# Blu-ray: We've Won!



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

*Blu-ray: We've Won!*



> Washington, D.C. (February 11, 2007) -- Did you hear that Sony's Blu-ray HDTV DVD format has defeated Toshiba's HD-DVD?
> 
> Well, you will -- although HD-DVD supporters won't hear of it.
> ...


See the rest of the article: *TVPredictions.Com*


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

I think it is funny... 

Sony claims victory, because of one month of sales?
I am sure Blu-Ray disks sold more in January, because all of those "kids" that got PS3 for the holidays wanted to get at least 1 movie.

And it wasn't probably "accidental" that there where a significant amount of titles release in January... since the "cheapest" Blu-Ray player was released late November (aka the PS3), with most of those expected to be holiday gifts.

IIRC... Didn't the "Divx" player claim victory only a few months into the "battle".

I don't think either side of teh "HD" DVD format can claim squat right now, as there is no where near the critical mass of titles out there... and frankly at $30 a pop on average for the movies.... 

I have actually turned my eyes back on the rental stores... as I just can't drop that kind of money on ever title...


----------



## Sharkie_Fan (Sep 26, 2006)

Earl Bonovich said:


> I don't think either side of teh "HD" DVD format can claim squat right now, as there is no where near the critical mass of titles out there... and frankly at $30 a pop on average for the movies....


Well... HD-DVD can make the claim that they've got the porn industry, which if history repeats itself is bad news for blu-ray...

Though I've seen predictions around from other "experts" who think there will be no clearcut winner - it'll end up being like DVD-R/DVD+R, and you'll have two formats and manufacturers will come out with devices that can handle both formats (if I'm not mistaken, LG has already announced (released?) a player for HD-DVD and BluRay...)

You are correct though, after 1 month of sales it seems silly to claim victory.


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

That's like claiming victory after one lap of the Daytona 500. :lol:


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

From where I sit... I still think both HDDVD and BluRay will lose. I think they are too early in the game, too expensive, and are helping to ensure what market there is for HD is divided into smaller camps... and eventually both formats will fail and a third format will appear in a few years that will finally take hold.

Right now I'm perfectly happy buying standard DVDs because the risk of picking the wrong platform is just too high.


----------



## Chris Blount (Jun 22, 2001)

They have some nerve claiming themselves as the winner. HD-DVD has been having strong sales. Sounds like more marketing hype.

BTW, I have BOTH formats so I am format neutral. I think it's quite realistic that both formats can co-exist once cheap dual format players hit the market.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Chris Blount said:


> They have some nerve claiming themselves as the winner. HD-DVD has been having strong sales. Sounds like more marketing hype.
> 
> BTW, I have BOTH formats so I am format neutral. I think it's quite realistic that both formats can co-exist once cheap dual format players hit the market.


At CES, Blu-ray made similar claims about the war being over. I didn't buy the hype then, don't buy it now. 

As for will both formats survive? Not really, not in the long-term. Something will define one or the other and one will stop being useful. But given that you can do players that can handle both formats, this might last longer than VHS/Betamax.... sigh.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## cawgijoe (Dec 22, 2005)

Chris Blount said:


> They have some nerve claiming themselves as the winner. HD-DVD has been having strong sales. Sounds like more marketing hype.
> 
> BTW, I have BOTH formats so I am format neutral. I think it's quite realistic that both formats can co-exist once cheap dual format players hit the market.


I personally don't see both formats surviving. If history is any indication, people don't like to go into a video store, either rental or sales and have to go to the right section to buy/rent their movie.

To top that off, stores don't like to have all that extra space being taken up by two (or more) formats.

The real danger here for both formats is that this "war" turns everyone off and both formats die.

If I had to pick a winning format, I would have to go with blu-ray based on the PS3and the fact that there are many more studios supporting the format. There are now and continue to be many more blu-ray capable machines entering homes on a daily basis as compared to HD-DVD.

I do see a real problem though as Earl alluded to earlier.....the price of the movies is just too high. I see alot more people picking the rental route if they get a hidef player. Anything over $20 for a disc is just too high in my book.

