Although I understand Mr. Mechanic's point about the diminished perceived value of DVD due to bargain bin pricing, some of his positions are problematic.

Setting aside the fact that it took Paramount years to release a TITANIC DVD featuring an anamorphic transfer, the increased audio and picture quality (the latter more apparent to even mainstream viewers on the larger displays available today) of Blu-ray are reasons some will "rush out" to buy TITANIC on BD. If we set the quality differential aside, it is *new* supplemental content added to catalog titles that also makes BD attractive. Ironically, it is Mr. Mechanic's former studio, Fox, that continues to release some BDs that do not include all of the supplemental content of their DVD predecessors: SPEED, DIE HARD, CAST AWAY, THE SIEGE and RONIN (MGM) are examples. Warner, on the other hand, continues to hire outstanding BD/DVD producers such as Jeffrey Schwarz to produce new documentaries for inclusion on even catalog BD releases, such as SET IT OFF (1996).

Although neither he nor I can prove it either way, I would be inclined to disagree with the assertion that "no one asked" whether BD should be introduced "in the face of an economic melt-down." I'd surmise there were/have been some conversations about that. But it seems to me the larger issues impacting the timing of BD's introduction to the marketplace are 1) the availability of blue laser technology; and 2) the "format war." If BD could have been brought to market sooner, perhaps it could have arrived *before* the home video market began to stagnate.

In any event, what would Mechanic have the industry do: delay the release of BD (and HD DVD) until some projected future date that the recession is supposed to be over, while supposedly maintaining perceived DVD value with higher prices . . . so that piracy could continue to grow? You can't have it both ways, Mr. Mechanic.