Originally Posted by andy sullivan
I agree that profit is not the end all of why LCD outsells plasma
Even that statement isn't quite right. Be clear here: profit follows
what happens with demand. Not the other way around. It's can be confusing, because price is part of what determines demand (the demand for a $12,000 display is low for instance). But get the causality in the right direction.
, but it goes deeper than that. and profit is the primary motivating factor. But that's pretty much a given for any product. One major reason that LCD's sell so much better and why many companies have championed the LCD technology is it's ability to manufacture tons and tons of product in the under 50" range.
No. None of that would matter at all if people wanted plasma over
LCD dramatically. You can imagine all kinds of things that could you manufacture tons and tons of: if it doesn't start with meeting what the people want, then you're making the wrong thing.
Marketing also plays a huge role in the dominance of LCD in that Samsung advertised the LED TV and falsely intimated that LED was in itself a new technology which of course it is not. In my experience fully 75% of customers still believe that false hood. Even many sales people propagate this misinformation.
Yes, that is regrettable. And irritating.
Company X didn't switch from selling apples to selling oranges because they couldn't sell apples, they switched because there are many more varieties of oranges than apples, hence a bigger market.
No that's saying precisely
the same thing. A company needs to survive. If people are buying one or the other, (apple or orange), and they're buying far more oranges, then they'll switch to oranges.