5 ms·

To be fair tvs are a very low margin product and without the ads it would be profitless for anyone but apple (or another manufacturer that sold as a premium to

To be fair tvs are a very low margin product and without the ads it would be profitless for anyone but apple (or another manufacturer that sold as a premium to avoid ads). I don't know how big the market for that is, personally I'm happy with a dumb tv connected to a video game console that has all my streaming services.

prepend 6y ago
To be fair, TVs are a decades old market that have paid off great for many companies and they didn’t have ads until recently.
- m463 6y ago
  i can't help but think it is like bundleware and the PC, which would subsidize the cost of the system, maybe by $50. same thing is happening with TVs. This crap subsidizes the price of the TV, so then the $279 tv looks more attractive than the more expensive tvs without ads/tracking/data gathering (which then disappear)
- devoutsalsa 6y ago
  TVs used to much more expensive, and they only became cheap when TV manufacturers realized there’s a ton of money to be made by selling your personal information. A manufacturer that doesn’t do this would not be competitively priced I’m afraid. “Why TVs Have Become So Inexpensive“ => https://youtu.be/NWwawTnT7LM https://youtu.be/NWwawTnT7LM
  - prepend 6y ago
    I don’t agree with this video. I bought a 55” plasma for $800 over 10 years ago. And I bought a Sony Triniton for $1000 around 2000. The price of TVs seems to be fixed around this price point and we seem to get more features, bigger screens, etc and the price stays about the same. The highest end TVs I see also have ads. So I don’t think this factors into the price at all. It’s just bonus profits on top of existing profits. If ad data subsidized prices significantly, I wouldn’t expect it in $4,000 TVs. Am I supposed to believe that the TV would be $4,050 without ads? It seems strange that high end TVs would care about these small amounts. I think this is just a cover story by marketers to garner sympathy.

prepend 6y ago

To be fair, TVs are a decades old market that have paid off great for many companies and they didn’t have ads until recently.

m463 6y ago
i can't help but think it is like bundleware and the PC, which would subsidize the cost of the system, maybe by $50. same thing is happening with TVs. This crap subsidizes the price of the TV, so then the $279 tv looks more attractive than the more expensive tvs without ads/tracking/data gathering (which then disappear)
devoutsalsa 6y ago
TVs used to much more expensive, and they only became cheap when TV manufacturers realized there’s a ton of money to be made by selling your personal information. A manufacturer that doesn’t do this would not be competitively priced I’m afraid. “Why TVs Have Become So Inexpensive“ => https://youtu.be/NWwawTnT7LM https://youtu.be/NWwawTnT7LM
- prepend 6y ago
  I don’t agree with this video. I bought a 55” plasma for $800 over 10 years ago. And I bought a Sony Triniton for $1000 around 2000. The price of TVs seems to be fixed around this price point and we seem to get more features, bigger screens, etc and the price stays about the same. The highest end TVs I see also have ads. So I don’t think this factors into the price at all. It’s just bonus profits on top of existing profits. If ad data subsidized prices significantly, I wouldn’t expect it in $4,000 TVs. Am I supposed to believe that the TV would be $4,050 without ads? It seems strange that high end TVs would care about these small amounts. I think this is just a cover story by marketers to garner sympathy.