...or don't consider it to be worth the price relative to the competition, especially when for the same price you could get a bigger panel. To some (maybe even most) this would trump any other advantages a Sony set would have. And Vizio are one of the quickest growing brands around, so they must be doing something right. *I* wouldn't buy one, at least not as a primary set, but I don't consider my standards to be typical of the majority of consumers.
Analyst expects Sony losses to be six times higher than expected(1.6 billion dollars)
- Thread starter Brimstone
- Start date
...or don't consider it to be worth the price relative to the competition, especially when for the same price you could get a bigger panel. To some (maybe even most) this would trump any other advantages a Sony set would have. And Vizio are one of the quickest growing brands around, so they must be doing something right. *I* wouldn't buy one, at least not as a primary set, but I don't consider my standards to be typical of the majority of consumers.
I very much doubt it. Walk into any specialist electronics store, and the majority of brands are big-name Japanese brands that have been around for a relatively long time. If many people thought they were that great, the brand and others like it would be ubiquitous. You say Vizio are one of the fastest growing brands, but is that because they were nothing until recently? Certainly here in the UK they have virtually no market presence.
I think questioning Sony's pricing against the likes of Samsung is valid, because the quality is at least comparable. I myself went for a Samsung L71 because the W series Bravia was on the expensive side, but the main reason I went for the Samsung was because I know they use the same panels as Sony. I still think Sony make some excellent hardware. PS3 is a brilliant piece of engineering, especially if we compare it against the 360. The Walkman's offer superior sound quality to the ipod nano. Its the software for both that has let Sony down.
Last edited by a moderator:
The point of the virtual trip to Costco was simply to show that it was possible for there to be a major price premium at an individual retailer for a Sony product versus the competition meaning that you calling out eastmen the way you did was inappropriate. You don't know for certain that he was being deliberately misleading any more than I know for certain that he wasn't. You could have made your point without the personal attack.
And lest you think I was cherry-picking results. I literally went directly to Costco.com because that was the retailer that was mentioned and that was the result.
I am hoping that we can hold ourselves to a higher standard here than some other forums, despite the influx of users we've gotten that frequent them.
Per this press release referencing DisplaySearch and (a member of the NPD group who track flat panel sales) and iSupply during Quarter 2 Vizio was #3 in overall flat panel sales in NA with 803,000 units shipped and #2 in Plasmas specifically with a 25% market share.
According to another press release they achieved $1.9 Billion dollars in revenue in 2007 with approximately 100 employees.
That's the type of change I've been referring to in the types of companies who can compete and succeed in the market.
Half of the problem Sony is encountering right now is out of their control, specifically the Yen currency.
As for the other half, once the times are bad, everyone's weaknesses will be more obvious. Previously, all large CE companies were able to delay/hide issues due to sales spikes. But I am really happy that the execs get a good chance/excuse to tackle difficult challenges again.
I like companies like Vizio. They force incumbents to change or face dire consequences. One of Sony's issues are that they don't have a software platform strategy. Most are one-off brands or products. Even consoles are different generation by generation. They should abstract their services now to survive any hardware transitions.
For other products like TVs, it's Sony's fault for not exploiting their media services group enough. At the moment, I believe Howard Stringer is a great manager and administrator, but someone needs to piece Sony's different groups together to form a cohesive team. It seems that no one is leading. You see money thrown into dead end projects instead of long term "stuff" that will help them integrate better.
IMHO, it looks like few in Sony is responsible for the final end user experience. They should set one up pronto. Most of the consumer products do not have great UI these days. The software guys are having a hard time tackling media related problems as well.
As for the other half, once the times are bad, everyone's weaknesses will be more obvious. Previously, all large CE companies were able to delay/hide issues due to sales spikes. But I am really happy that the execs get a good chance/excuse to tackle difficult challenges again.
I like companies like Vizio. They force incumbents to change or face dire consequences. One of Sony's issues are that they don't have a software platform strategy. Most are one-off brands or products. Even consoles are different generation by generation. They should abstract their services now to survive any hardware transitions.
For other products like TVs, it's Sony's fault for not exploiting their media services group enough. At the moment, I believe Howard Stringer is a great manager and administrator, but someone needs to piece Sony's different groups together to form a cohesive team. It seems that no one is leading. You see money thrown into dead end projects instead of long term "stuff" that will help them integrate better.
