OT: decline in LCD HDTV prices

[BE]

Can anyone lead me to a web site where the downward price trend is carefully
described and plotted? I'd like to get a solid sense of when, for example,
I will be able to purchase a 42" LCD unit (non-DLP, non-projection) for $900
retail or thereabouts. It appears that manufacturers are well on their way
to perfecting the process of the main component - the LCD glass - and the
rest of the unit should be more or less commodity parts.

In my opinion, if prices don't cut in half by this time next year, it can
only be the result of collusion. Am I wrong?

Bee

 

[Bob Urz]

BE wrote:

Can anyone lead me to a web site where the downward price trend is carefully
described and plotted? I'd like to get a solid sense of when, for example,
I will be able to purchase a 42" LCD unit (non-DLP, non-projection) for $900
retail or thereabouts. It appears that manufacturers are well on their way
to perfecting the process of the main component - the LCD glass - and the
rest of the unit should be more or less commodity parts.

In my opinion, if prices don't cut in half by this time next year, it can
only be the result of collusion. Am I wrong?

Bee

Yes, your wrong. But it has nothing to do with collusion. Prices are

coming down. They came down some this year because of a demand let up
this fall. The Korean (and others) manufactures are scaling up to use
larger wafers of glass in there production process. There are always
some panels that have to get scrapped because of process errors.
But a glass substrate that will make 2 to 4 big panels can make a boat
load of the smaller panels. So its a supply/demand vs yield issue.
Eventually, prices will reach a equilibrium when more manufacturers
are building the large substrates and the CRT is regulated to only
small specialty applications.

The dirty little secret about these panels is how long the back lights
will last and how replaceable they are. People are working on LED type
back lights now (with a few interesting twists), and this should help
that issue. Time will tell.

Bob



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

 

[Geoffrey S. Mendelson]

BE wrote:

Can anyone lead me to a web site where the downward price trend is carefully
described and plotted? I'd like to get a solid sense of when, for example,
I will be able to purchase a 42" LCD unit (non-DLP, non-projection) for $900
retail or thereabouts. It appears that manufacturers are well on their way
to perfecting the process of the main component - the LCD glass - and the
rest of the unit should be more or less commodity parts.

In my opinion, if prices don't cut in half by this time next year, it can
only be the result of collusion. Am I wrong?

No. The cost of making an LCD is limited by many factors. The real problem is
that the size of an LCD makes a big difference in the reject rate. The bigger
an LCD is, the harder it is to make perfect.

The real cost cut will come with Organic LED (OLED) technology. An
800x600 3.5 inch screen will cost wholesale about $5. Currently a
320x240 3.5 inch screen is about $40 in large quantities. This will cut
the cost of a handheld device almost in half. They are simple to
manufacture, the process is similar to printing with an ink jet printer.

OLEDs are "active" devices. they need no backlighting and they are unafected
by temperature. They are inherently high contrast.

The downside is that in 3,000 hours of use the blue LEDs will be half the
brightness of when it was new. Obviously when new, the price will be high,
but in two or three years, the screen for your 42 inch TV will cost $100.
Either it will be user replaceable, or it will just be a screen with a
seperate tuner.

Eventually it will reach movie theaters who will use an OLED screen instead
of a projector and passive screen. Once a year the theater will close and
a new screen, delivered in a roll like a rug will be rolled out to replace
the old one.

Since the material is plastic, a conductive coating and bio-degradeable active
elements, the old screen can be safely rolled up and put out in the trash.

Geoff.

--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel gsm@mendelson.com N3OWJ/4X1GM
IL Voice: (07)-7424-1667 IL Fax: 972-2-648-1443 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838
The trouble with being a futurist is that when people get around to believing
you, it's too late. We lost. Google 2,000,000:Hams 0.

 

[dkuhajda@locl.net]

The price is set by the market and the profit margin of the product.

