backtop


Print 63 comment(s) - last by Pessimism.. on Jan 5 at 4:14 PM


3D glasses are worth no more than the $3 up charge the theater wants  (Source: Panasonic)
Give us a decently priced 3D TV with passive glasses and things might take off

A disconnect in what analysts think will happen and what actually happens with consumers seems to be commonplace within the TV industry. In October, DisplaySearch released some figures that forecast the shipments of connected TVs to soar this year. So far, according to massive electronics retailer Best Buy, the mass adoption of expensive sets with new features simply hasn't happened and adoption of 3D TVs is still slow.

Reuters reports that Best Buy CEO Brian Dunn told analysts that sales of 3D TVs has fallen behind expectations. Dunn said, "There was confusion about 3D early (on). It was a little short on content." A little short is an understatement, and one of the films that could have helped drive 3D TV adoption – Avatar – is locked up as an exclusive for Panasonic until 2012.

With the news of slower than expected sales of high-end TVs, Best Buy was forced to cut the profit forecast for the year. Frank Ingarra from Hennessy Funds stated, "The stock got killed today." Ingarra co-manages a find that has 32,000 shares of Best Buy stock. The stock closed at $35.52.

TV makers still expect sales to improve next year as more 3D content becomes available. LG's Jay Vandenbree told 
Reuters, "Just like how high-definition TV started in sports and movies, as 3D evolves, it will go with sports and movies and then become more of an everyday thing."

Some also point out that 3D content that is poorly produced is also making some watchers queasy. Google's Google TV offerings are also not doing as well as expected on the market. The main reason for this is the fact that most of the major video streaming services and networks blocked Google TV devices from accessing and streaming content from sites like Hulu, Fox, and others effectively killing the benefits of paying more for Google TV.

Perhaps even more telling though is a statement from Ross Rubin, analyst at NPD. Rubin said, "People can also buy lower-priced alternatives to connected TVs, be it video game players, Blu-ray players or Apple TV."

Consumers aren’t stupid; many are familiar with 3D from the theater and most understand the benefits of 3D in the home. What many consumers simply won't get behind are sets that are overpriced and then require active glasses that cost $200/pair or more adding an extra $800 or more to the cost of going 3D for a family of four. 



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Mode of watching
By Wererat on 12/15/2010 12:49:47 PM , Rating: 3
A wise person (my wife) enlightened me to a cause of slow 3d adoption yesterday.

She prefers to watch TV whilst doing other tasks.

Therefore, she doesn't want to wear additional glasses or have features on the TV which require her full attention or would detract from her ability to handle whatever else she's doing.

By contrast, a movie in the theatre is (unless you're very rude) an experience where you're devoting your full attention to the show. There, glasses or other aids aren't a hindrance.




RE: Mode of watching
By cmdrdredd on 12/15/2010 9:51:22 PM , Rating: 2
So true and very overlooked. A ton of people have the TV on and "watch" while writing a paper during commercials or reading the online sites such as this one.

Another overlooked aspect is the economy. Unemployment is at record levels and many people are in fear of the uncertain future. They are not going to plop down the needed money on one of these sets with things as upside down as they are now. Plus, right now you can get a Panasonic 42" 3D Plasma for $1100, then you need a 3D player or at least some glasses for viewing 3D content. So you figure $160 for a decent 3D Blu-Ray player and about $280 for the 3D starter kit *roll eyes* which comes with only 2 pairs of glasses and a pretty craptastic movie called Avatar. Then each additional set of glasses is $108 a piece. So lets say a family of 4. You need the TV, the player, the starter kit, and 2 additional pairs of glasses. Grand total of $1756 before shipping and any applicable sales tax. Then you get to watch 1 movie and maybe 1 channel on TV with some 3D content. That price doesn't even include a 3D compatable receiver for surround sound that can pass the 3D signal through HDMI to the TV.

By contrast a 58" 1080p Plasma without 3D is $1100 and you use all your current equipment to watch HD content. No starter kits etc. Most people I know would opt for the bigger set and skip the 3D.


RE: Mode of watching
By wempa on 12/16/2010 12:54:44 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Grand total of $1756 before shipping and any applicable sales tax. Then you get to watch 1 movie and maybe 1 channel on TV with some 3D content.


Not only that, but for the 99.99% of the time that you aren't watching 3D, you are getting ZERO benefit from all that extra cost. Gee, I wonder why it hasn't taken off ! </sarcasm>


"If they're going to pirate somebody, we want it to be us rather than somebody else." -- Microsoft Business Group President Jeff Raikes

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki