Is Plasma TV on deathbed?

I'm going to go out on a limb(not really) and say NO. Looks at all the changes that have been made to plasma recently. Has LCD changed much in the same time period? I would say no, so the tech is still better than LCD IMO, and until that changes, plasma is going nowhere.

My opinion is that Plasma has 3 - 5 years left in the market. Samsung's numbers, referenced over a year ago in the WSJ, have LCD at over 70% share and plasma under 10%. Plasma has a niche this year, and probably next year, for large (over 55") screens with very good picture quality. My guess is that in 3 years LED will close the gap enough that the manufacturers no longer have a business case to justify the cost of dual R&D and manufacturing efforts.

This year, for 60" and greater sets, plasma has a price / performance point that was compelling enough for me to get one.

WSJ article at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...atestheadlines

Where are you hearing these rumors? I never hear such things outside of a store, except from people saying they've "heard rumors". Actually, i have mostly heard this from salesmen in stores - either by overhearing them telling this to customers or telling me directly (whereupon i roffle).



Mostly just FUD from people with an anti-Plasma agenda, sales people trying to get you to buy a more profitable LCD or LED LCD TV, or simple ignorance of the market and the industry.

Samsung, the largest seller of LCD and LED LCD TVs, are heavily invested in Plasma manufacturing and they officially stated earlier this year that they expect to continue making Plasma TVs for at least 10 years. That's one heck of a commitment to Plasma.

Panasonic has invested billions of dollars in new Plasma plants and every year they sell every TV in their inventory. They are fully committed to Plasma technology, and even if LG and Samsung exit the market i'd expect Panasonic to continue making Plasmas until the next great technology emerges - which i don't think will happen anytime soon.

LCD and LED LCD has improved a lot in recent years, but it is a more complicated technology and is more expensive to produce. And the physical limitations of the screen technology will never allow it to quite attain the smooth natural organic image or the depth of a good Plasma TV. Plasma technology is simpler, it will always cost less per inch of screen size, will always look better, and will always have better viewing angles.

Plasma tech is mature, inexpensive, and superior and i think it's very sustainable for many years to come.

Plasma isn't one of those future oriented growth industries.

Manufacturers have dropped production of the sets until there are really only 3 left (Panasonic, Samsung, LG/Zenith).

Two factors will be critical to the future of plasma. Energy costs - plasmas are energy hogs compared to LED sets. If energy costs go up substantially (which they will - just a question of when) plasma sets will be like driving a 10 mpg car around.

Second is the remaining manufacturers ability to utilize existing production facilities. Existing plants need to be depreciated off the books. Once this is done, companies usually build new production facilities for either technology upgrades or tax benefits. Nobody is going to build a new facility to produce plasma sets.

Plasma has had a long lifespan. It still produces the best pq for the movie lover in a home environment. The recent pricing of sets makes them a bargain for the screen size.

Unfortunately, tv sets have become more generic over time. Instead of just displaying moving images, they now are used as computer monitors and for gaming. In these areas, while image quality may be excellent, the fragile nature of plasma technology rears it's ugly head in the form of image retention/burn-in.

It's hard to take a post like this one seriously. No huge manufacturer makes major decisions based on depreciation life cycle, at least not in the way you are suggesting. Please define "energy hog" for us. Certainly it can't mean an electricity cost of $100 per year or less, can it? Let's remember that's based on a usage rate that probably exceeds what most users employ. Regardless, electricity is a very minor component of the cost of ownership. How many years would you have to run an LCD television of comparable quality to make up in energy cost the difference in purchase price? Five years? Ten years? At that point... who cares?

As for your last assertion, plasmas have consistently been shown to be the superior gaming set. There aren't exactly a plethora posts in this forum where users claim to have ruined their set with IR via gaming.

No one is making a buying decision based on power consumption. If you can afford a $1,000 tv, you can afford an extra $5/month in electricity.

Who knows what the future holds. Right now, plasma is a better deal and if people continue to buy them , you can bet manufacturers will continue to make them. In order for plasma to die, sales will have to drop substantially from where they are now. I don't see a catalyst that will cause this. At least over the next couple of years.

I don't think depreciation of factories has any bearing whatsoever as to whether plasma TVs will be made. Does someone really believe that since the company can no longer claim a tax deduction, they'll stop using it and instead invest a ton of money on a new factory, just so they can deduct a fraction of the cost? This comment reminds me of the episode in Seinfeld where Kramer said something about the company just writing it off.

