Woot.com Sells $1.3 million in TVs over 22 Hours

Woot.com has built on its relationship with InFocus and yesterday the one-item-per-day online outlet store flexed the power of its unique retail model: it sold out an allotment of 450 new (not refurbished) 61" ultrathin (6.85" deep) DLP RPTVs over 22 hours for $3000 each.  InFocus sweetened the deal further with a $500 rebate.  This TV typically cost $5,000 – $8,000, and includes 2 ATSC tuners, an NTSC tuner, a Windows CE-based web browser, and all the trimmings. Infocus_61md10_for_web Infocus_61md10_for_web2

With woot’s flat $5 shipping, this leads to some remarkable statistics:

Item Quantity: 450
Item Price: $2,999.99
Total Sold: $1,349,995.50
Last Order time: 10:05 PM Central Time (new items are offered at midnight, Central Time, so that means the entire sale took 22 hours)
Order Pace: a $3,000 TV sold every 2 minutes, 55 seconds, or $61,094.47 an hour.
Shipping Cost: $5
Shipping Total: $2,250
TV Weight (w/ stand): 189.5
Total Weight: 85,275 lbs
Rebate by Infocus: $500
Infocus Payout: $225,000

Obviously, Woot will be paying a bit more than $2 grand to ship 85,275 lbs. of merchandise direct to customers’ homes. 

In marked contrast to most Woot items, the order pace started slow – very few items moved in the first hour, as customers digested the information about the set and asked spouses for permission.  If you follow the flow of conversation in Woot’s forum, you find a clear pattern: initially, woot regulars whined about the high cost of the item (some Woot items sell for as little as $10 or $20).  Then, as word got out about the deal, a flurry of new customers posted their excitement and celebrating their purchasing savvy (or impending divorce due to differing monetary priorities — in one case, if the poster is to be believed, marriage counseling would be a far better use of his $3,000 than an HDTV). Woot appears to be following the Costco model and broadening its customer base by offering higher end products to be found in what was always designed to be a bit of a treasure hunt.

The key question other retailers must ask is how this will affect pricing going forward.  Will consumers tune out Woots as one-time sales – almost like a lottery win – or will this drive down pricing as customers expect to find "finds" going forward?

-avi

Woot.com Sells $1.3 million in TVs over 22 Hours Read More

Coping with the Death of Audio

At a macro level, it’s pretty clear that audio component sales are dropping, while displays – flat panel and DLP rear projection sets in particular – are consuming the bulk of consumer outlays.  So what is a company that specializes in selling high end audio components to do?  Audio Advisor started out as a catalog retailer of high end audio toys (they’re now on the Internet as well), and each catalog used to feature pages after page of amps, preamps, integrated amps, high end CD players, extremely expensive record players for analog lovers, and digital audio doodads that supposedly improved CD audio quality for digital lovers.  At the other end of the catalog retailing price range, Crutchfield used to sell dozens of entry level and mid-priced receivers and DVD players. 

With sales of these products down, these retailers could try to compete for video dollars and sell plasmas and LCD panels, but going up against big box retailers and PC-based online outlets (such as Dell.com) is a recipe for suicide – without incredible volume, margins on displays can actually be negative.

Crutchfield has instead decided to focus on the auto side of its business.  Auto sound has remained strong, and auto displays – for movies or GPS navigation – have absolutely exploded.  While local stores still have an advantage in terms of installation, Crutchfield’s online store benefits from selection tools and advice wizards that simplify the process of figuring out what you can actually use in your car.

AudioAdvisor never sold auto sound products, so that route would be a significant departure.  Instead, the company is turning to furniture and cables.  Cables are high margin products that have always been featured in the catalog, but now more than a quarter of the catalog features at least one interconnect, speaker cable, or replacement power cable as part of the layout.  The other new gear category is furniture.  AudioAdvisor has a 16 full pages (out of 76) dedicated entirely to furniture – mostly stands for the video displays its customers are buying elsewhere instead of upgrading that preamp.

-avi

Coping with the Death of Audio Read More

Front Projection: When More is Less

Evan Powell over at Projector Central has an insightful article up on choosing the right resolution for budget front projectors.

Bottom line:

  • In the U.S., 848×480 is ideal for DVD, video games, and regular TV. HDTV looks pretty good at this resolution, too. These projectors are cheap, the images are beautiful – go for it.
  • Moving up to 1024×576 is essential for Europeans, where the extra resolution is needed for regular TV (the U.S. and Europe use different TV standards).
  • Moving up to 1024×576 is counterproductive for U.S. consumers because the extra resolution isn’t used for TV and makes little difference on HDTV, so why spend more to risk introducing softness or artifacts on DVD, which now has to be scaled up to fit?
  • Moving all the way up to 1280×720 (or higher) makes sense for U.S. consumers who plan to watch a lot of HDTV or one of the new HD disc formats being introduced later this year.

-avi

Front Projection: When More is Less Read More

When Manufacturers Don’t Manufacture, What Are They?

I wrote earlier about Outlaw’s new 990 audio processor, and was left with a few questions. They’ve since posted a FAQ that not only answers my questions, but also provides rare public insight into industry practices for cross-company parts sharing. Audio is a lot like the automobile industry – creating a platform is enormously expensive, and companies often share development to keep costs down. Sure, there are a few boutiques that create everything themselves from scratch, but custom efforts are enormously expensive, limiting the potential market size.

