not evolutionary) to consumers. HDTVs are too expensive (even with Chinese manufacturers), and still too confusing with average consumers still believing that Plasmas are better than LCDs, which are better than DLPs. HDTVs will not grow exponentially, but rather gradually over the next 10 years. It has taken about 10 years to reach 25%, I think in another 10 years it might reach 90%-100%.
Second, the same people who have bought HDTVs in the last 10 years are not the same people who will be buying HDTVs for the next 10-15-20 years. A lot of these people will simply be getting HDTVs because they have to. They need a new TV, their old one broke, etc. These same people won’t be rushing out to spend an additional $100 on HDM equipment/movies (assuming that at this time HDM players and movies drop to DVD levels).
So now let’s throw back in the HDM equation. Currently, HDM (combined) is selling pretty well. There are charts that are showing that HDM (specifically Blu-ray) is beginning to show the same sales trends as DVD. Good news, right? If Blu-ray (or any other HDM format) is half as successful as DVD then it’ll be well worth all the effort. However, at the current moment it can’t be that successful. As soon as it hits the “wall” the sales trend will stop, and will then gradually gain momentum along with HDTVs, probably falling under the same percentage. For example, let’s say HDTVs reach 50% market penetration, you can probably expect HDM players to reach 40%-45% penetration.
Finally, you have to take into account that when HDM seriously starts to take hold of the market there will also be radical price slashing of DVDs and DVD players (yes they can drop even lower). As with all products that are going into retirement, you can be assured that studios and CE companies will want to hang onto any last profits with that format for as long as possible even if that means slashing prices. This, in of itself, could undo HDM from establishing a dominant hold over the home video market by itself. As an evolutionary product (not a revolutionary product) there will be that large percentage of people in the U.S. who honestly just won’t see the benefit in HDM and will wish to take advantage of the reduced DVD prices to expand their movie collections even farther.
This may seem like a doom & gloom post for HDM, but it’s not. Actually, given the conditions, I think that HDM is very lucky to be coming into the market now as opposed to later or earlier. If HDM had come out in the beginning of the decade there probably wouldn’t have been enough HDTVs to supplement it, and it would have died off like Laserdisc. In turn, had HDM launched later this year, or even over the next 2 years there is a chance that it might not have reached enough critical mass to combat digital downloads when they become feasible, which is going to happen eventually, don’t kid yourself if you think that it’s an impossibility. Bottom line, HDM will become probably become a success (in one form or another), but chances are the consumer isn’t just going to stand up one day and throw out their DVD collections. In the end, I hope you are comfortable with a 2 format system because given all that I just explained I can’t honestly see it happening any other way.
Thanks for reading.
A Brief History of Iraq
This was written during a political discussion by myself. It explains, at least in part, why I think we are stuck in what can only be called a quagmire. Thanks for reading.
Iraq’s history is at part to blame for what is happening today, although rest assured America now deserves a good portion of that as well (or if you are a neocon you can call the blame our ‘accomplishment’). In any case there is a long history of why Iraq has been a bloody, violent nation and I will highlight them here.
After WWI the Ottoman Empire was disbanded, gutted, and basically left for dead. It was a dead state and further proof that Empires were a thing of the past. In accordance with the Sykes-Pico agreement, France and Britain began carving up the Ottoman Empire’s land to further their colonialistic dreams. Two “peace” conferences would take place over the course of two years to figure out exactly what they should do. France, Britain, and the U.S. all partook in the peace conferences.
During the first conference the three negotiators began discussing what was going to happen. France and Britain, wanting to colonize the area where as the U.S. wanted to let them govern themselves without any intervention (I know its surprising). It was decided that a peace accord would go out to these haphazard lands and do a poll of what the people wanted: freedom, or colonialism. The results were to be decided at the next peace conference in exactly one year.
As the second peace conference came around all three delegates once again got together in Paris. The peace accord that was sent out came back with the results. Unsurprisingly, the results heavily favored that of the people wanting to be free, and not just mere colonies. This, however, was unnacceptable to Britain and France. The U.S. not wanting to have any hand in what the other two nations were doing withdrew completely from the peace conferences. The delagates from Britain and France had then drawn out the borders for their new “colonies” on the back of a napkin (literally). France got what is today considered Palestine, Israel, and a good chunk of Syria, where as Britain got a small part of northern Syria as well as Iraq.
Under British colonialism now, Iraq would serve as a ‘hub’ for British needs in the Middle East. The British quickly did away with the tribes that previously ruled the area and established a monarchy. The monarchical figure they chose to “lead” Iraq was named King Faisal I, who was a Sunni Muslim. King Faisal was in charge from around 1920-ish to 1933 when he had a heart attack. Much of his reign was plagued with rebellions, especially by the Kurds to the noth. In 1921 the Shiites rebelled against the monarchy. In 1922, 1924, 1925, 1927, 1929, 1930, 1931 the Kurds rebelled. In 1930 the Christian Assyriands rebelled. All rebellions were ruthlessly put down, with the British backing the state with their own troops. After Faisal I died, his son Ghazi took the throne only to be killed 6 years later in a car accident. However, in 1936 a coup de tat would change the power once again.
