Where's the list that shows units sold and NOT $ volume, of course BR is always going to have a higher $ volume figure, their more expensive for FS!
Answer a simple question, why is it listed this way and not by units sold??? Everyone knows why, it's a convenient way to spin the truth and spread BS, how unusual for the BDA to do that!
Ok, guys, let's lay this issue to bed. There is REALLY simple math going on that you all don't seem to understand. Let me lay this out:
The numbers that compare BD directly to DVD (the pie chart in the middle with percentages of top 20 BD VOLUME vs top 20 DVD VOLUME) is based on just that: VOLUME. That's UNITS SOLD. As in, this is a statistics company that knows how to compare different items with different average prices and volume is how you do it in this case.
The numbers on the left and right are percentage change from month to month. In other words, they are comparisons of DVD sales to DVD sales and of BD sales to BD sales. It is perfectly fine and reasonable to use $ for this comparison, because THE ACTUAL COMPARISON GOING ON IS BETWEEN THE FORMAT AND ITSELF. Once you've done the simple math and arrived at the percentage change of DVD sales in one month vs DVD sales in the next month (and ditto for BD), you've removed the unit ($) and made it a pure number that represents the percentage of change in spending for that format. At that point, it is again perfectly fine to look at the two numbers and see who had the higher percentage change. These are honestly really simple concepts, you guys.
The only thing about this Nielsen comparisons that anyone possibly has a valid complaint on is the issue of using top 20. I am ok with them using it because I'm of the opinion that it is a good way to get a pertinent comparison between an incumbent format and its upstart replacement. However, I can understand that certain people don't agree.
These other complaints, however, about using $ vs volume are completely off and spring from a total misunderstanding of statistics/math.
If I'm not clear in my explanation, let me know and I'll try to reword it.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Where's the list that shows units sold and NOT $ volume, of course BR is always going to have a higher $ volume figure, their more expensive for FS!
Answer a simple question, why is it listed this way and not by units sold???
Everyone knows why, it's a convenient way to spin the truth and spread BS, how unusual for the BDA to do that!
Ok, guys, let's lay this issue to bed. There is REALLY simple math going on that you all don't seem to understand. Let me lay this out:
The numbers that compare BD directly to DVD (the pie chart in the middle with percentages of top 20 BD VOLUME vs top 20 DVD VOLUME) is based on just that: VOLUME. That's UNITS SOLD. As in, this is a statistics company that knows how to compare different items with different average prices and volume is how you do it in this case.
The numbers on the left and right are percentage change from month to month. In other words, they are comparisons of DVD sales to DVD sales and of BD sales to BD sales. It is perfectly fine and reasonable to use $ for this comparison, because THE ACTUAL COMPARISON GOING ON IS BETWEEN THE FORMAT AND ITSELF. Once you've done the simple math and arrived at the percentage change of DVD sales in one month vs DVD sales in the next month (and ditto for BD), you've removed the unit ($) and made it a pure number that represents the percentage of change in spending for that format. At that point, it is again perfectly fine to look at the two numbers and see who had the higher percentage change. These are honestly really simple concepts, you guys.
The only thing about this Nielsen comparisons that anyone possibly has a valid complaint on is the issue of using top 20. I am ok with them using it because I'm of the opinion that it is a good way to get a pertinent comparison between an incumbent format and its upstart replacement. However, I can understand that certain people don't agree.
These other complaints, however, about using $ vs volume are completely off and spring from a total misunderstanding of statistics/math.
If I'm not clear in my explanation, let me know and I'll try to reword it.