I also think that for the average Joe to be interested in feeding his brand new HDTV, these player prices need to hit $400 or less. That was the price that seemed to generate alot more interest in DVD and spurred sales. I bought my first DVD player at that price.

Just my ramblings..........


----------



## machavez00 (Nov 2, 2006)

TW announced The Total HD disc at CES. How does this affect Sony's decleration of victory?


----------



## keep amonte (Oct 2, 2002)

LG makes a player that plays both formats. I have the PS3 but primarily for gaming not BluRay, although it was a nice feature. The BR movies I have watched are amazing, but aside from renting, they are way to expensive! 
I also have both SACD and DVD-Audio and I am displease with the lack of titles out there (outside of classical). This is why my HDDVR with HD movie channels is more my pace. I rarely watch a movie more than once anyways!


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Incidentally... one of the sure fire ways to prove you haven't won... is by declaring that you have won!

If Blu-Ray truly had already won the war... there would be no need to declare it, because the fact would be self-evident.

Racing to such a declaration is a clear indicator that the war still rages.


----------



## ibglowin (Sep 10, 2002)

It's all over except for the crying.


----------



## Azalo (Oct 24, 2006)

I hope downloadable HD movies defeats both of them


----------



## tonyd79 (Jul 24, 2006)

cawgijoe said:


> I personally don't see both formats surviving. If history is any indication, people don't like to go into a video store, either rental or sales and have to go to the right section to buy/rent their movie.
> 
> To top that off, stores don't like to have all that extra space being taken up by two (or more) formats.


Agree with the first point.

Disagree on the second. DVDs are small. Most video stores around me look empty because they finally ditched VHS for DVD. They could downsize the stores but they do have space.

Look for Blu-Ray barn and DVD Hut coming to a neighborhood near you soon.


----------



## gjgman (Jan 25, 2007)

President Bush also announced a long time ago the ending of hostilities in Iraq...remember that??


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

gjgman said:


> President Bush also announced a long time ago the ending of hostilities in Iraq...remember that??


Thus supporting my point that a declaration of victory does not a victory make. Go back to our country's Declaration of Independence. We were not in fact independent at that point... we had to fight a war and win our independence... the declaration was a political/marketing rallying point.... but we could have lost that war.

When victory comes, it is unarguably obvious to everyone... no need for a formal declaration.


----------



## nick1817 (Feb 12, 2007)

I'm barely making it into the HD market now, as is the rest of America. HD DVD's or Blue Rays aren't on top of their purchase list right now.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

nick1817 said:


> I'm barely making it into the HD market now, as is the rest of America. HD DVD's or Blue Rays aren't on top of their purchase list right now.


That has been my feeling too... HDTV is just becoming more affordable for middle-America for the first time.... and not too many people buying a $1000 or $1500 HDTV want to pay another $500-$1000 for an HD player so soon.

It took DVDs a LONG time to get heavy market penetration and wipe away VHS tape sales... and DVD was a pretty good quality leap over videotape.

I don't expect HD to be as long to adopt as DVD, BUT until the price is more competitive AND there is less confusion... it is easier for most consumers to just get a cheap ($50 or less) DVD player and buy DVDs for now and get lots of enjoyment from their new HDTV watching widescreen DVDs at 480p.

Only those of us in the early-adopter scenario are more tempted to go HD with our DVDs... but for some of us it is too risky too. I think the companies would see much better sales if they had waited until everyone agreed on one format before going to market.


----------



## cruxer (Nov 11, 2006)

Azalo said:


> I hope downloadable HD movies defeats both of them


Once it's readily available, I would count on that. I have a Bluray only because I bought a PS3, and having one did spur me to buy a couple of BD discs, which were quite impressive (I'm sure HD DVD is equally so.). That may be a trump card for Sony, since it will put lots of BD players in people's hands even when they didn't directly intend to buy one.

The time these guys lost fighting with each other will ultimately cost both camps, at least in opportunity cost. It's already rumored that Sony will be offering a movie download service for the PS3. They offer hidef, and I buy no more BDs! Movies with no media is the real deal.