IMHO, it looks like few in Sony is responsible for the final end user experience. They should set one up pronto. Most of the consumer products do not have great UI these days. The software guys are having a hard time tackling media related problems as well.
specwarGP2
Regular
Of course he was being deliberately misleading. First of all, he said that his vizio came with a 2 year warranty and 90 day return policy, when in fact it doesnt. That is costco's store policy that applies to all TVs purchased at costco. Second, he said that the cheapest 40" class Sony 1080p he could find was $1800, which is a flat out lie or he's blind. Costco sold the S class for far less than that last year. In fact most anywhere you could buy and HDTV sold the S class for much less than $1800.
Also your virtual trip doesnt make sense because you're comparing a midrange Sony to a low end vizio. Once again, the S class competes with Vizio, and if you compare the price between the two you'll see that its only a few hundred dollars at most.
I bought my tv at costo in January 2008. It was $1000 with a $200 coupon from costco bringing it down to $800. At the time costco did not have any 1080p sonys at the 42inch range. The closest i found were at bestbuy and that was $1800 for a 42inch sony 1080p lcd. I was also looking at the toshiba regza but the cheapest i could find it for was $1500 at sixth ave. However after reading up on that model i learned that it had a horrible green push.
I started looking for a tv sept of that year and i researched alot before buying the tv.
Also I don't think its wise to insult a product I bought because your upset that sony didn't offer a similar value.
If I bought that sony last year I would have spent at least double the price and you know what , it wouldn't have 120hz , it would be a 4000x2000 tv , it would be a 3d tv or whtaever the heck else is going to come out in the next few years. But you know what , my vizo will also never been those things either , but that $800 or so I saved will allow me to do other things with that money and when I buy my own place hopefully in another 3 years if my savings go right , it will allow me to buy a really good tv that has all the features neither the sonys , toshibas or vizios of the day had in my price range and my vizio can stay in the bed room or go in a guest room or whatever.
This is basicly the same thing as when i bought my tv.
Wait so I'm lying that my tv came with a 90 day return policy and a two year warrenty , but yet then you say my tv did come with that ? Huh
As for sony , as I said there were no sony tvs that did 1080p for that price at the 42inch range. Do you really think that if i could get a toshiba , sony , panisonic or samsung that was 42inch with 1080p for $1200 even i wouldn't have bought that instead ? Vizio is in the top 5 flat panel sellers for a reason and thats because of the price diffrence.
First, if the warranty info for Vizio is a Costco benefit, then eastmen was inaccurate in reporting his experience. Perhaps he got confused or didn't care as long as he received the benefit. In any case, we now know it is not a Sony problem per se.
Sony introduced 17 new HDTV models in CES 2008 (on top of existing ones). Bravia was selling well before the economy and average price tanked further: http://www.tvweek.com/news/2008/07/sony_tv_profit_jumps_on_bravia.php. Note that unit sales is only one measurement. In general, incumbents like Samsung were/are having problem too, it's not a Sony only challenge.
If eastmen was shopping in Jan 2008, may be the showrooms were being refreshed (and after holiday sales). So he couldn't find any ? ^_^
Sony introduced 17 new HDTV models in CES 2008 (on top of existing ones). Bravia was selling well before the economy and average price tanked further: http://www.tvweek.com/news/2008/07/sony_tv_profit_jumps_on_bravia.php. Note that unit sales is only one measurement. In general, incumbents like Samsung were/are having problem too, it's not a Sony only challenge.
If eastmen was shopping in Jan 2008, may be the showrooms were being refreshed (and after holiday sales). So he couldn't find any ? ^_^
specwarGP2
Regular
I didn't say you were lying. I said you were being deliberately misleading. The 2 year warranty and 90 day return policy is from costco, not vizio.
Patsu's post just reminded me that the 2008 Bravia lineup wasn't released to retailers until march or April at the earliest. There was no 42" Bravia in 2007 (2008 had exactly one, the first time ever since the Bravia name has been in use), so when you went to purchase your vizio in Jan 08, Sony did not even have a 42" panel for sale, therefore your entire post is BS.
