Slashdot Mirror


HDTV Expert Alfred Poor Tells You What to Buy and What Not to Buy (Video)

Alfred Poor's website is called HDTV Almanac. That's where he talks about the latest HDTV industry news and changes. He also writes about HDTVs and monitors for a variety of industry publications and does some marketing consulting for manufacturers in the field. In this 17 minute video, Alfred tells us what features we should look for in our next TV buy and which ones aren't worth spending extra money on. He also says that for a variety of non-technical reasons, you might want to consider buying your next TV between now and June -- and says you should think about getting a 3D TV even if there aren't many 3D TV shows you want to watch right now.

43 of 324 comments (clear)

  1. Listen to what I have to say by jkflying · · Score: 4, Funny

    BUY BUY BUY!!!!

    --
    Help I am stuck in a signature factory!
    1. Re:Listen to what I have to say by realityimpaired · · Score: 5, Insightful

      When they figure out how to do 3D TV's which don't require that I wear clunkly glasses and keep my head perfectly level, I'll consider buying a 3D TV. Until then, the 42" LG flatscreen that I bought 5 years ago works perfectly well. It does 1080p, the picture is bright enough and clear enough, and it has 2 component video inputs and 3 HDMI, which is better than a lot of TV's on the market today.

      For the foreseeable future, I don't see any reason to replace it unless it decides to shuffle off its mortal coil.

    2. Re:Listen to what I have to say by Moryath · · Score: 5, Informative

      Given the size of my living room, a 720p 50" Sony I bought years ago is doing just fine. It doesn't need 1080p, because at the distance I'm sitting from it, the eye can't tell the difference anyways.

      http://s3.carltonbale.com/resolution_chart.html

    3. Re:Listen to what I have to say by skids · · Score: 3, Informative

      I've found the tunable 3rd party glasses (Monster MV3D or XPAND X104) require significantly less head leveling. FWIW.

      (BTW if you are buying for 3D, DLP is the better performer in this space, despite what manufacturers say about their LED/LCD/Plasma refresh rates. Problem being you can no longer get a DLP set smaller than huge.)

    4. Re:Listen to what I have to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      >People are going to buy anyways. No one actually needs to tell consumers to consume. Supply attempts to meet demand.

      Many people would disagree with you. The US consumer confidence index, while in the rise, has been pretty damned low for the past few years. Unfortunately, the US economy is largely reliant on rampant consumerism. Lack of consumer confidence means consumers are less likely to spend money, less spending of money by consumers is bad for the US economy.

    5. Re:Listen to what I have to say by AngryDeuce · · Score: 3, Insightful

      3D is a gimmick, just like it always has been up to this point. I'll invest in 3D when we're seeing true 3-dimensional holography without the need for special glasses, and it doesn't seem like that's going to be anytime soon...

      Plus I always get headaches after a couple hours of watching 3D content, so I avoid it in the theater whenever I can. The only film I even care to see in 3D at this point is The Hobbit, and that's not so much because it's 3D in itself but because I've been watching the behind the scenes footage of their technical setup and am interested to see the difference in quality compared to the typical shit-tastic, fake 3D slapped on top of a 2D movie, Hollywood crap.

    6. Re:Listen to what I have to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The problem isn't technological. I'll buy a 3DTV when they discover a way for 3D to actually be an important part of the story and to move the story (and my emotions) in ways that regular 2DTV cannot. So far, they have not been able to do it at the movie theaters so my expectation is that they will not be able to do this for quite some time.

    7. Re:Listen to what I have to say by b4dc0d3r · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "You might want to consider" is about the same as "If you're in the market" plus a little of "Take a moment and think about if your wife has been complaining about something with the TV."

      If you are in the market, and especially if you are in the market and don't realize it, this is probably great advice. If you are not in the market, even the normally terrible summary doesn't tell you to buy one, only consider it.

      I don't understand the knee-jerk "It works for me" replies to any 3D TV story. I'm interested, I don't have one yet, and having this guy's opinion gives me more info to base my decision on.

      In other words, if your needs are fulfilled right now, you are very likely not the target audience.