The manufactures are not going to lower the price if every unit they
produce at the current price sells soon after it hits the stores.
Competition and manufacturing cost cutting will allow for prices to
come down and more units will be sold.
The price is already at a point where large numbers of consumers are
already replacing current tube based tv sets with lcd or plasma units.

The manufacturing technology is already at the best level it will be
for some time with only minor improvements possible in the near future.
Until demand starts to fall off, there is no incentive to lower price
to spur greater demand.

The idea of collusion is simply wrong.

 

[Andy Cuffe]

On Sun, 8 Jan 2006 17:00:04 +0000 (UTC), gsm@mendelson.com (Geoffrey
S. Mendelson) wrote:

The real cost cut will come with Organic LED (OLED) technology. An
800x600 3.5 inch screen will cost wholesale about $5. Currently a
320x240 3.5 inch screen is about $40 in large quantities. This will cut
the cost of a handheld device almost in half. They are simple to
manufacture, the process is similar to printing with an ink jet printer.

Cheap OLED TVs have been a year or two away for as long as I can
remember. I'll believe it when I see it. I have not seen anything
beyond the tiny displays on the outside of cell phones.

Andy Cuffe

acuffe@gmail.com

 

[Ray L. Volts]

"Andy Cuffe" <acuffe@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:2d65s115jcnk2rm8cpkdfeft2p3n4kt6ua@4ax.com...

On Sun, 8 Jan 2006 17:00:04 +0000 (UTC), gsm@mendelson.com (Geoffrey
S. Mendelson) wrote:


The real cost cut will come with Organic LED (OLED) technology. An
800x600 3.5 inch screen will cost wholesale about $5. Currently a
320x240 3.5 inch screen is about $40 in large quantities. This will cut
the cost of a handheld device almost in half. They are simple to
manufacture, the process is similar to printing with an ink jet printer.


Cheap OLED TVs have been a year or two away for as long as I can
remember. I'll believe it when I see it. I have not seen anything
beyond the tiny displays on the outside of cell phones.

Andy Cuffe

acuffe@gmail.com

Until recently, engineers have had considerable difficulty in creating large
OLED displays. They've apparently succeeded. I haven't seen it in person,
but Samsung has produced a 40-inch OLED TV:
http://www.akihabaranews.com/en/news_9619.html

 

[none]

On Sun, 08 Jan 2006 16:23:30 GMT, BE <n3wsr3ad3r_|@|_sbcglobal.net>
wrote:

Can anyone lead me to a web site where the downward price trend is carefully
described and plotted? I'd like to get a solid sense of when, for example,
I will be able to purchase a 42" LCD unit (non-DLP, non-projection) for $900
retail or thereabouts. It appears that manufacturers are well on their way
to perfecting the process of the main component - the LCD glass - and the
rest of the unit should be more or less commodity parts.

In my opinion, if prices don't cut in half by this time next year, it can
only be the result of collusion. Am I wrong?

Bee
No you're not. The manufacturers and all involved in the chain down to

your local retail store are and always have been greedy bastards.
They are simply NOT going to reduce the price on anything they produce
and market until the consumers exert enough pressure by simply
choosing not to buy at grossly marked up prices.(Or would you believe
all these nay-sayers when the history of retail pricing says
different? Or have you forgotten how they gouged us on early vcrs not
to mention the scandalous prices they charged us for the tapes that
went in these machines?)

 

[none]

On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 05:31:56 GMT, James Sweet <jamessweet@hotmail.com>
wrote:

none wrote:
On Sun, 08 Jan 2006 16:23:30 GMT, BE <n3wsr3ad3r_|@|_sbcglobal.net
wrote:


Can anyone lead me to a web site where the downward price trend is carefully
described and plotted? I'd like to get a solid sense of when, for example,
I will be able to purchase a 42" LCD unit (non-DLP, non-projection) for $900
retail or thereabouts. It appears that manufacturers are well on their way
to perfecting the process of the main component - the LCD glass - and the
rest of the unit should be more or less commodity parts.

