3 ms·
Maybe. My personal suspicion (lacking definitive evidence) is that the TVs aren't 'loss leaders' in the sense the vendors are actually loosing money on each one
by kjs3 2y ago
Maybe. My personal suspicion (lacking definitive evidence) is that the TVs aren't 'loss leaders' in the sense the vendors are actually loosing money on each one sold (accounting shenanigans notwithstanding). It's just that the viewers are so used to ads invading every possible place within eyeball range, why wouldn't you take advantage. More to the OP Q: Why spend a single penny improving the viewer experience, when that's not where such a nice bump in revenue is coming from. Once the TV is sold, the viewer isn't paying you any more until the next TV purchase, so screw'em.
- sydbarrett74 2y agoMy wording was poor. Apologies. I probably should've said, 'heavily subsidised' instead.
- kjs3 2y agoLike I said, I lack the facts to know if it's 'subsidy' or 'loss-lead' so it's not like you're 'wrong'. But really, my point is all that is a distraction from the fact it's about extracting bonus recurring revenue from shoving ads in front of us because we've been trained to accept it.