    8. Re:Listen to what I have to say by tgibbs · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, most modern 3D technology does not require you to keep your head perfectly level. Older 3D glasses that used linear polarization showed crosstalk if you tipped your head but this is not the case with the modern technology. "Active" (shutter) glasses (the somewhat clunky ones) work perfectly well with moderate tips of the head, although your brain gets confused if you tip your head completely sideways (because the parallax is not in the direction that your brain expects from the position of your eyes). Most modern passive 3D systems use circular polarization, which is similarly insensitive to head angle.

    9. Re:Listen to what I have to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      A 16" screen, at lap distance (say, 18") is about 40 degrees of visual arc. About the same as a 50" screen at 4.5 feet. Assuming that Moryath's living room is bigger than 10 feet (maybe even bigger than 15 feet), your experience with a laptop screen does not apply to his experience.

    10. Re:Listen to what I have to say by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Funny

      For the best experience in mortal coil shuffling, I recommend Monster Cable brand mortal coil. It's death contacts are gold tipped, because that matters to digital mortal coil shuffling just as much as analog mortal coil shuffling.

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    11. Re:Listen to what I have to say by ceoyoyo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I doubt very much he has his 50" TV on his lap.

      Seriously, why do people find the fact that the eye's resolving power is measured in seconds of arc so difficult to comprehend? You need to know number of dots, screen size AND viewing distance to make any meaningful statements.

      And that goes double for the "photographers" who think you need Z number of megapixels for an X x Y print.

    12. Re:Listen to what I have to say by demonbug · · Score: 5, Informative

      The rest of your description is likewise meaningless. At 12 feet from the TV on a 50" screen, you CAN NOT physically tell the difference. It is impossible, your eyes don't have the resolution to handle it, and telling yourself otherwise is like telling yourself you need some $10,000 ethernet cables for your home network too.

      This is not true. The acuity numbers you base this on (from the article linked earlier) are related to vision tests like you might undergo at an optometrist, where the measure is the smallest size text you are able to read at a given distance. "Nominal" vision in this case is 20/20, which means that the subject can resolve letters 20mm high at a distance of 20 feet - this is where the 1 arc-minute of visual acuity your linked article mentions appears to come from (and never mind that people have been measured with vision down to 20/8, which would reduce this significantly - about 0.4 arc-minutes).

      This is useful information, but it doesn't actually mean what you seem to be claiming - that we can see no difference in features smaller than this, and any greater resolution is wasted. In tests where subjects are assessing whether two lines line up, acuity down to about 8 arc-seconds has been observed, which is actually better resolution than the physical receptors on the retina. Similarly, a single dark line against an evenly illuminated background can be observed down to a limit of about 0.5 arc-seconds, much finer than the physical detectors in the eye.

      This isn't to say that we need displays capable of sub-1 arc-second resolution, but human vision is far more complicated than you make it out to be. Saying that there is no difference between a 720p display and a 1080p display at x distance and size because the pixels are too small to be individually resolved (based on results from a test for resolving letters) is simply not true. Most people probably can detect a difference, even if the difference is too small for them to really notice in moving pictures (or are just not bothered by it). Claiming that no one can see any difference and therefore anyone who doesn't follow that simplistic chart is an idiot is, simply, false.

    13. Re:Listen to what I have to say by AlfredPoor · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Excellent points, demonbug. I agree completely that there is more to the human perception systems than is credited by the "conventional wisdom." We can't hear frequencies above some limit (and that limit is much lower for me now than it was 40 years ago), yet we can "notice" quarter-wave differences in phase which form the basis for psychoacoustic effects such as surround sound from stereo speakers. I completely accept that we may well by able to "resolve" much finer details than indicated by the traditional 1 arc-minute limitations, especially under some conditions. (Under other conditions, the same average person's resolution be quite less. For example, two shades of blue may appear different under some circumstances, but identical under others.) And I certainly accept that the visual acuity of different individuals is likely to vary widely.

      So the issue is not so much whether there is some fixed line that divides Acceptable Image Quality from Not Acceptable. I accept that this is a moving target for many good reasons that make the boundary conditions difficult (probably impossible) to identify with precision. Instead, I'd argue that having a general, fuzzy approximation is better than having none at all, and that while the 1 arc-minute "conventional wisdom" is limited, it probably does okay as a rule of thumb to get closer than an order of magnitude from the optimal choice.