In my opinion, if prices don't cut in half by this time next year, it can
only be the result of collusion. Am I wrong?

Bee

No you're not. The manufacturers and all involved in the chain down to
your local retail store are and always have been greedy bastards.
They are simply NOT going to reduce the price on anything they produce
and market until the consumers exert enough pressure by simply
choosing not to buy at grossly marked up prices.(Or would you believe
all these nay-sayers when the history of retail pricing says
different? Or have you forgotten how they gouged us on early vcrs not
to mention the scandalous prices they charged us for the tapes that
went in these machines?)




Somebody's gotta make money somewhere. Have you any idea how many
millions of dollars it costs to develop a new technology?

And do you have any idea how little it actually costs to produce the
product? Pennies on the dollar.

Most of the technology for LCD and flat screen imaging has been around
for donkey years, so it didn't cost that much to develop what's on the
market today. Really just refinements along the way.

Besides if even 10 cent of every retail dollar actually went towards
paying the worker a fair wage I'd be the last to complain.

 

[none]

On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 12:12:57 -0500, Andy Cuffe <acuffe@gmail.com>
wrote:

On Mon, 09 Jan 2006 22:41:24 -0600, none <Vampyres@nettaxi.com> wrote:


No you're not. The manufacturers and all involved in the chain down to
your local retail store are and always have been greedy bastards.
They are simply NOT going to reduce the price on anything they produce
and market until the consumers exert enough pressure by simply
choosing not to buy at grossly marked up prices.(Or would you believe
all these nay-sayers when the history of retail pricing says
different? Or have you forgotten how they gouged us on early vcrs not
to mention the scandalous prices they charged us for the tapes that
went in these machines?)


Everything I've read suggests that profit margins are very slim on LCD
TVs. Large LCD panels are very expensive to make. There are only a
hand full of multi-billion $ factories in the world that can make
them. Remember how long it took for LCDs in laptops to become large
and affordable? If they could sell a large LCD TV for $300 someone
would already be doing it.
Believe everything you read, do you?

As for the technology being so rare and so expensive. How is it then
that Sharp has been producing 6ft flat screens televisions for the
past 15 or so years.
Like I said flat screen technology has been around donkey years.
The ONLY reason it's become so prevalent in the general consumer
market is because they have found an inexpensive means of mass
producing them.
I can remember lcd's being used in military applications back in the
early 80's

What makes you think early VCRs were over priced? The technology was
a lot more expensive back then. Compare an early VCR to a modern VCR.
The modern one has a fraction of the complexity and materials.
Andy Cuffe

I don't think, I know. don't be so quick to buy into the concept of
"expensive" technology. No one research lab has the corner market on
the latest technological breakthrough.
There are dozens if not hundreds of research concerns all working
along parallel lines and for the most part at the same level.
Just as there are many different solutions to any technological need
so are there R&D firms who'll sell your manufacturing business a less
expensive method for producing the end product.
Prices are only high because of the marketing strategy/tactics of the
name brand companies ( Sony, Panasonic, JVC etc...) and their attempts
to throttle out any competition from the less established companies.
Besides the real point is the gross disparity between the cost of
producing the goods and what they charge for it.
Or do you think it's a good thing to pay 10 fold or higher over the
actually cost of the end product?

acuffe@gmail.com

 

[Leonard Caillouet]

"none" <Vampyres@nettaxi.com> wrote in message
news:6599s19hc66thsi784konheram08mvckcf@4ax.com...

On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 05:31:56 GMT, James Sweet <jamessweet@hotmail.com
wrote:

Somebody's gotta make money somewhere. Have you any idea how many
millions of dollars it costs to develop a new technology?

And do you have any idea how little it actually costs to produce the
product? Pennies on the dollar.

Most of the technology for LCD and flat screen imaging has been around
for donkey years, so it didn't cost that much to develop what's on the
market today. Really just refinements along the way.

