Blu Ray = DVD 1.5
I suppose in much the same way the PS3 and the 360 are PS2 1/2 and x-box 1.5?
Blu-Ray price = DVD 2.5
This is nonsense, Blu-ray discs do not cost two and a half times more, around here the average difference is 0-15% (most new DVD's cost around 200 NOK here and Blu-ray the same, some DVD's are cheaper but so are some Blu-ray discs). I seriously doubt that the rest of the world suffers from inflated Blu-ray prices which sends the cost up to our equivalent of 500 NOK, which is what a videogame costs brand new here.
Economical crisis makes you think again.
Digital purchase is still a purchase and not a cheap one at that, despite links of distribution being cut, saving costs in theory.
Downloadable content is cheaper, more practical, with a wider and more accessible choice, etc.
In the same context you probably think of TV's and players, where you have to actually own a TV and a player, you also need to own a PC and an internet connection, which is not cheap if you have the kind of speeds you'll need to download HD content and most online films aren't even true HD, especially in the audio department (because of storage issues, how long would it take an average person to download a 40GB movie? The supposition is also that mainstream audience will suddenly start a media revolution where the symphony of downloading, using all manner of cables, getting codecs and software to even get to see the movies on a big screen when they can just have a TV and a player, pop in a disc and look at it, much the same easy way the have the last 25 or so years (VHS was very similar in use). See how banks are still in use, stores still exist despite there being online, often cheaper alternatives? Things take time and a wholly digitalized, fully internet based society is a long way away still which most people will realize if they take a look around. It is growing, but not to a point where all things optical will be obsolete within a couple of years other than among a few gaming and video nerds. Blu-ray is often accused of being a "technophile" product and concept, yet it is miles more user friendly and adoptable than any current online service for mainstream users.

It will never replace the DVD the way the DVD replaced the VHS. It might gain respectable market shares in some regions but it will never fulfill it's purpose.
Edit; this point may hold slight merit, allthough we don't know exactly what the purpose of Blu-ray is at this point. If it is indeed to overtake DVD's in revenue and lifetime sales, I have to award a single point for this one, I don't think that will happen either to be honest. Perhaps quite close but not the whole mile, in the end.

Blu-Ray might be Sony's biggest mistake ever. It screwed the PS3 and it wasn't meant to synchronize with an economical crises. UMDs, MiniDiscs, etc. It's all part of a huge Betamax complex. Sony needs a therapy.
UMD and MiniDisc were inferior formats and had no way of or the intention of shoving CD's and DVD's out of the market, and they were also almost solely propelled by Sony with much less force behind them. These formats were meant to coexist with current ones, a plan that failed spectacularly, which no one denies. So because these two (three with Betamax) failed, Blu-ray must as well? Kind of like the Wii then? The N64 and the Gamecube had poor sales and we all see how badly the most recent addition to the Nintendo family is doing... Oh, and have you forgotten about CD's? Primarily developed and distributed by Phillips and Sony, it can hardly be counted as a failed format in my book. Your desire to see Blu-ray fail, whether it be because you don't like Sony (which could be the case, there'a a lot of that recently) or because you feel satisfied by DVD's, will not affect the overall performance of the format. It is on its way up, it has a long climb ahead of it, but to deny that it is indeed climbing, is sheer folly, no less. 








Old points, all invalid in context. Nice effort, though.