      Translation: listen to the experts and the reviews and all, but trust your eyes. Go to the store and look at the screens, and decide for yourself how big a screen you need to have so that you can see the fine detail when you're as far from it as you will be in your living room. Nothing beats the Mark II Eyeball as a predictor of future satisfaction.

      Alfred Poor
      HDTV Almanac

    14. Re:Listen to what I have to say by vlm · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My god guys, that is abstract. Let me explain how people in the real world buy a TV using myself as an example.

      So last october ye olde magnavox 25-year old CRT in the living room started giving weird colors, seems the red gun is going out, and also its having some convergence problems, and occasionally some HV probs. The TV is dead! The TV is dead! Oh no the TV is dead! (or terminal, anyway) Off we go to Best Buy with a budget, and we spent what we budgeted. I was completely uninterested in the bells and whistles, all I wanted was a really big monitor with VGA and/or HDMI input from my mythtv box (most people would use a cablebox, eh, same difference) so I got a somewhat featureless TV that is larger than a feature-ful TV at the same price.

      I did not bother trying to debate Keynesian economics with a wife going thru reality TV withdrawl. And frankly I also missed the women in bikinis suntanning on Survivor.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
  2. Screw 3D movies, bring 3D games! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I have tested NVIDIA 3D technology with some games at it's awesome! The effect is even more real because you are actually interracting with the world. For example Left4Dead is great with 3D glasses. Now we just need more support from game developers.

  3. 3D Display... by Nrrqshrr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Manufacturers really should get over their 3D complex. Sure, they spent a lot on it, R&D and Marketing, but it does more harm than whatever gimmick-value it provides...

    1. Re:3D Display... by Cazekiel · · Score: 5, Interesting

      My dad has always been a 3D nutter; he even constructed his own 3D digital camera around ten years ago (consisting of TWO digital cams, measuring the exact distance from each other/shot timing and put onto a homemade wood frame. The images were run through a program on the computer that arranged them to make the pictures viewable through a classic stereoscopic viewer). While he has the new technology, the 3D TV, manufactured digital cams, etc., he has that complex... only it's been a lifetime love affair, organic, geeked-out and really cool to grow up with. :)

      --
      You want to know how to help your kids? LEAVE THEM THE F*&K ALONE. --George Carlin
  4. TFS Saved Me 17 Minutes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Alfred Poor...says you should think about getting a 3D TV... .

    Thank you summary, you just saved me 17 minutes by letting me know that Alfred Poor is a tool.

    1. Re:TFS Saved Me 17 Minutes by Daetrin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Guy who does "marketing consulting" for the people trying to sell us the latest TV with all the gimmicks tells us to buy the latest TV with all the gimmicks. Color me shocked.

      There are certainly a lot of things i'd like to know about which specs and features i needed to worry about and which i don't, i certainly did a lot of research on it the last time i bought a tv, but the first thing i put in the "just a marketing gimick that i don't care about" is 3D. I say this as someone who owns a 3DS and and never gets headaches from it. 3D works for me just fine, i just don't give a damn most of the time. And from what i've gathered from talking to other people i'm far from the only one. So the fact that this guys is pushing it makes me doubt everything else he has to say.

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
  5. Armchair expert says buy "through my site" by mattdm · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is some guy with a website, with a dull and poorly produced video telling you to buy stuff. I stopped when I got to the part where it says that most people buy smaller TVs than they "need". N-E-E-D.

    Now, if he said "people buy smaller TVs than would be AWESOME", okay, fine. But this is basically crass consumerism pumped up by guy who isn't an "industry expert" but rather someone who worked for a crappy rah-rah-buy-stuff computer magazine for 20 years and is trying to trade on that to get some money. That's not wrong in itself, but it sure does translate to being a slashvertisement here.

    Two thumbs down.

    1. Re:Armchair expert says buy "through my site" by Jmc23 · · Score: 3
      Ever heard of context? Need was said in the sense of being able to utilize the resolution. Makes no sense to buy an hdtv at 19" and sit 6' away from it, you really NEED it to be bigger.

