Honestly, I don't get the fascination with BluRay, and certainly don't get the cries for those of us who still use DVD to follow the technology (not referring to you, bosk, since that isn't what you said, but in general). Yes, BluRay looks better than DVD, but for a lot of people it just doesn't look enough better to convince them to buy a whole new system. Plus if someone likes to play movies on their computer and has a computer that's even a couple of years old (or a Mac), a BluRay is not a good investment for them since they simply can't play it. It might be a better investment if BluRay discs worked to play DVD-quality video on ordinary DVD players, or if DVD/BluRay combo packs weren't literally the cost of a DVD plus the cost of a BluRay. But, quite simply, for a lot of people it is not worth a marginal bump in picture quality to experience numerous drawbacks.
I get that the label wants to follow all of the latest technology trends. But even the most ardent of BluRay fans has to admit that there are a ton of people out there for whom the format is not yet worth it. So I think it's silly for the label to take features away from DVD buyers for no particular reason (there is absolutely no reason why they should not be able to sell the CDs either on their own or together with the DVDs at next to no additional cost).
Edit:
Get a blu-ray player!
So much this. TAC, I think I've got an extra one laying around somewhere. Wanna buy it real cheap, Buddy?
Great, but I like to watch things like this on my laptop, so are you also offering me one of those that can play BluRay? And what if I want to loan it to a friend who doesn't have a BluRay player (a lot of people don't)?
Honestly all we're asking here is that they not completely exclude us from buying the CDs just because we don't want to buy BluRays. I don't get why anyone would actually oppose the label making the CDs available in a set with the DVDs or on their own. Either it affects you positively, or it doesn't affect you at all.