At the end of the day, these rumors only help those of us that recognize the superior quality of plasma's picture. Salespeople push uninformed buyers towards LED/LCD, and they buy the ridiculously overpriced sets, and keep profit margins high enough that plasmas continue to be invested in and made. I asked a Best Buy rep what the best selling TV of 2011 is so far for them, and he told me they've been selling the UND7000's and 8000's like crazy. This forum has a group has proven the wild inconsistencies of the panels on those models, and based on their price and performance, I can only imagine how huge a profit Samsung is making on those things. The same can be said of the C8000 and C9000 lines from last year. The insane price markup and enormous profits they are making on inferior LED's gives them more breathing room when it comes to catering to the niche market of plasma. And I am truly grateful for that

I have a 50" NEC Plasma. And when it goes {4yrs from now} I'll buy again, a Plasma. *Unless OLED is out by then..........
For a very bright living room, The PQ is better with Calibration, viewing angle is much better, There are just more Pluses w/ a Plasma over a LCD. Not knocking anyone who prefers a LCD....

db

Well Said !

What does it even matter though?

If all manufacturers announced today that no more plasmas would be made after this year, how would that invalidate that the current models are inferior, or not worth the money? I never undrestood the concern of whether or not a display will be around in the future. I have a 60A3000 SXRD - they quit making these almost 3.5 years ago. It still gives a good picture, but I am now looking for something even better. I will buy what's available to me based on my wants and needs (whether it be plasma or LCD) when I am ready and not care if it will be made in three, five, or ten years.

Bah...nobody uses the extremely dim standard default mode on plasmas. They are especially dim so they can qualify for energy star ratings. Let's be serious and talk energy use after proper calibration. Furthermore, the disparity is not going to be as noticeable on the smaller 42 inch plasmas. Let's talk 65 inch screens. LED's use way less juice than a 65 inch PDP.

For what it is worth, my 59D7000 is rated at $37 a year with average use (5 hrs a day). So, that breaks down to a little over $3 a month. I'm sorry, but energy rating between the two is a moot point anymore. $37 a year is pretty decent IMO. I'm sure my old 65" CRT did that every few months.

Baloney. These rumors don't prove anything about PQ. This notion that PDP is automatically assumed to be superior to LCD-LED is an old worn out stereotype. For the last few years, Samsung's top of the line LED's have bested their comparable PDP's for PQ. The B8500 beat the B860, and the D8000 LED outperforms the D8000 PDP. They also beat out all the LG's, since LG stands for Low Grade. All that leaves is Panasonic. Only Panasonic's top of the line, pricey VT30 can compete with the very best LED has to offer. All of the rest of their line-up is inferior to the very best LED's. So there is really only one plasma for 2011 that can really compete in the upper echelon. Samsung really dropped the ball this year, as they couldn't get their black levels down much over last year, and their Cinema Smooth is still wonked. Doesn't bode too well for the future. Perhaps Samsung has hit the wall when it comes to lowering black levels on their plasmas.

Slowly but surely, the viewing angles are finally improving on LED's. Nowhere near PDP, but nevertheless, they are becoming less and less of an issue each year. That is the lone remaining bugaboo. The vast majority of people are satisfied with the motion on the 240hz LED's. The majority of complaints come from people who do not understand how the AMP works, and have them adjusted improperly.

The only thing keeping PDP afloat is the low-cost. They do give you a good bang for the buck, but if you are willing to shell out enough dough for a top LED, you can get PQ that beats most every currently offered plasma out there.


The ONLY Panasonic that has a fighting chance of competing with a D8000 LED is the expensive VT30. Panasonic's cheaper offerings just don't measure up. Panasonic can hang their PQ hat on one top of the line model, which isn't exactly much cheaper than the top Samsung LED's.

Rated by whom? In which picture mode? After calibration? I doubt it. CNET rates a 50 inch GT30 at $54.08 per year, and you are trying to snow us into believing that your much larger 59 inch D8000 PDP is rated for only $37 a year?

NOT after calibration. Who cares about overly-dim default standard picture mode which was purposely made dim to make PDP's seem like they use less energy, which no videophile will ever use.

EDIT: I just looked it up on CNET. AFTER proper calibration, the 59D8000 is rated to cost $72.66 per year. A far cry from the BOGUS $37 a year you quoted.

http://reviews.cnet.com/flat-panel-t...ml?tag=rvwBody

Fanboy much? Show me where they compated the 8000 series LCD/LED against the Plasma and that the LCD/LED won? Actually provide any proof you have to back up your claims.

He's been making these claims since 2008 or earlier and kindly neglects to inform people that he places his HDTV's directly facing a wall-sized window and his primary criteria is how well it can resist glare in that absolutely awful viewing environment. Who cares that no one else is gonna care about setting up a plasma like that. It's how he does it, so that means his conclusions are true for everyone, even people who have more logical tv placement.

The 65vt30 after calibration uses 285 watts. The sharp70" is rated 238 watts, sounds like way less and the picture is crap on the lcd compared to a pdp.

The Energy Guide stickers on 2011 plasmas tell an interesting story: When plasmas are run in their most energy-efficient mode, they are really really close in efficiency to LCDs. Are they there? No, but they are really really close.