      Modded +5? Two thumbs down.

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
  6. Rubbish by Cherubim1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Poor advice. There is no need for anyone to buy anything beyond a HDTV. This is all marketing BS delivered by a corporate-paid shill.

  7. Re:TL;DR by Pieroxy · · Score: 5, Informative

    In a couple of lines, what does he say?

    Please buy the TVs whose manufacturers pay me more $$$ for.

  8. 3D is worthless to me... by neokushan · · Score: 4, Informative

    Due to a (somewhat) rare eyesight condition, 3D doesn't work on me. I have two working eyes, just one doesn't see as well as the other so my vision is way off balanced to the right. I am also fairly near-sighted. Day-to-day, this causes me absolutely no trouble at all. I can't wear glasses (doesn't help), so I make do with just getting closer to things.

    Anyhoo, it never stopped me from being able to use a computer. Standard font sizes on standard monitors were fine, I could read them just fine. However, as displays have gotten higher and higher resolutions, I'm finding it harder and harder to read them. My eyesight hasn't got any worse, it's just that things are getting smaller.

    Despite all of the advances in Technology for the differently abled, such as DPI settings in windows, it doesn't actually help. Adjusting DPI breaks so many apps that it's more trouble than it's worth. 3D seems to be the big new thing everyone wants you to buy and I can only pray that it fails so badly, people just give up trying to sell it. I worry because if 3D becomes the "standard", there's possibly going to be a shift towards content that is only /i>3D, in much the same way that content has shifted to "HD everything", meaning I'm screwed.

    So, for little ol' me, don't buy into 3D. Please.

    --
    +1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
    1. Re:3D is worthless to me... by neokushan · · Score: 3, Informative

      Indeed, it's a lot better than it used to be but I still have a major program that doesn't like it - Visual Studio.
      Now the funny thing is, it's "DPI-Aware" and the interface is, mostly, fine. The problem is the Windows Form Designer. It works, but the results on my screen differ from a non-DPI adjusted screen. So simple things, like lining up a bunch of text boxes so they're straight (and thus visually appealing) just doesn't work, not unless whoever runs the program is running the same DPI settings. Oddly enough, if a program is designed with DPI set to the default, on my DPI-adjused screen it's still fine. It makes no sense, really.

      When I encounter a program that doesn't adjust correctly (as you said, often older or badly written programs), you can disable all DPI scaling easily enough but VS completely ignores these settings.

      I'm lucky in that I have a decent sized monitor - 22", but at 1080p I find it just about uncomfortable to use. I only need about a 10% increase to be comfortable with it, but that's just enough to break things. I have a 24" monitor at home that's 1200p (1920x1200) and it's perfect for me. I'm saddened that you can't find 16:10 monitors any more because of this.

      --
      +1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
  9. Blu-Ray vs. DVD by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This guy must have bad eyes. I have a PS3 & 42" 1080p TV. Ours is probably 8-10 feet away depending on where you sit in our living room. I can easily tell the difference between a Blu-Ray and DVD. In fact, it's a tremendous difference in clarity.

    --
    Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    1. Re:Blu-Ray vs. DVD by afidel · · Score: 3, Informative

      BS, I'll buy that you can't tell the difference between 720p and 1080p beyond 10-12' but the difference between SD and HD is very, very noticeable on a 42" set even at ~16' (distance from my tv to our typical sitting position on the couch).

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  10. BUT YOU NEED TO BE READY FOR 3D by alen · · Score: 4, Insightful

    you need to buy a 3D TV for the most money even though there is little media for it and even though they will be a lot cheaper in a few years when or if there is more media just to be ready for the media. remember you won't be able to buy a 3D TV in a few years when the 3D media arrives so you have to buy it now just to be ready for the arrival

    anyone remember maximum PC 15 years ago? they were saying the same thing. buy expensive crap before there is any media just to "be ready". like the hardware is not going to be cheaper when the media arrives. i see the same nonsense now about the upcoming 4K TV's

  11. wth by matt_king · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you are going to post "advertorial" content SLASHDOT, at least mark it as such. I just lost some respect for this site.

