Why are samsung DLP RPTV's so expensive?

Jmo that 2 years from now a dlp set will be 40-50% cheaper.


I've been close twice to buying, even made an offer when haggling on price on the 56".


But these factors have put me back in a waiting mode.


High Defn cable is 6 months away.

Stand Defn picture is worse than the TV I currently have.

Design improvements are on the way.

Prices should fall with more competition.

Technology will improve.


and most importantly,

NASCAR still is not televising in high defn yet anyway!

This is actually one area I can give information, instead of ask for it!


Texas Instruments and a few other companies and their fabs currently make the DLP processors. As with any relatively new product, initial yields are low. In addition, alot of the excess capacity from 12-18 months ago has been "snapped up" by the rebound in capacity utilization for semiconductor/chip production.


Bottom Line: China and some Far East fab installers are trying to expand production for these kinds of chips. But it was easier and more profitable of them to take care of existing, older/developed technology once technology spending snapped back last year. Think of General Motors with plenty of auto capacity, and they can either expand production of hard-to-produce, limited quantity new model Corvette's or mass expansion of older model regular sedans and trucks. It's easier to go for the latter, since that was what flowing when demand initially dropped.


I think the 3rd generation of DLP chips/sets later this year and expanded production by TI and other licensee should drive down the demand. It's a tough chip to manufacture, but I remember when 64-bit DRAM's were $30-$50 a chip. A few years later, they were 1/4th that amount. Today, top of the line DRAM's go for $4.00, give or take.

"i thought i saw something about the RCA 56" being $1000 cheaper than the Samsung 56". "


I don't think there is an RCA 56" DLP.


===============


"I think the 3rd generation of DLP chips/sets later this year and expanded production by TI and other licensee should drive down the demand."


There are licensees? Can you show me some information to back up that claim?


"As with any relatively new product, initial yields are low"


The DMD is just not a new product. The yields have been low for years. It's hard to make, obviously.

Thanks a lot.


The "superstructure" step is the hard part and they are clearly continue to "own" that in-house completely. It's their competitive edge and I'm quite sure they don't even trust their partners with seeing it.


The HD3 is clearly about cost reduction through a smaller chip size vs. HD2. I am not at all opposed to that -- especially beceause it seems to help screendoor / visible-pixel issues.


You are right, that ED plasma at 42" is also an issue. Samsung dropped out of the 43" size because they wanted to drive the price of their entry set down close to $3K (it's $3199 for the new 46"), but still make money. I'm thinking that if they stuck with 43", they have had to go to $2899 or so and didn't like the margins down there.


I doubt they are worried yet about LCOS given it's only Philips and a $20K Mitsubishi. But the threat is real and it seems likely that 1920 x 1080 LCOS from someone will eventually be quite inexpensive to both make and sell...


How small were the announced Toshiba's running down to? And what of Panasonic? I wonder if the truth is that right now you can't really make money at small sizes with DLP?


Mark

"Even if the technical reasons pan out , isn't it likely that production delays, etc will delay any real super-cheap, mass-produced LCoS threat for a few more years?"


Not necessarily. No one so far has produced a mass-produceable LCOS, but there are at least 5 companies trying. And one of them is awfully good at making chips. Another is efforting to reduce the LC-layer thickness, which might make it easier to produce them, etc. etc. etc.


=============


"I thought Lcos still burned in and had degradation issues. "


Only in mythology, not in reality.


Mark