jarrod said:
Of course it doesn't. The fact that the BDA distributes royalties to over 30 companies has nothing to do with that, I was just commenting on the funny coincidence. Warner staying HD-DVD only would've drawn out the format war, would've kept Paramount doing multiplatform support, and could've potentially drawn more content providers to take a similar stance. While HD-DVD never had near the adoption BD could boast (due to PS3), it did have comparable video sales and there was the threat of a diversified/split market. Warner being enticed into BD support essentially ended that, which is why the BDA adopted so many of their patents and let the royalties flow. This is why Warner is the 4th biggest taker in the BDA.
No sane company would've released a product like PS3, a product that within 4 years has completely wiped out all profits for it's division since it's inception over a decade earlier. If they'd known then what they know now, we'd have gotten a MUCH different PlayStation 3. Sony didn't expect to sacrifice anything, they expected to dominate as always. They thought their brand was inpenetrable. Again, arrogance and hubris. |
WARNER IS NOT THE BIGGEST TAKER
HD-DVD would have ended whether or not WARNER was in or out in the next 1 year when the war ended as that time
no sane company? - but they weren doing it with a future profit goal in mind and noways did PS3 wipeout all the profit os PS division
SONY knew they would sacfrice the PS brand for now - you must not know anything about business if you would think SONY would expect profits.there are research,surveys,etc carried out
they thought theor brand was inpenetrabble but that was only shown on the outside.inside they were expecting this