  12. Okay, so someone link to some good advice then? by mojotooth · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Everybody seems to be bashing this guy as some kind of shill, could some of those same folks please point out some advice that they *would* give credence to?

    --
    -- Mojo Tooth : exploring our world as only an idiot can.
    1. Re:Okay, so someone link to some good advice then? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Here's my advice:

      1: Current TV broken?
      2: Yes? -> Buy one that suits your current needs. If it costs over $1000, reevaluate concept of "wants" and "needs". Buy it (you were going to anyway). GOTO 1.
      3: No? -> Wait until it breaks. GOTO 1.

  13. Shop for Deals by na1led · · Score: 3, Informative

    My dad purchased his Samsung 55" LCD 3D TV with glasses for $2200. I purchased my Samsung 51" Plasma 3D TV w/ glasses in December for $599 at BestBuy. I always try to find the best deal, not the latest and greatest.

    --
    -- By all means let's be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brains drop out.
  14. Total binspam - why was this even posted? by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 5, Informative
    Want some real advice? Do not buy a 3D tv. There's almost no content, the technology is immature, and the price will only go lower for better technology as time goes on.

    BTW - this guy is no expert.

    Who submitted this shite anyway? Oh, there was no submitter - it's a slashvertisement brought to you by roblimo. Can we have a way to down-mod stories? We've only been asking for that for years and years and years now. It would be better than those stupid anti_social_media buttons.

    --
    Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
    1. Re:Total binspam - why was this even posted? by FunPika · · Score: 3, Interesting

      How about we all just exclude Roblimo in our user options, nothing of value will be lost (I checked, everything Roblimo posts here appears to be videos, and at least half of them seem like slashvertisements).

      --
      After years of not using a signature, I am going to make one to say the following: Fuck Beta
  15. Posting under top comment for exposure by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 4, Informative

    When logged in, go to Options, then Exclusions section. Check the box "Roblimo" and hit save.

    No more advertising videos.

    --
    Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
  16. 3D may never be worth it by SpeedyG5 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Personally I go to the movies to relax and enjoy. I do not go to have things popping up in my face(Insert porn joke here). I am there to be immersed in the story I don' t want to ducking, bobbing and weaving. What is the obsession with 3D, they keep trying to shove it down my throat(Another porn joke). I could get a little subtle depth play, but that wouldn't warrant me paying good money for a new plasma. Regardless of wether the content is there I don't want it.

  17. Re:Football? by jmac_the_man · · Score: 3, Informative

    Either:

    a North American game in which a ball is normally carried by hand and passed from hand-to-hand;

    The North American game ("Gridiron Football") is so named because when the game was invented, the ball was 12 inches (1 foot) long from tip to tip. The modern ball is 11.5 inches because it makes the forward pass easier.

    or:

    a rest-of-the-world game in which a ball is controlled and passed by use of foot or head.

    The game you're talking about ("Association Football") gets its name from being played on foot. (As opposed to on horseback, like polo.)

  18. 4K on the way by AlfredPoor · · Score: 5, Informative

    Yes, 4K television is under development. ("4K" is roughly equivalent to 4 times the resolution of 1080p, for those not familiar with the term.) I would not recommend waiting for 4K for several reasons. First, people are fine with watching DVDs (which are standard definition) on their HDTVs right now, and don't even bother getting the Blu-ray version of a movie (which is high definition). They tend to sit too far from the screen for its size, which means that they can't see the added detail anyway. They're not going to sit twice as close (or get a set twice as large) in order to get the extra detail that 4K offers. And we're probably at least 10 years away -- if that -- from having a distribution system (broadcast and physical media) that can get the image to your set in the first place. So I'm not going to postpone my purchase just for 4K technology.

    Alfred Poor
    HDTV Almanac

    1. Re:4K on the way by AlfredPoor · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There certainly are 4K displays now; they've been demonstrated for years. The problem is that we don't have a distribution system for them; the same was true for HDTV. We had the display resolutions (especially on computer monitors) long before we had a system to distribute broadcast content, or the infrastructure to create the content for that matter.