Last edited by a moderator:
One of the things that i am seeing in almost every aspect of buyer behavior is the "good enough" approach.
Brand names with better quality, be it, clothes, food,beer, tv´s or HiFi is competing against discount values where consumers take the aproach that it´s "almost" or "just as" good as the quality products. And it´s certainly not worth paying the premium.
Anyone producing quality products , not just Sony, will have a hard time during bad times. Except Lego, because when it comes to kids, we don´t compromise
Brand names with better quality, be it, clothes, food,beer, tv´s or HiFi is competing against discount values where consumers take the aproach that it´s "almost" or "just as" good as the quality products. And it´s certainly not worth paying the premium.
Anyone producing quality products , not just Sony, will have a hard time during bad times. Except Lego, because when it comes to kids, we don´t compromise
djskribbles
Legend
Since Sony joined up with Samsung (they have a joint venture, S-LCD) their LCD's have been very popular. They are definitely top 2, arguably only second to Samsung. Their plant is made of Samsung employee's in Korea, and the panels are designed and manufactured by Samsung, but Sony LCD's use their own tweaks and technologies, and are assembled by them.
Sony also has a joint venture with Sharp, so some of their lower-end LCD's use Sharp panels. Most of their mid-range LCD's are Samsung and all of their high-end LCD's are Samsung. A dead giveaway is if it's a 42", it's a Sharp, but if it's a 40", it's a Samsung.
Well I read that Sony's TV division hasnt made a profit since 2004..so they must be doing something wrong..
No i know exactly what the return policy is . However there was no 1080p sonys at costco in the 42inch range at that point. Thus I got the discount.
Sony may have released new tvs at ces but i doubt they would have apeared in stores that january , esp early january when i bought it. I have to look at my receipt but i believe ib ought it the first week of january.
also from your link
So they wre third in market share but second in dollar share. Thats because of its price premium over vizios.
Like i said , i started looking in sept of that year , i looked at all tvs and the sonys were just too expensive. I also said I looked into the toshiba regza's of the day but they had a horrible green push and the best i could find them for was $1500 or so.
I'm sorry why ? Because sony had a 40inch instead of 42 inch , omg wtf that 2 inch diffrence jsut completely changes every thing !!!
Your starting to get trollish.
So once again , now sony has a 2inch smaller panel at double the cost , thanks for making my point stronger. I'd love for you to show me a 40inch 1080p sony tv in january 2008 that cost $ 1,500 or less and wasn't a balck friday sale or the day after christmas but was a stop in anytime and pick it up for that price.
Trust me i looked at all tv brands when buying . http://www.costco.com/Common/Catego...esc1&lang=en-US&ec=BC-EC10605-Cat2341&topnav=
even now i can save $600 bucks by buying a vizio 42inch vs a sony 40inch at costco. $600 bucks may not sound like alot to some , but thats more than half the cost of the vizo .
Is it better quality though? I would think costco with its 2 year warrenty 90 day return policy would have dropped vizio like a bad habit if they were having trouble with the units. My unit has been rock solid now for a year. Get me through another 3 or 4 years as my primary tv and a few more after that and I'm fine. I've gotten away with non brand names before. I had a slyvania monitor for what about 8 years. I think i got it when I was a senior in highschool or mabye a freshmen in college. That was 99 or 2000. Its stilling working fine at my uncles house and its been a good ten years since i bought it.
For me with the vizo it was $800 plus 7% tax when all was said and done , if it dies out before the 2 year warrenty is up and they can't fix it , i get a new model . That cost me nothing more. If it dies after that in say 4 or 5 years i just buy another $800 or so dolalr tv. It will have 5 year nwer tech , look better than the more expensive tvs of 2007/ early 2008 and in the end i would have spent right about what i spent on the brand name. On the flip side i could have bought a tv that was twice as much from sharp or sony or samsung only to have it fail in 3 years or 5 years and be in the same situation only further in the hole .
I have no idea if you bought something considered quality, i don´t know the name, so i will guess not
The buy cheap and often tactic is not stupid, but i think it´s inline with the "good enough" approach i mentioned. I am more inclined to buy quality and sell it while it´s still worth something and upgrade.