--Cross


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

At this point, I don't believe most of the population has a broadband connection fast enough to adequately support high def downloading. Cablevision has 30Mb access, Verizon has 20Mb or 30Mb for fiber depending on where you live and I’m chugging along at 15Mb on Road Runner. Until higher bandwidth broadband options become the norm HD movie downloads and streaming will not be a standard.


----------



## HDTVsportsfan (Nov 29, 2005)

I actually purchased my first HD player today at BB. It was the Toshiba HD-A2. I got it new for under 400 w/ coupons and points. My two 50" panny's native rez is 720P. I couldn't see spending money on a BD and not being able to fully utilize it. I picked the cheaper of the two evils. Who knows, I may be having to buy a BD within a year.


----------



## innersanctum (Nov 30, 2005)

This question is directed to the XBox 360. I have a question...let's say that Blu-Ray does indeed win the HD wars and becomes the standard format. Isn't really easy for Microsoft to develop a Blu-Ray Player that will connect to the XBox in the same manner they developed an HD DVD player?


----------



## ibglowin (Sep 10, 2002)

Absolutely. They just have to rewrite the software and driver for BD.



innersanctum said:


> This question is directed to the XBox 360. I have a question...let's say that Blu-Ray does indeed win the HD wars and becomes the standard format. Isn't really easy for Microsoft to develop a Blu-Ray Player that will connect to the XBox in the same manner they developed an HD DVD player?


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

I'm bet $$$ M$ already have it running in theyr lab !


----------



## durl (Mar 27, 2003)

I'm a newbie when it comes to these new formats, but from a technical standpoint, why wouldn't Blu-ray win out? The discs can hold far more data from what I've read.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

durl said:


> I'm a newbie when it comes to these new formats, but from a technical standpoint, why wouldn't Blu-ray win out? The discs can hold far more data from what I've read.


From a technical standpoint, Blu-ray could/should. But the format that best captures the interest of the market, which is not technically based but positioning, marketing, price, and content will win this battle. Betamax was a technically better format, but Sony screwed itself (I don't recall the details on that war, just remember it) but VHS won.

And that is what has some of us so frustrated (read--pissed) that the manufacturers could not come to some form of agreement and relive the same history again. So I'm not going to buy either content or player until they wake up and declare truce (or the battle is truly won.)

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## machavez00 (Nov 2, 2006)

G4 had a segment on their CES show about the "Format Wars". They claimed VHS won out because the porno industry chose VHS over Beta. I heard that The porno industry has picked HD-DVD as the format of choice. Will history repeat itself?


----------



## ibglowin (Sep 10, 2002)

No

This is not 1980. We don't get our porn on tapes or disc anymore. The Internet, Cable, Satellite are the medium of choice.



machavez00 said:


> G4 had a segment on their CES show about the "Format Wars". They claimed VHS won out because the porno industry chose VHS over Beta. I heard that The porno industry has picked HD-DVD as the format of choice. Will history repeat itself?


----------



## machavez00 (Nov 2, 2006)

ibglowin said:


> No
> 
> This is not 1980. We don't get our porn on tapes or disc anymore. The Internet, Cable, Satellite are the medium of choice.


But is it in HD?


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

machavez00 said:


> G4 had a segment on their CES show about the "Format Wars". They claimed VHS won out because the porno industry chose VHS over Beta. I heard that The porno industry has picked HD-DVD as the format of choice. Will history repeat itself?


There was some discussion that Blu-ray wouldn't sell to the adult industry, denied by the blu-ray group. So at this point, who knows?


----------



## Chris Blount (Jun 22, 2001)

Like it or not, porn is big business. Whether or not it will make or break HD-DVD remains to be seen.

The good news for HD-DVD is that if Universal follows through and remains HD-DVD exclusive, it's going to be a big summer for the format. Here are the titles that are rumored to be released from Universal on HD-DVD:



> April - The Good Shepherd, Smokin' Aces, The Game, The Jerk, The Hitcher, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, The Nutty Professor
> 
> May - Alpha Dog, The 40-Year-Old Virgin: Unrated, Smokey and the Bandit, Hurricane, Skeleton Key, The River, Midnight Run, The Frighteners, The Big Lebowski, Dragonheart, Lost in Translation
> 
> ...


