HD-DVD, what went wrong?

I saw a good HD/ BD comparison in a forum (see HODO):

HD DVD Pros
->Complete spec/format since inception, resulting in a modestly more complete experience (PIP and Network connectivity are included in every player, unlike the BD Profile mess, of 1.0, 1.1, and 2.0)
->Interactivity via HDi (developed by Microsoft) is generally considered to be easier to implement than BD's Java-based menu system (although Java is far more flexible)
->Low player prices (please lets not argue about subsidy)
->Manufacturability of discs (requires a very minimal capital outlay for disc replicators to go from DVD to HD DVD, which OUGHT to result in lower costs and hopefully prices)
->Flipper DVD / HD DVD discs (DVD on one side, HD DVD on the other)
->AACS DRM (known and understood, relatively unobtrusive)
->No Region coding (discs purchased in Japan will work in your US HD DVD player)
HD DVD Cons
->lower 30GB capacity (versus BD's 50GB) and bitrate maximum of 28 (versus BD's 40, IIRC) -- no matter what anyone says, the advantage here is far from absolute or empirical, the law of diminishing returns applies, although some movies (long, fast action) would benefit from both
->less studio support (formerly only slightly so, now dramatic with the BDA having paid Warner, and likely Fox, to go BD-only with their movies)
->Single OEM of players (Toshiba is virtually the only C/E OEM making HD DVD players -- see "low price" above)

BD Pros
->More storage space on disc and higher maximum bitrate
->More studio support (dramatically so, now -- although as a consumer, I dislike the WAY they've managed to get more studio support . . . by paying off the studios, feels very anti-competitive to me; to be fair HD DVD paid for Paramount exclusivity as well)
->More C/E OEMs (first gen players were almost all Sony referece designs mfg'd by Panasonic if I'm not misaken, but since that point more C/E OEMs have started coming out with their own units)
BD Cons
->A "rushed to market" approach has resulted in the current Profile mess (profile 1.0 players do not have PIP or network connectivity, profile 1.1 players have PIP but no networking, and profile 2.0 players have PIP and network) making some players less than fully functional from the day they're sold -- on top of this, the marketing around profile 1.0 and 1.1 players is a bit deceptive in that neither really highlight the fact that some disc features may not work with certain profiles
->High priced players, if we're to compare functionally equivalent players (i.e., a full profile 2.0 BD player with a very good HD-A35 from Toshiba) BD player prices are roughly 2x HD DVD player prices
->High disc replication costs (too much detail to go into here, suffice to say that HD DVD, because it is more similar to DVD than BD is, is cheaper to produce)
->More DRM: BD players must be able to implement BD+ which is a player based DRM schema
->Region coding: BD allows for it (HD DVD does not)
->No "flipper disc" capability: if you're going to "go" BD, you've got to go all the way, no half-a$$ing it
->Since the profile 2.0 (the one with network connectivity) is still in the process of coming to market, there are no real web-based interactive special features on BD discs (yet)

It loooks good do far, so what the HD-DVD camp did wrong?

1. It was known that manufacturing cost for both HD-DVD hardware and software is lower than Blu-ray but the savings were not clearly translated to the customers. HD-DVD had the golden opportunity last year, but they wasted all the chances.

• Yes, HD-DVD hardware was priced a bit lower than Bly-ray, but it was way more expensive than a DVD player. If a Blu-ray player costs 4 times a regular DVD player, HD-DVD is 3 times: even when it's claimed to be cheaper to produce.
• xBox outsold PS3 last year, but non of the xBox came with a HD-DVD Drive!

2. Cancelled the press conference in CES after Warner's announcement.

• No struggled, no talked back, HD-DVD just shut up and closed the door? It really didn't matter how well they talked afterwards (no going down without a fight?) the HD camp acted like they lost and they admitted that they lost the battle! Sony and all the press were more than happy to see the reaction of HD-DVD! Instead of a real stand up fight, HD camp left the castle! I guess it is because of these bunch: HD-DVD, such a well designed format, did not took off and likely never take off.

Toshiba finally lowered their HD-DVD player prices after CES, after the whole world got the impression that they admitted they had lost. After the consumers believed Blu-ray was better therefore it won. Didn't it all come a bit too late? What didn't Toshiba lowered their HD-DVD player prices enough to win the market before Christmas? I guess if Warner did not make the announcement before CES, HD-DVD would continue to sit there and wait to win. We are talking America, where aggressiveness is rewarded and humbleness is a crime. HD-DVD lost not because of the technology, but lacking the appropriate planning and leadership.

Now the press is still stepping on the format. If only Blu-ray lowered their price of the players now, HD-DVD could roll-up immediately.

Business lesson: don't scratch your head during a battle unless you are ready to give up, people are judgemental and would interpret that as raising your hands or raising a white flag.