Originally Posted by specuvestor
Sometimes I think you guys expect it to stand on its head and juggle 6 pins
Rome is not built in a day. The first OLED device just came a year and half ago.
Sometimes I think people confuse existence with success. Those are not the same.
So what do u guys define as successful in shipment or % of market? 10m? 1%?
If OLED TV has 1% of the market, that's an abject failure. If OLED TV gets to 10% of the market and stays there -- a scenario I find unlikely for a number of reasons -- it might or might not be successful. That'd be ~25m units per year, probably spread across 3-4 primary manufacturers. So, I dunno, but it's unlikely anyone would be making money at it. If they were, sure that's successful.
Luxury automobiles is certainly "successful" without being mass market for example. And BMW, Audi and M-B all make money in normal years.
Successful and mass market are 2 different things. 5.1 is successful but not mass market. Similarly despite the contention, Bose is successful.
Bose is quite successful. No arguing that point. 5.1? I'm less sure. It has almost no market penetration and almost no one makes money selling it. There are lot of companies making speakers so there is certainly economic activity around 5.1, but I think it's fair to call it (a) a mass-market failure (b) a very low profit business.
IMHO it is not exclusive. The 3 tech can coexist. No one needs to die in this western
They probably will. But if you read the hype here, you could easily get the mistaken impression that the "cheaper, superior OLED is going to wipe all other technology off the planet and soon". I'm not apologizing for combating that perception.
And furthermore, recognizing that the OLED TV push could actually fail -- even though risk of failure does decrease with time and the number of players involved -- isn't based on some claim that it's exclusive.
I'm just tired of reading BS like "OLED will be cheaper, so and so says so". So I write analysis explaining why so and so isn't necessarily understanding things or choosing to be as honest them as I will. If no one wants to read that, they can skip the post.
By the way, here's an interesting forecast from just two months by DisplaySearch, which -- if anything -- tends to overhype new technologies. I will direct you to two things about it.
1) The TV market overall is barely growing.
2) It looks like one technology is more of less dominating the heck out of the others. And while that could change out in the future it cannot change in the near future
. Those italicized words are not a prediction, they are essentially fact because you can't conjure production facilities like a Harry Potter magical effect.
From the same report as the graph:OLED TV is set to debut around late 2012 as a contender in the 40”+ category, but will only grow to about 2.5% of the 40”+ segment by 2015 due to high prices and limited availability. Current projections are for OLED to debut at about 2-3X the price of a high-end LED-backlit LCD TV.
I would more or less call that the "optimistic" scenario. DisplaySearch is in the business of selling reports to people who believe in a better future. They could not, for example, have written: "We believe demand at 2-3x high-end backlit LCDs will be minimal and OLED will register nothing more than a 0.2% market share of the 40+" segment in 2015." That report would not sell. I'm not saying they don't believe what they wrote. I think their report is very plausible.