Quoted from http://www.thedigitalbits.com


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

Regarding porn in HD, do you really want to see pimples on some porn actor's
butt in hi-definition? Frankly, I don't think HD will necessarily _enhance_ your
pornographic 'experience'. 

Regarding the HD disc format wars - I'm not buying into either format unless
and until:

a) the number of titles available in a given format becomes much, much larger;

b) the cost of movies in any format drops below the magical $19.99 price point;

c) the price of a player falls to under $100.

Hopefully, an unintended benefit: as either/both HD formats slowly become
more popular, the retail price of newly-released standard DVD titles will drop
to less than $10.


----------



## machavez00 (Nov 2, 2006)

Nick said:


> Regarding porn in HD, do you really want to see pimples on some porn actor's
> butt in hi-definition? Frankly, I don't think HD will necessarily _enhance_ your
> pornographic 'experience'.


I think that's why D* doesn't carry Spice HD any longer.


----------



## ibglowin (Sep 10, 2002)

IMHO not too many people want to see pimples, bruises, stretch marks, razor burn etc in HD. I just don't see this as any factor at all in the equation outside of a passing fancy.

If it does catch on you can bet that the Cable and Sat operators will add an HD porn chanel pronto. And again, you will have the option of paying $50 for a single HD-DVD porn flick or an ENTIRE months subscription for probably the same price and with your HD DVR record your HD porn and archive it or do whatever the heck you wan't to with it just like anything else in HD these days.

Mainstream content will decide the winner here. Advantage Sony. The only way they can lose is to make some incredible corporate blunder (which they are capable of). Right now they are cranking out "A" list titles each week and people are snapping them up like there is no tomorrow. They just announced new and cheaper BD players this coming year where they had originally said it would be several years before player prices fall.



machavez00 said:


> But is it in HD?


----------



## machavez00 (Nov 2, 2006)

ibglowin said:


> If it does catch on you can bet that the Cable and Sat operators will add an HD porn chanel pronto.


D* had Spice HD and was dropped. http://www.tvpredictions.com/spicehd042706.htm


----------



## keesor (Jan 14, 2007)

Back to the original topic for a second, the only reason Blu-Ray sales are as high as they are, is because there are hardly any games out there for the PS3! The buyers have to use their new "game system" for something, so I guess Blu-Ray disks are the only choice!:nono2:


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

tibber said:


> Betamax was a technically better format, but Sony screwed itself (I don't recall the details on that war, just remember it) but VHS won.


There were a couple of factors, but the most important was probably the limited recording time of the Beta format.

Sony's desire to exercise strict control over everything associated with the Beta format was also a deterrent to competition.

I found this interesting article in a recent Google search. It tells an important story about CE.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Given how horrible SD content looks on many HD displays, there will be all sorts of clamoring to get HD versions; even if they are just re-mastered from high quality NTSC video.


----------



## ibglowin (Sep 10, 2002)

I actually bought my PS3 as a BD player first, game player as a backup in case BD failed as a medium. I now own 25 BD movies and 2 games.



keesor said:


> Back to the original topic for a second, the only reason Blu-Ray sales are as high as they are, is because there are hardly any games out there for the PS3! The buyers have to use their new "game system" for something, so I guess Blu-Ray disks are the only choice!:nono2:


----------



## kfcrosby (Dec 17, 2006)

Earl Bonovich said:


> *Blu-ray: We've Won!*
> 
> See the rest of the article: *TVPredictions.Com*


Just saw a magazine ad for the LG dual format..... Anyone seen a cost yet?
http://us.lge.com/aboutus/pressdetail/detail/press_TV|Audio|Video_311.jhtml


----------



## ibglowin (Sep 10, 2002)

Old news sorta. Its out and cost a cool $1200. You can buy a PS3 for $499 and an X2 for $375......


----------



## cnmsales (Jan 9, 2007)

Format wars of today arent like they used to. I agree, with todays technology we will more likely see players that play BOTH formats instead of one winning out, at least not for a while.