Besides if even 10 cent of every retail dollar actually went towards
paying the worker a fair wage I'd be the last to complain.

So since you have it all figured out, why aren't you investing in these
companies making so much money, or building the products yourself and doning
business in the way that you think is fair? The big bad corporate world
won't let you in, right?

The electronics business is like every other business. There are winners,
losers, and everything in between, at every level from the miner to the
consumer. You could say the same stuff about the auto industry or the
hamburger business. Obviously, you identify better with the losers.

The Eagles said it best..."I'd like to find your inner child and kick its
little ass, get over it, get over it."

Leonard

 

[jakdedert]

Leonard Caillouet wrote:

"none" <Vampyres@nettaxi.com> wrote in message
news:6599s19hc66thsi784konheram08mvckcf@4ax.com...

On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 05:31:56 GMT, James Sweet <jamessweet@hotmail.com
wrote:


Somebody's gotta make money somewhere. Have you any idea how many
millions of dollars it costs to develop a new technology?

And do you have any idea how little it actually costs to produce the
product? Pennies on the dollar.

Most of the technology for LCD and flat screen imaging has been around
for donkey years, so it didn't cost that much to develop what's on the
market today. Really just refinements along the way.

Besides if even 10 cent of every retail dollar actually went towards
paying the worker a fair wage I'd be the last to complain.


So since you have it all figured out, why aren't you investing in these
companies making so much money, or building the products yourself and doning
business in the way that you think is fair? The big bad corporate world
won't let you in, right?

The electronics business is like every other business. There are winners,
losers, and everything in between, at every level from the miner to the
consumer. You could say the same stuff about the auto industry or the
hamburger business. Obviously, you identify better with the losers.

The Eagles said it best..."I'd like to find your inner child and kick its
little ass, get over it, get over it."

Leonard


He probably never looked *inside* one of those original VCR's.

They were a marvel of discrete electronics and precision-machined
mechanical parts. VCR's only started to get really 'cheap' when the
technology developed to the point where IC's replaced most of those
components...and the IC's had enough error correction to compensate for
'less than precise' transports; AND the original R&D bucks had been paid
back.

Beta didn't really survive that far. They were never actually 'cheap',
although the development of the technology--both before and after the
introduction of consumer machines--allowed somewhat cheaper solutions
for the professional uses that the Beta recording format was
subsequently employed.

jak

 

[Leonard Caillouet]

"jakdedert" <jakdedert@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
newsvcxf.34159$qw4.22338@bignews5.bellsouth.net...

Leonard Caillouet wrote:
"none" <Vampyres@nettaxi.com> wrote in message
news:6599s19hc66thsi784konheram08mvckcf@4ax.com...

On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 05:31:56 GMT, James Sweet <jamessweet@hotmail.com
wrote:


Somebody's gotta make money somewhere. Have you any idea how many
millions of dollars it costs to develop a new technology?

And do you have any idea how little it actually costs to produce the
product? Pennies on the dollar.

Most of the technology for LCD and flat screen imaging has been around
for donkey years, so it didn't cost that much to develop what's on the
market today. Really just refinements along the way.

Besides if even 10 cent of every retail dollar actually went towards
paying the worker a fair wage I'd be the last to complain.


So since you have it all figured out, why aren't you investing in these
companies making so much money, or building the products yourself and
doning business in the way that you think is fair? The big bad corporate
world won't let you in, right?

The electronics business is like every other business. There are
winners, losers, and everything in between, at every level from the miner
to the consumer. You could say the same stuff about the auto industry or
the hamburger business. Obviously, you identify better with the losers.

The Eagles said it best..."I'd like to find your inner child and kick its
little ass, get over it, get over it."

Leonard


He probably never looked *inside* one of those original VCR's.

They were a marvel of discrete electronics and precision-machined
mechanical parts. VCR's only started to get really 'cheap' when the
technology developed to the point where IC's replaced most of those
components...and the IC's had enough error correction to compensate for
'less than precise' transports; AND the original R&D bucks had been paid
back.

