Originally Posted by eagle_2
Same goes for you. WE JUST BOUGHT A $5,000 CAR IN OCTOBER, PLUS REGISTRATION FEES AND TAXES, PLUS WE HAD TO REPAIR THE TRANSMISSION ALREADY!!! Do you know how expensive that is? We spent close to $1,000 to repair our car in January.
By my math, that's $6000.
And you people have the nerve to call me out because I make a simple statement that right now we don't have a lot of disposable income due to the car throwing things out of whack for us? Talk about bizarro-world.
For me, there has not been one single solitary word calling you for a lack of disposable income. You should carefully
re-read what I wrote. I would never criticize anyone for financial setbacks, for working hard, for having hard times, etc. etc.
And I have every right to be disappointed that last year they gave us 2 remotes and this year they're giving us 1. If you can't see Samsung is giving the customers the shaft by not giving the customer the same value this year that they gave us last year, that's you're problem. Also, I thought I said pretty clearly that even if money wasn't a factor, personally, I prefer having a nice dedicated standard remote. Or is it wrong for me to have a preference like that?
You don't have that right, and this is the part that is driving me batty. You bought your TV last year
. But every time you make a post like this, it strongly implies you are shopping for a TV this year
. You cannot afford a TV this year. So why are you shopping for one? Why do you care what one includes? That fact you were willing to accept the guy's offer of his remote above really implies you are thinking about buying a new TV this year
. So which is it? Are you broke? Or are you buying a new TV? If the latter, stop crying poverty about $70. Really, stop. If the former, stop shopping for a TV you can't afford. I am not shopping for a Lamborghini.
Originally Posted by cmay91472
Rogo, all of the respect you have garnered from others for your knowledgeable contributions to these forums has just been flushed down the toilet.
I doubt it, but thanks for the insight. You really need to carefully read what this guy is saying and the things I have included in this post. If he is struggling financially, I feel for him. If he is struggling financially after
making an expensive purchase last year, I feel for him. If he is contemplating a new, expensive purchase this year, I don't feel for him. I think he's a fraud. And he keeps acting like someone in the market for a new TV this year
. Read his words very, very carefully.
The fact that you are trying to defend your obnoxious elitist post about your opinions on someones else's financial status is pretty sad and pathetic.
The thing is -- and this is where people who don't bother reading the words but decide to reach some conclusions for whatever reasons they wish -- I have no obnoxious, elitist opinions about his financial status. I have one opinion: "If you can't make rent, don't buy a new TV." If you already bought one and you're making payments on it, you don't need to worry about what changes they made for this year
because you are not in the market.
You obviously must have had everything handed to you on a silver spoon to be able to make fun of someone else's financial struggles so freely and have no clue what it feels like to have to actually to try to save up for something if you truly don't understand how insulting your two most recent posts are. The last thing someone struggling to make ends meet is to be told that if they can't afford a $70 remote that they shouldn't be buying a TV.
If you read my posts, you would understand how not insulting they are of someone's financial status. Incidentally, I grew up in a middle-class neighborhood in New York City. I've had nothing handed to me.The last thing someone struggling to make ends meet needs to do is to be shopping for a new $3000 TV.
According to this guy's own posts
, he already bought the TV last year and got whatever he needed. He's fighting to make his payments against adverse financial times. Good for him. So why is he shopping for a new TV? Doesn't add up. Not one bit. Why is he worried about what's included in the new box? And he's clearly worried, because he's rejected the idea of adding a remote to his purchase
, when the TV he already has includes the necessary remotes -- according to him. The facts he lays out
do not add up.
NEWSFLASH! $70 is a lot of money for many people. Maybe not for you, but for others yes.
I ran a non-profit for 4 years in the poorest community within 100 miles of where I live. I find it amusing and offensive all at once that you think I don't know the value of $70 to many people.
At the same time, I find it bizarre you don't see what's wrong with this story..... Let's take a further look...
Originally Posted by eagle_2
Well, I can only speak for myself, but if there was a 46" HX950, or if the 55" was several hundred cheaper, to put it around the price of the F8000, I would certainly be at least looking at that set, and giving it some serious consideration. I'm keeping my eye on the Panasonics too this year, though my experience with last year's Panasonic plasma ST50 left me underwhelmed. Some goofy decisions that affected how I would be viewing the set, and in the end, I decided to go with LCD.
"Looking at that set".... "Keeping my eye on the Panasonics too this year
".... Why are you shopping?
Personally, the only reason I'm giving Samsung even a consideration after the terrible quality of their sets last year (from what I experienced anyways) and the awful customer service that took months to get things resolved, is because they are just within that barely affordable price we've settled on, especially after they've been out for a little bit and Best Buy starts throwing some huge sales on them. I wish there were other options really. What's frustrating is there were times when I was blown away with the picture of my Samsung last year, but the panel was clearly defective, and the quality control is just not acceptable for such an expensive set. When they look good, they look really good. But when the panels have flaws, they're awful.
Here we go again... You're still shopping.....
(OK, here's the part where I went back and read and learned you are sitting on a Best Buy gift card
But you were making payments on the TV, which is not at all consistent with a gift card. I'll allow for a moment that somehow they cash you out of a 36-month financing with a gift card -- which seems really improbable -- but I'll allow it because the "facts" here are very difficult to put together.
You can sell the gift card for 88 cents on the dollar at Cardpool after buying a TV you can afford or no TV at all/
. I mean, in the past year, your situation has obviously changed. The car got totaled, the transmission failed, etc. etc.
Yet you're shopping for $2000-3000 TVs in a world where $1000 55" TVs are readily available.
Yeah, I'm "judging" here. The ridiculousness of this set of circumstances.
No one is saying you shouldn't have a new TV or that you need a universal remote or that we shouldn't wish you well with your struggles (I certainly do). But the idea that you should go broke to buy a flagship model TV for $2500 or more and then complain that at that level
, $70 more is out of the question? This is not just a "first world problem", it's downright bizarre.
Again, I don't really care what other people who are not actually reading the words think
I have written. The words do their best to speak for themselves and are based on my best ability to understand the "facts" as laid out here by the more-than-slightly confusing set of information laid out by eagle in these posts. If one actually reads all the information, one can separate one's sympathy for the person from their belief that people struggling to make ends meet should not ever be spending $2000-3000 or more on a television. In fact, most reasonable people would come to the same conclusion, no matter how much sympathy one feels for the person.