Bakr Sidqi overthrew the monarchy in Iraq and ruled it as a nationalist. He was part of a growing trend along with Nasser of Egypt, in Arab Nationalism. Bakr was eventually assassinated in Mosul and his rule would be yet again replaced by somebody who was well favored by the British. This person would be Al-Saeed (aka the Happy One). Al-Saeed was a blind follower of British rule. He relied on them heavily to crush rebellions and rule the empire. Unfortunately after WWII the British had to withdraw most of their troops and only kept a consulate in Baghdad from which they could rule. Iraq no longer had British troops to squish the rebellions and Al-Saeed had to rely on his own troops to do it. As dissent grew more and more fierce among the people there would eventually be one successful coup that overthrew his rule. In 1963, under Abd Al Salam ‘Arif, the Baathist party took control of Iraq.
Al Salam ‘Arif was a minor player in the control of Iraq, him and his party was eventually filtered out of the Iraqi political system within a few months of taking control. Al Salam simply was not powerful enough to hold onto the country. In 1968, a bloodless coup de tat brough to power the Baathist general Ahmad Hassan Al-Bakr, whose cousin and right hand man happened to be Sadam Hussein. Hussein, emerging as a political figurehead, eventually got enough power to overthrow his cousin and sieze power of the country in 1979.
Hussein was responsible for ruling Iraq until 2003. During his reign he used many biological and chemical weapons against Iran as well as the Kurdish population to the north. The U.N. and more specifically the U.S. knowing that he had used and was continuing to use biological and chemical weapons, cast a vote in favor of Iraq to not issue any sanctions that may have stopped Iraq from using illegal weapons. The U.S. favored them using gas and chemicals to kill Irani soldiers, the Kurds just happened to be test subjects for Hussein’s new gas bombs and missles. The U.N. and every nation within that cast a vote to allow Iraq to use those weapons (including Britain and the U.S.) are in part to blame for the deaths of thousands upon thousands of Kurdish men women and children.
In 2003 the U.S. fully invaded Iraq and removed Sadam from power. The war is currently still raging and the U.S. backed president of Iraq has a very unstable hold over the country. He, much like Al-Saeed who relied on the British troops, relies very much on American troops to put down the rebellions, erm insurgents. The U.S., much like the British did, is building the world’s largest embassy in Baghdad. It will be designed to hold 3000 people (the average embassy holds about 200-300). The U.S. officials will run Iraq from the embassy. The U.S. has also begun to enter into a 25 year “treaty” with Iraq that will allow the U.S. to keep its troops there indefinetely.
Iraq will not be a free country. They will have mock freedom, much like they did when the British ruled them. It will be a farse, and a sham. More than likely, the President of Iraq will get pushed out of power during a coup de tat by a general of the current military. Such are the things that happen when you set up fake governments.
I hope you enjoyed the history behind Iraq.
StudentStuff.com Article
This is an article I wrote for StudentStuff.com about the advantages of taking Advanced Placement classes while still in high school.
But I Want to go to the Beach. . .
By: Geoff Gibson
StudentStuff.com
Or the Block, or the Brea Mall, or the Mountains. Let’s face it, living in Orange County you have a lot of access to a lot of different places. There is almost always something to do, or something going on somewhere in this county. Sometimes it can be a bit overwhelming, especially if you are a high school student who is also burdened with a seemingly endless amount of homework. So does that mean you should skip on those Advanced Placement classes in order to catch a few more hours of freedom? No way!
Take it from me, a full-time college student who is also running a full-time business, AP classes are no waste of time. In today’s college world, competition is tough. Chapman University, UC Irvine, and Cal State Fullerton are all brimming with students from Orange County, California State, and the U.S. Not to mention, in addition to competing with other high school seniors for valuable spots within these universities you will also be battling with transfer students from some of Orange County’s best community colleges such as Fullerton College, Cypress College, Santiago College, Golden West College, and Orange Coast, amongst others. These transfer students have a greater chance of getting into any one of these three universities than your average high school student with a 3.5 GPA. Getting into college today is no simple task.
So why AP classes? Advanced Placement classes are high school classes that allow you to get ahead of your average high school student. Sometimes they will even count towards college credits. That means when you do finally start college you won’t be burdened with all of the college classes that is usually expected of you. Think of it this way; right now you are a high school student. You don’t have much freedom, and your parents probably pay for most of your expenses. When you goto college you are going to have much more freedom, but also many more responsibilities. School will be taking up the majority of your time and you won’t be able to get a job, or goto parties or your favorite O.C. hangout locale. Taking AP classes now will help lighten your college load so you can get a job and earn some extra money during a time when extra money is tight.
Don’t hesitate! In order to get into some AP classes you are going to have to start right away. Make an appointment with your high school counselor to see if you are eligible. Start preparing for the AP tests, and make sure you are ready for a bunch of work. It may not seem like it is worth it now, but when college rolls around in a few years you’ll be thankful that you can start enjoying life much faster than the rest of the college students around you.