Beta didn't really survive that far. They were never actually 'cheap',
although the development of the technology--both before and after the
introduction of consumer machines--allowed somewhat cheaper solutions for
the professional uses that the Beta recording format was subsequently
employed.

jak

I wonder if he thinks Toshiba is going to make a killing selling those HD
DVD units for $499? LOL.

Leonard

 

[James Sweet]

Leonard Caillouet wrote:

"jakdedert" <jakdedert@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
newsvcxf.34159$qw4.22338@bignews5.bellsouth.net...

Leonard Caillouet wrote:

"none" <Vampyres@nettaxi.com> wrote in message
news:6599s19hc66thsi784konheram08mvckcf@4ax.com...


On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 05:31:56 GMT, James Sweet <jamessweet@hotmail.com
wrote:


Somebody's gotta make money somewhere. Have you any idea how many
millions of dollars it costs to develop a new technology?

And do you have any idea how little it actually costs to produce the
product? Pennies on the dollar.

Having been involved for a while in the production of consumer
electronics hardware, yes I do have a pretty good idea. The actual cost
of materials is not always terribly high but from keeping the lights on
in the factory to packaging materials to paying for shipping, and all
the other things that take a cut the profit margins are razor thin.
Nobody is getting rich making this stuff, it's hard to even make a
decent living while competing against underpaid workers in 3rd world
nations.

If it were possible to make a load of money undercutting everyone
selling HDTV sets I'd be doing it myself. Why don't you give it a shot?

 

[Andy Cuffe]

On Mon, 09 Jan 2006 22:41:24 -0600, none <Vampyres@nettaxi.com> wrote:

No you're not. The manufacturers and all involved in the chain down to
your local retail store are and always have been greedy bastards.
They are simply NOT going to reduce the price on anything they produce
and market until the consumers exert enough pressure by simply
choosing not to buy at grossly marked up prices.(Or would you believe
all these nay-sayers when the history of retail pricing says
different? Or have you forgotten how they gouged us on early vcrs not
to mention the scandalous prices they charged us for the tapes that
went in these machines?)

Everything I've read suggests that profit margins are very slim on LCD
TVs. Large LCD panels are very expensive to make. There are only a
hand full of multi-billion $ factories in the world that can make
them. Remember how long it took for LCDs in laptops to become large
and affordable? If they could sell a large LCD TV for $300 someone
would already be doing it.

What makes you think early VCRs were over priced? The technology was
a lot more expensive back then. Compare an early VCR to a modern VCR.
The modern one has a fraction of the complexity and materials.
Andy Cuffe

acuffe@gmail.com

 

[James Sweet]

none wrote:

On Sun, 08 Jan 2006 16:23:30 GMT, BE <n3wsr3ad3r_|@|_sbcglobal.net
wrote:


Can anyone lead me to a web site where the downward price trend is carefully
described and plotted? I'd like to get a solid sense of when, for example,
I will be able to purchase a 42" LCD unit (non-DLP, non-projection) for $900
retail or thereabouts. It appears that manufacturers are well on their way
to perfecting the process of the main component - the LCD glass - and the
rest of the unit should be more or less commodity parts.

In my opinion, if prices don't cut in half by this time next year, it can
only be the result of collusion. Am I wrong?

Bee

No you're not. The manufacturers and all involved in the chain down to
your local retail store are and always have been greedy bastards.
They are simply NOT going to reduce the price on anything they produce
and market until the consumers exert enough pressure by simply
choosing not to buy at grossly marked up prices.(Or would you believe
all these nay-sayers when the history of retail pricing says
different? Or have you forgotten how they gouged us on early vcrs not
to mention the scandalous prices they charged us for the tapes that
went in these machines?)

Somebody's gotta make money somewhere. Have you any idea how many
millions of dollars it costs to develop a new technology?