      Alfred Poor
      HDTV Almanac

    2. Re:4K on the way by Junta · · Score: 3, Informative

      Not all of the LM9600, only the 84 inch.

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  19. Re:TL;DR by amcdiarmid · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you are in the marked for a TV right now: 1) You probably want a larger TV than you think. (It should be like a move it theater...) 2) Smart TV is not really worth an additional cost, as ROKU (or similar) are trivial to add. 3) You probably want to get a 3D TV, because a TV lasts 5-10 years & in two there will be content. 3a) There are 3 types of 3D: Funky battery powered glasses, Passive glasses (like in the movie theatre); no glasses (but you have to be sitting in a specific space, or it won't look right).

  20. Transcript by QuasiSteve · · Score: 4, Informative

    TItle: Industry Expert Alfred Poor Gives HDTV Buying Advice
    Description: There are features you need and some you don't

    [00:00] <TITLE>
    A "Slashdot TV" logo appears in the bottom left with "An Interview with Alfred Poor of HDTV Almanac" to its right.
    "What mistakes do / people make when / they buy an HDTV?" zooms into view.

    [00:04] Alfred>
    The biggest one they make of all is not buying [...]

    [00:06] <TITLE>
    A webcam picture of Alfred Poor fades into view.

    [...] the right size TV.
    A lot of people were trained - I don't know about you, but I was trained, growing up, to not sit too close to the TV - it's going to ruin your eyes.
    In fact, I was taught: hold your palm out so that if it covers up the screen, then you're at the right distance.
    That's great for the old-fashioned standard definition TV but it's not the right move at all for HDTV.
    I try to tell people to think in terms of going to the movies; You don't sit all the way in the back of the theater so that you can cover up your screen with your hand - You want an immersive experience, where you're enveloped by the image.
    That's the same thing you want at home.
    For most people, they typically get a screen that's a lot smaller than what they really should have.
    There are a lot of rules of thumb out there - some of them are wrong, but they basically.. if you're gonna be sitting about 6 feet away, you need at least a 42" screen.
    A 47" screen would be even better.
    So, that's one of the big mistakes that people make.
    Now the prices have come down so much that a larger screen doesn't cost that much more.
    So I encourage people to buy probably the next size up from what they they ought to get.

    [01:22] <TITLE>
    "Are HDTV prices going / to keep on going down?" fades in and out of view. These titles appear throughout the video.

    [01:28] Alfred>
    Actually, the story is that the prices have been coming down very steadily.
    They've been coming down almost 20%/year, for the last 4 or 5 years.
    If there's one business that I would not want to be in, it would be manufacturing HDTVs.
    It's a brutal, brutal business.
    We've seen Pioneer get out of it.
    Panasonic is backpedaling, even though they have this huge commitment to plasma screens.
    SONY is trying to figure out how not to make their own anymore, just job it all out to somebody else in China.
    Philips doesn't make 'm anymore - they've just loaned the name to somebody else to stick on their sets.
    On and on and on - it's a brutal, brutal business.
    We've got Samsung, we've got LG - you've got a handful who are doing a good job of making a go at it, but they're probably losing a lot of money on it also.
    So the price has been coming down pretty steadily.
    Will they keep coming down?
    Well, each year I say they just can't keep coming down any more than they have, just because you get all the materials' cost.
    And yet, they continue to do so.
    I think it's gotta slow down - I think we're probably getting near the bottom.
    If we see cuts at this point, it'll be more due to distress than increased efficiency.
    It will be because there'll be either retailers or manufacturers who are stuck with inventory and trying to get some cash out of it, rather than sit there having to pay interest on the inventory.
    Though having said that, we're gonna see a bunch of good opportunities, probably in the next 3 or 4 months, to get some very good deals on HDTVs.
    Sears has announced that they're gonna be closing a whole lot of stores, and that could put a whole lot of product into the channel at low prices as they try to liquidate some of that inventory.
    Each store is gonna have several of each model on hand.
    So you're talking about hundreds of sets right there.
    If Sears starts advertising prices that are way low, well Best Buy, Costco, they're gonna have to follow them right down into the mountain, so that they don't give up market share.

    [03:44] <TITLE>
    What's the HDTV