Here's the rub, most people are not going to run their brand new plasma so dim that it's just not that much fun. And as a result, most plasmas are going to be very approximately about 1/2 as efficient as LCDs these days. That said, 2011 plasmas are going to obliterate the performance of my 2006 plasma. While the $40-50/year worth of energy I'd save by upgrading isn't going to change the world in an of itself, if 10 million people buy TVs that use on average 200w less for 5 hours per day, that's 1 kW/hr saved per household per day... Nearly 0.4 MW/hr per household per year. On average, American homes use 11 MW/hr per household per year (http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=97&t=3). The notion that saving that much energy isn't interesting is quite frankly a little bit silly.

In the intermediate term, people buying plasmas are generally replacing something worse from a power consumption standpoint. In the long term, plasma manufacturers will stop making plasma TVs when there is some alternative or because regulation or other market conditions (read electricity prices) make it unpalatable.

If it's on its deathbed, I'm glad it came to rest at my house!

I dont think so - not at this point. The scary thing for me being a KURO owner is what the hell Im gonna do when I actually do have to consider an upgrade or if I want to go to a larger size. Zoinks!

Overall though - plasma will be around for a while. The LCD/LED lies and PQ shortcomings are all "out there" now and people arent falling for the hype quite as much as before. I successfully steered two neighbors recently towards plasmas and saved them money and got them better PQ. How often does LESS money get you MORE quality? Not very often but it sure does in the flat -panel industry in many cases!

Better PQ for less money is enough to keep plasma afloat for a while. Many people shop on price first and plasma gets you more inches per dollar in almost every situation.

You don't have to take any of the posts here on AVS seriously.

People made different buying decisions on cars when gas was $1.25 a gallon vs $4 today. If you think that the price of electricity is going to go down onver the next decade, you are free to think that and make your purchasing decisions accordingly.

Plasma sets Energy Star ratings are like most government certifications - meaningless. I doubt there is anybody dumb enough to suffer through the dim picture their set produces with the energy saving mode engaged. To get a decent picture, you have to use more juice.

I'm glad you know how each manufacturer makes decisions. I don't. I do think that no manufacturer will be building new plasma production plants ever again. Once the current production facilities are done (tax incentives expire; plant age; plant fully depreciated; labor cost increases: etc.) the replacement facility won't be focused on plasma technology.

As the gap between pq continues to narrow between plasma and LCD, there really won't be any point in continuing to make both type of sets. If one gets phased out, guess which one it will be?

My proof is my eyes. I have owned most all the top LED's and PDP's from Samsung the last few years.

B8500
C8000
C9000
D8000

Liar, liar, pants on fire! The B8500 LED trounced the B860 plasma (had 'em side by side)....IN TOTAL DARKNESS. Of course the LED's will maintain better contrast/pop in a bright room too, which is the cherry on top, since they are more versatile. But I am talking about the Samsung flagship LED vs. flagship PDP comparison IN THE DARK. The LED's are better.

plus one to Randy Walters on that for plasma.

Perhaps you do not know how to set one up. Or perhaps you had a string of bad luck. Not everyone has complaints about their D8000 LED--just a few loudmouth nitpickers on AVS. The same types that complain about DSE on the Kuros, floating blacks on the VT25, brightness fluctuations on the VT30, and blooming on the HX929. In other words, people who just look for something to complain about with a set. Some of the people who call the D8000 trash also returned Kuro Elite 111's because of the dirty screen effect. Their opinions are suspect, to say the least.


Nonsense. The blacks are gray on the PDP compared to the LED. Even worse if you engage Cinema Smooth. I am talking in a dark room. In a room with daylight, there are no real blacks on the D7000 PDP, but varying shades of gray. The truth of the matter is you probably just don't know how to set-up an LED properly. Plasmas admittedly are simpler to setup for novices.


This shows how totally unobjective you are. You obviously had some kind of bad experience and are soured by it, and cannot think objectively. When you make foolish and outrageous comments like this, it shows that your opinions are not relevant.


Yeah, just fine. The black levels on the D8000 LED are better than Samsung's plasmas. You obviously do not know what you are talking about, for if you want to watch as they are shot, you would use Cinema Smooth. That is the whole point of Cinema Smooth, to avoid using 3:2 pulldown, which is NOT how it is shot or encoded on the disc.


Umm, go educate yourself, ok? By not engaging Cinema Smooth, and using 3:2 pulldown, you are NOT watching films with the same cadence as the director intended.


How about Samsung themself? Samsung typically calls their flagship LED their best HDTV, not their PDP. Please educate yourself.


Even off axis the LED's will have better blacks than your PDP. Deal with it.

Based on your post history, I have very little faith in any assessment of how a set does in different "lighting environments".

It's also keenly aware to me that in your world, the only sets people would consider buying are Samsung lcd's or Samsung plasmas. Seems like a pretty heavy bias. If I were to buy an LCD I seriously doubt I would be looking at a Samsung.