3-D TV is Getting There, Slowly

Discussion
Jan 12, 2012

An article on the Adweek website asks if we’re "past the hype" when it comes to 3-D TV. Based on the reports coming from CES in Las Vegas, we’re not only past the hype, we’ve moved on to numerous other consumer electronics stories.

Experts on a panel at the show discussed the state of 3-D TV and came to the conclusion that the technology is further along than many think.

According to the same Adweek article, Tom Cosgrove, CEO of 3net, said studies have shown that there will be up to 14 million 3-D televisions in the U.S. by the end of 2012.

A PCWorld piece explained why 3-D television went from being cool at previous CES shows to mundane. For one, manufacturers have moved on to "smart" sets connected to the internet, also being referred to as "convergence TV". There are also those "goofy glasses" that viewers have to wear to watch 3-D TV.

A continuing challenge to 3-D television acceptance is content. There just aren’tt enough good programs to keep viewers interested. Beyond "Avatar", content remains a challenge both in scope and quality.

Finally, price remains a roadblock to greater 3-D television sales. Steve Bambridge, global business director GfK Boutique Research, according to a piece on the Variety website, said China has the lowest cost to consumers and the greatest penetration of 3-D sets.

"What are they doing with those 3D TVs?" asked Mr. Bambridge. "There’s not a lot of 3-D content in China — which goes to show if you drive the price low enough people will take the product."

Discussion Questions: What do you see as the future of televisions in American homes? Will American tastes evolve beyond standard 2-D, non-“convergent” screens? If you’re a consumer electronics retailer, how do you approach marketing and merchandising all the TV choices available today?

Please practice The RetailWire Golden Rule when submitting your comments.

Join the Discussion!

8 Comments on "3-D TV is Getting There, Slowly"


Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
Ralph Jacobson
Guest
10 years 4 months ago

3D, no glasses! It’s the future!!! πŸ˜‰

Paula Rosenblum
Guest
10 years 4 months ago

I cannot envision a family sitting around the TV wearing dark glasses and isolating themselves from each other.

If I was going to paint a magic wand, it would be a zero footprint TV that can be projected pretty much anywhere, and moved at the owner’s whim. Converged with computing of course.

If I’m a CE retailer, I offer a few models of each and wait.

Gene Detroyer
Guest
10 years 4 months ago

Forget about television. Too often we try to segment our technologies and behavior into pigeon holes. One thing Steve Jobs was good at was ignoring how most people looked at technology tools and instead looking at how people behaved.

So let’s stop talking about television and just talk about screens. Once we start talking about screens, we will apply 3-D to multiple levels of communication. (Anybody playing Mario 3-D?) How about pictures (recipes on the kitchen screen) and graphics in 3-D? Easy! Certainly there are more and more 3-D movies, notably for the kids. No great need for TV show content in 3-D to drive 3-D.

3-D is more desirable and in fact more utilitarian than 2-D. There is no doubt that there will be a cheap, convenient — and without glasses — transition.

W. Frank Dell II, CMC
Guest
10 years 4 months ago

For some reason when something new in technology arrives, there is the thinking that everyone should have it in the next year. This is not realistic. Current estimated life for a TV is 5 years. Technology is typically ahead of content. Think back a few years ago when high definition hit the stores. With only a few programs offered in HD, few would pay the higher price. Now when they replace their TV, only HD is being sold. Sports and movies are most like the largest 3-D market. Consumers are unlikely to want to use the glasses for news and regular programs.

Craig Sundstrom
Guest
10 years 4 months ago

I think I speak for most of us here — yes, call me Mr. Presumptuous — when I say the challenges/issues relating to television today have (almost) nothing to do with technical issues and everything to do with content…I don’t see 3D changing that.

M. Jericho Banks PhD
Guest
M. Jericho Banks PhD
10 years 4 months ago

Sales of fashion eyeglasses are up over the past few years. Lots of us wear “cheaters.” Mine are Kazuo Kawasaki 704s like Sarah Palin, but with slightly enlarged lenses to fit my big fat head. So, what do I do with those 3D glasses? Awkwardly position them on my nose along with the Kawasakis? Replace my regular eyeglasses with the 3Ds and try to enjoy blurred vision? This is absurd. My Sony “smart” TV has more features than I can absorb, but no 3D. It will not be missed.

Mel Kleiman
Guest
10 years 4 months ago

Only two types of electronic merchants are going to survive. Those that deal on price and those that deal on quality, service, and more importantly, knowledge.

Kai Clarke
Guest
10 years 4 months ago

3-D is a solution looking for a problem. There is no true demand, and no real appeal. Just because a technology is different, doesn’t mean that consumers want it. Higher definition, wireless TV that is internet enabled and smart is what consumers want…essentially a computer in a TV. This is the next step in TV demand.

wpDiscuz

Take Our Instant Poll

What do you see as the biggest impediment to 3-D television sales today?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...