----------



## LP30 (Feb 27, 2004)

Far from over. There are a number of issues still in the Blu ray format. The cost of a stand alone player is still nearly twice that of stand alone HD player. Many of us don't want a PS3 in our hometheater rack. The best price for blu ray is the often maligned first generation Samsung unit which has improved, but is still has limitations. 

The "advantage" of true HD for 1080p quoted originally by Sony was nothing more than marketing hype. Both formats are 1080p/24 on the disc. The last 2 HD units anounced and on the market both support 1080p output. The HD format requires suppot for ethernet, advanced audio codecs, and has HDI (the interactive features). Blu ray does not require the first 2 and the interactive BD-J has not been finalized. Even the 2nd Gen Samsung does not support the advanced audio codecs. 

The bandwidth and total storage is greater with blu ray than HD DVD, however Toshiba just announced a 3 layer 51 gig disc which would be greater than the 50 gig 2 layer Blu ray disc. The dual layer 50 gig Blu ray has chronically experienced yield problems limiting its initial use leading to higher production costs. 

From a user standpoint, HD DVD does not require region codes, blu ray does. That means a HD DVD disc manufactured for Europe or Japan will work on a US player, but a region coded Blu ray disc would not. 

My gripe is that these companies couldn't get their act together and agree on a standard and a way to share the profits to avoid this rediculous "war" The way I looked at it, I needed an HDMI capable player, so I could spend 250 on an Oppo and play SD discs, or spend 350 on a Toshiba A2 get 5 free movies, have a great upconverter that also plays HD DVD.

Apple TV just launched, so they better all watch out.


----------



## 4DThinker (Dec 17, 2006)

In the VCR wars, Sony's Betamax was better than VHS for video quality. VHS still won. Having room for "more data" is only an avantage if that extra data is worth having. Even on regular DVDs I find it rare that the "extras" are worth the data space they take up.

I'll bet that the winner will be the first standard to become available in a reliable <$200 player. Yes, there has to be content, but my guess is that the media monsters that have put out movies in the "losing" HD format can (and will) quickly reissue them in the winning format.


----------



## AlbertZeroK (Jan 28, 2006)

Sharkie_Fan said:


> Well... HD-DVD can make the claim that they've got the porn industry, which if history repeats itself is bad news for blu-ray...


It's interesting the effect that industry has. It is the only way I could get my boss to learn to use a computer! (Which should blow the minds of most of those out there trying to keep porn off company computers...)

I though UMD was going to win? LMOA!


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

The adult and gaming industries are two BIG driving forces in technology advancements. Without those, we probably would not have the broadband internet for consumer use nor the high resolution computer graphic displays we have now.

Most other computer uses did not drive the advancement so fast. Sure, there would be some advanced computing power & graphics for the medical industry... but it would be so expensive we could not afford it.

I do not spend money in either industry right now, but it is hard to ignore they are responsible for a lot of other things I do buy.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

HDMe said:


> The adult and gaming industries are two BIG driving forces in technology advancements.


Don't forget the military. It has driven many of the innovations in the medical industry and certainly begs innovation in the video gaming industry.


----------



## AlbertZeroK (Jan 28, 2006)

harsh said:


> Don't forget the military.


yeah, cuz the Military and NASA are still using hardware from the 80's anymore ... Oh wait, yeah they are...


----------



## todthebod (Mar 8, 2007)

Blu-ray and HD will cut a deal and the discs will be playable in either player.


----------



## P Smith (Jul 25, 2002)

Sure, after both will lost a lot of $$$$$$$$$.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

todthebod said:


> Blu-ray and HD will cut a deal and the discs will be playable in either player.


As I understand it, this is not possible with current hardware. You could go buy one of those LG dual-compatible players... but I do not believe there will ever be a way to "upgrade" an HD-DVD player to play BluRay or vice-versa.

If the consumer was amenable to buying another player then they would already buy both formats from the start.