I did this with all my TV´s (all but one was a sony) and with every Panasonic Projector i have owned (5 or so). And i didn´t have to go the "good enough" route but had high quality and excellent performance.
Everything you buy today does seem like a toss up if it will last or not. But i still believe and expect brand names to take less risks and have a better quality components and better QC
You were refering to the warranty, not return policy.
That's what I implied above.
That's why companies like Apple, Samsung and Sony love higher margin (if enough people buy their products).
In 2007, all the brand names were more expensive than $1000. You're not in their target segment; that's all.
There were spikes here and then (e.g. somewhere in 2006 and early 2008). Their LCD TV business is explained rather well here: http://business.nikkeibp.co.jp/article/eng/20081222/181031/
... which highlights the importance of technology leverage.
I have no idea if you bought something considered quality, i don´t know the name, so i will guess not
The buy cheap and often tactic is not stupid, but i think it´s inline with the "good enough" approach i mentioned. I am more inclined to buy quality and sell it while it´s still worth something and upgrade.
I did this with all my TV´s (all but one was a sony) and with every Panasonic Projector i have owned (5 or so). And i didn´t have to go the "good enough" route but had high quality and excellent performance.
Everything you buy today does seem like a toss up if it will last or not. But i still believe and expect brand names to take less risks and have a better quality components and better QC
I agree. I've had some brand name thigns that have lasted very long. Though i feel that things don't last as long as they used too. We had a stove that recently died at 22 years. The new stove has already had many problems and its a jen air that cost around 3 grand. We had a fridge for 20 years that died , that was almost 3 years ago and 20 years is not bad at all , however when my parents moved in here 24 years ago the family that left , had a 15 year old fridge that we still used outside in the garage till we bought another fridge to replace our dead one.
What i've learned in my time is the more expensive the thing you buy after a certian point , the more expensive it is to keep running. On the flip side after a certian point of savings the cheaper you buy something the more it costs to keep running. Its finding that optimal point thats improtant .
really i was under the impression that it was both. 90 day return policy with a 2 year warrenty. Is that not a return policy ?
according to market share , not many people were .
In 2009 i can still find much cheaper vizios with comaprable specs to the sonys and other brand names.
No, they are separate. Warranty is typically a manufacturer thing and easier to be confused with retailer's extended warranty. Return policy for big items is usually a retailer offer. So you are saying you knew they were both Costco benefits but you made a mistake attributing them to Vizio ?
Same answer. The brand names would love to sell to everyone with similar margin, but price sensitive folks wouldn't bite. So companies pick a workable margin and stick with it. Also helps to invest in R&D and keep money in the bank for rainy days ^_^.
If you'd bought in 2009, then perhaps you would have gotten a brand name TV (or not, if you just want a HD TV, any HD TV).
SXRD's were considered "the best," but they weren't the rage in the sense that it was a high-volume business. That said, it was probably profitable at some point.
patsu said:
The panels Sony uses are from S-LCD, a joint venture in Korea that operates a couple of LCD panel fabs (7G and 8G). The ownership split is 50/50 with Samsung controlling an extra share. Kutaragi was the one that started the JV with Samsung back before the reshuffle. The Sharp JV/partnership is a new one at Sharp's 10G plant. We'll see though what the quarter conference call says about ongoing capex in the LCD space.
Vizio isn't a public company, so when we say that it has been successful (in gaining market share), is less expensive than other LCD sets, and is popular among consumers... all this is true. But what is completely absent from this is any insight into whether they are profitable or not, and since that is the context of the discussion here...
Syntax Olevia and plenty of other brands since the LCD revolution have been there one day with decent share, and gone the next. Their finances are completely obscured to us, we don't get earnings warnings or articles months in advance. I hope Vizio ultimately survives and thrives, but nothing is for certain in this environment.
Anyway, this marks the end of the TV "brand" discussion. It is completely off-topic, and if folk want to carry it forward, there are different sub-forums here at B3D better suited to it.
Yeah, but it was breaking down into 'xxx brand is not a bad buy at $yyy far better than Sony at $zzz blah blah', 'xxx is not a good buy, quality blah blah blah price premium yadda yadda yadda'. As in: we're not talking about the market anymore, but about what models of TVs we like.