http://www.tvpredictions.com/bluwarner103007.htm

Will Warner Bros. Endorse Blu-ray?
Studio executive hints that dual-format policy may be changing.
By Swanni
 

That will be a major blow to HD DVD if Warner do go Blu-ray exclusive.

Much like the blow to Xerxes messenger.

SPARRRTAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

lol,

well there is nothing sure but considering the words of the vice president
...
of course, Microsoft can still buy a 18 month exckusivity if they want.

That might be good news to Sony.

Sorry, but a blog just made up the 18 month limit and the $150 million payout.

And don't try to counter with the $50 million for GTA IV DLC. That was based on actual company documents. This thing about Paramount was based on no actual evidence.

Well, you're sort of correct. While there is no direct evidence for a payout, it's somewhat accepted that some money did change hands during this deal. Some reputable sources did comment on it, and while I despise DigalBits (that Bill Hunt guy is a hack who often perpetuates ridiculous rumors as fact in his blog), I do believe that Paramount was paid in order to support HD DVD. It for sure wasn't the only reason for them switching as I feel they did have some other good reasons to switch (production costs WAY cheaper than Blu-ray for instance), but I'm fairly confident that without some payout they wouldn't just switch on their own.

Now, where it gets interesting is where people try to pull MS into this deal. In actuality, it was a Toshiba deal. Toshiba has commented on it, and have clarified that MS had nothing to do with the deal. MS has also commented on the deal and clarified that they had nothing to do with it.

MS paying for it was never really based of anything more than a theory; albeit a very flawed theory at that based on no evidence. I think the whole theory reflects a bit of wishful thinking by people wanting to believe that MS had something to do with. After all they're big scary evil corporation, and no other large mega-corporation does similar things in busy (if you're not picking up on my sarcasm, you should be as I'm laying it on fairly hard).

The whole thing is a completely flawed argument, and it goes something like this: MS has a lot of money; MS likes to make monopolies with their money; MS somewhat supports HD DVD (even though they really don't support it in any true way as their largest contribution to the format war, software, is used by both HD DVD and Blu-ray); MS wants everyone to download and will accomplish this by killing off all physical media (a terrible conspiracy theory (that I hope dies a bitter death) dreamt up by a fanatic somewhere); THEREFORE, MS MUST have paid Paramount to support HD DVD! Yes, what a logical argument, is it not?

Now, there is not one single shred of evidence to support this "theory", and in fact the only evidence from this deal supports the fact that MS had nothing to do with this deal. I like to believe facts. I don't think there is an argument to say that Toshiba didn't pay Paramount (mainly because it just makes perfect sense and because they have pretty much admitted it), but I also think it's fair to say that MS had nothing to do with it.

People should also keep in mind, about all this mega-corporate buyout crapola, that at the end of the day both sides in this "fight" aren't exactly playing fair. I think you'd have to be a pretty blind fool to truly believe that the studios exclusively supporting Blu-ray were paid off to do so. Please don't come in here with a "holier-than-thou" argument as Sony is FAR from innocent in any shape or form.

And you think they don't pay for exclusives in gaming? Please, give me a break. They may not be “fed-exing” the publishers a check in the mail, but you can bet your ass the publishers just don't support Sony purely out of loyalty; especially when the development costs for their system isn't exactly low. There is some financial incentive being given to the publishers, and it'd be silly to think there were never. I do love the arrogant comments from that Jack Tretton fellow; "we don't need to pay for our games" (paraphrased). Just a lovely quote, it is.

I'm no particular fan of MS as a whole company, but I'm also not naive enough to think that Sony is some angel either. After all, at the end of the day, I could really care less what they do because it's really all about the games. I don't care what the company has to do to get said games on the system; just get some quality games on your system, and all will be happy (for the most part, that is). I would appreciate it, though, if people would get off their damned high-horses and come back to reality please: pretty much all mega-corporations participate in huge buyouts/exclusivity deals. It's business (well big business), and whether you like it not it's here to stay.

If you want to get angry at big companies for "ruinnig gaming", you shouldn't direct your "hate" (however illogical it may be to "hate" a company) solely at MS as Sony was truly the first huge corporation to enter gaming. Just some "food for thought". Thanks for reading

The biggest point I find in the article is that "it appears consumers no longer want to decide" - in other words consumers are not adopting either format in a hurry. With standard DVD's looking pretty good with a decent upscaling player the need to switch is not compelling. In fact this format war could end up being a non-event as consumers opt for downloadable HD content ...

As for Studio exclusivity ... all things are subject to change and if the numbers start to swing you could easily see significantly more titles available on both formats.

Right now many titles from Sony, Fox and Disney that are Blu-ray only here in the US are available in HD DVD in other countries. • And, since HD DVD is region-free, you can order discs on sites like Xploited Cinema and don't have to worry about them not playing on your HD DVD player - and they look just fine ... ;)

Blu-Ray has slowly been gaining ground on HD-DVD, and if the trend continues, most studios worldwide will eventually choose the format that sells the most.
Movie studios go where the sales are, so I'm not so sure they'd be interested in selling exclusive releases to HD-DVD for money if they potentially loose customers over it, that could come back and bite them in the ass.

But, like others said before me; this would not only be a blow to HD-DVD, but probably a nail in the coffin.
Personally I vote Blu-Ray myself, especially for PC use since it has tremendous storage capacity.
Also, an 8x Blu-Ray is faster than an 8x HD-DVD, since the content is bigger, so most PC users will do like me eventually I think.

 If you consider the New York Times citing two anonymous Viacom executives the same as a blog, then I guess you'd be right.

""Sorry, but a blog just made up the 18 month limit and the $150 million payout.""

==> Personnaly, I dont see why people of Paramount would go HD DVD exclusive when you sell more copy of your movie with the BR version !
I dont even understand how you can say something like :
"we go HD DVD exclusive BUT only for 18 months".
Microsoft/Toshiba, or whoever you want, may have put some money in their pocket. That would make lot of sense to the whole story ...

"""And don't try to counter with the $50 million for GTA IV DLC. That was based on actual company documents. This thing about Paramount was based on no actual evidence."""

==> I believe you.
No actual evidence for Paramount ... if you say.