I really don't see how both formats can survive being so dissimilar. One will win, or both will lose. My money is still on both losing actually.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

HDMe said:


> As I understand it, this is not possible with current hardware. You could go buy one of those LG dual-compatible players... but I do not believe there will ever be a way to "upgrade" an HD-DVD player to play BluRay or vice-versa.
> 
> If the consumer was amenable to buying another player then they would already buy both formats from the start.
> 
> I really don't see how both formats can survive being so dissimilar. One will win, or both will lose. My money is still on both losing actually.


Those aren't mutually exclusive futures. Both will lose. Then one will win, but by virtue of survival, having lost sales along the way. Mine for instance. A major delay of my purchase.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## DTC mac (Oct 23, 2005)

Please God, Just once let the better format ( blu-ray ) prevail swiftly.


----------



## mrjim (Dec 4, 2006)

If and when D* has more PPV channels in HD I think I will watch these until there is a clear winner in the HD DVR war!


----------



## koralis (Aug 10, 2005)

4DThinker said:


> In the VCR wars, Sony's Betamax was better than VHS for video quality. VHS still won. Having room for "more data" is only an avantage if that extra data is worth having. Even on regular DVDs I find it rare that the "extras" are worth the data space they take up.
> 
> I'll bet that the winner will be the first standard to become available in a reliable <$200 player. Yes, there has to be content, but my guess is that the media monsters that have put out movies in the "losing" HD format can (and will) quickly reissue them in the winning format.


If I remember right, the Betamax had better quality, but the tape LENGTH in terms of time was shorter, and an inconvenient amount. Ah, here it is...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betamax


> The main issue with the Beta format in the early days of the USA market was recording time. The original prototypes shown to Matsu****a used a linear tape speed of 40 mm/sec. The technology of the day needed that speed due to the 60 micron heads employed. *Sony engineers and management had decided that since one hour was acceptable to the U-Matic's buyers, it was acceptable for Beta too. *So the Beta format had a smaller, one hour cassette called a K-60.


So if you wanted to watch a feature film, you'd have had to change the tape once or twice. It's even worse if you wanted to RECORD a film from TV while you were out, since no one would be around to swap tapes when one filled up.

In at least that respect, the inferior graphics and the larger cartridge enabled longer recording times that led to a quick leg up on Betamax from which it never recovered the momentum.


----------



## penguin44 (Oct 29, 2005)

I enjoy my HDTV. I love what I get, but as an early adopter for HDTV my TV does not support HDMI. While I would love to get my newer movies on BD or HD, whatever comes out on top, I can not justify buying a new TV and Player for higher res movies. I have seen both, and they look great, but then, I have DVD's that have excellent transfers and so close to an HD look. I would never replace my dvd's but look forward to one day not needing an new HDTV to watch the same HD I already get on Sat/Cable. Plus I don't like to own a lot of movies, rent for sure, and since no renter in my area is dealing with HD BD rentals, they lost me for the moment. I truly hope some format is agreed on and not needing HDMI or some other stupid inputs to be able to 'view' my hd content.


----------



## AlbertZeroK (Jan 28, 2006)

Anyone here know if Super Bit DVD's are going to become more popular? I've been wanting to try one myself.


----------



## djlong (Jul 8, 2002)

I think the real winner of the Blu-Ray/HDDVD war will be disk drive manufacturers as more and more peopel DOWNLOAD high-def in an On-Demand-like setting with more and more broadband coming out.

The long this war goes on, the more chance the "digital living room" has. I've got over 2TB in my home network right now and a lot is filling up with HD stuff in anticipation of a future widescreen purchase.


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

You have made the decision on which comes first and decided the programming comes first, before the hardware. That is rare these days.


----------



## brantlew (Mar 19, 2007)

I think downloadable movies is a horrible idea because inevitably what will happen is that the content will be compressed beyond an acceptable level to make it easily downloadable. Look at all the OTA, satellite, and HD content out there. It is full of compression artifacts that are easily visible in high motion or contrast changes. I am constantly underwhelmed with broadcast HD content out there and this is probably the quality that we would be stuck with in downloadable content. High definition DVDs with 15 - 50 GB however have the space to accommodate really great video with practically unnoticeable compression artifacts. I just don't see downloads of 30GB being practical with near-term technology and therefore they will not be able to compete with physical media.


----------