Outlaw uses the three different models shown below for product development, and so do all the other specialty brands to one degree or another, regardless of their distribution model. The selection of which development path to use is determined by the specific product, its cost, complexity and its anticipated volume. Going back to our first offering, the Model 750 amplifier, we have never hidden our relationships with some of the industry’s leading manufacturers. Remember that out process is not unique, and only a few of the "major" brands actually design and manufacture their own processors from the ground up. We know of no company in the "internet only" market that totally designs and builds all of their processors on their own.

The FAQ continues to describe which of its products were designed, manufactured, licensed out, or licensed in. Outlaw exclusively sells direct online; I don’t know if that completely explains their openness. But they are hardly alone, and got me thinking of some other common business models:

  • Brand A designs, someone else manufactures for Brand A. Very few – if any – of today’s manufacturers actually manufacture everything they sell. In some cases, a company will manufacture one type of product, but not others.  For example, Sony manufacturers most of its TV sets, but practically none of its headphones.
  • Brand A designs and then its design is "sublet" to Brand B to defray costs. Brand B rebadges the design with mostly cosmetic changes and sells it as its own. This has long been the way most vendors obtain their universal remote controls, but it happens in high end audio whenever a vendor specializes in one component but needs to offer retailers a complete product line to get distribution.  For example, Lexicon has been rebadging Bryston amplifiers for years.
  • Brand A designs the core chassis (in the case of a processor or receiver), core technology (in the case of MP3 players and digital cameras) or driver/crossover (in the case of speakers), and Brand B rebadges it with changes. These changes can be cosmetic, substantive, or both.  For example, most MP3 players – including the iPod – are based on chips from PortalPlayer. Companies can use PortalPlayer’s software (technically "firmware," in this case), use just some of it, or write their own from scratch.
  • Brand A and Brand B share development costs on the core technologies, then customize the surrounding technologies for differentiation. Examples here include Sony and Samsung’s jointly owned LCD fabrication plants; LG and Philips have joint ventures in plasma TV manufacturing. But in each case, the video processing, scaling, types of inputs, and case design are all different, leading to different performance characteristics and pricing.

-avi

When Manufacturers Don’t Manufacture, What Are They? Read More

Internet Persistence and Current TV Trends

Home Theater View grew out of business weblogs at JupiterResearch and AskAvi columns written over several years at a personal site, http://www.greengart.com.  Thanks to the persistence of the Internet — web pages never really die as long as they’re in Google’s index — one of those old AskAvi columns is now generating a lot of feedback. It seems someone queried Google to find advice choosing a TV, found Column 10, and posted it to a  newsgroup.  They did this without ever looking at the column’s date (which is on the page, though perhaps not as prominent as it could be).

Column 10 was provocatively titled, "Why HDTV Doesn’t Matter," and it covered whether to buy a 4:3 (square) TV or a 16:9 (widescreen, rectangular) shaped TV.  At the time, there was precious little HDTV content being broadcast and even fewer ways to get that content using cable or satellite.  There were also several 4:3 TVs on the market with a true 16:9 squeeze mode – in other words, you could buy a square TV without giving up the higher resolution of widescreen programming (though you’d have black bars on top and bottom of your image).

The advice was good for its time: it was written in 2001, before the advent of relatively affordable DLP-based sets and Dell HDTV plasmas. (And I noted that the price of HDTVs would come down in time for something to watch on them).  But to correct any misconceptions, this is not the advice I would give today.

First of all, there’s a lot more widescreen programming available now, even for those watching standard definition ("regular" TV, as opposed to HDTV). Even video games are being created for widescreen playback. Second, 4:3 sets with 16:9 squeeze mode have largely disappeared from the marketplace, having been replaced by less expensive widescreen HDTV-ready models. No, today the issue isn’t whether to go widescreen or not, but which widescreen technology to go with: traditional CRT? New, narrow depth CRT? CRT rear projection? Plasma flat panel? LCD flat panel? LCD rear projection? DLP rear projection? LCOS rear projection? Wait for SED flat panel? 

Short answer: budget and screen size dictate the technology. Past Home Theater View columns have covered LCD vs. plasma, the introduction of SED, DLP’s suitability for gaming, DLP vs. LCOS, and the announcement of narrow depth CRT.

-avi

Internet Persistence and Current TV Trends Read More

Consolidation in the Display Business

The New York Times today reports (free reg. req’d) two separate deals: Fujitsu is selling its LCD display manufacturing to LCD leader Sharp, and Matushita (known in the US as "Panasonic") is hooking up with Hitachi to jointly manufacture plasma displays.  Bottom line here: prices are dropping too fast to go it alone if you aren’t dominating the field.

-avi

Consolidation in the Display Business Read More

Plasma vs. LCD

Now that CES is over, it’s time to hit the mailbag.  If my email inbox is a barometer of market readiness, there’s a lot of consumer confusion around LCD and plasma.  Here’s a primer:

Both LCD and plasma have advantages and disadvantages. The simple answer is that – due to manufacturing constraints – for smaller sized screens you’re limited to LCD and for larger screens you’ll only find plasma. If you’re in the middle, then keep these guidelines in mind:

LCD

  • LCD is currently a lot more expensive on a per inch basis. This doesn’t mean it’s better, just that it’s more expensive to manufacture.
  • There are LCDs with 1920x1080p resolution on the market. Plasmas currently top out at lower (but still HDTV) resolutions. It won’t stay that way for long – Samsung and LG have shown 1080p plasmas – and on real world material, the added resolution doesn’t always make much of a difference. But if you want a 1080p flat panel display, LCD is it for now.
  • Both LCD and plasma displays are blazingly bright. But LCD is typically even brighter than plasma and thus is better in a bright, sunlit environment than plasma.
  • LCD isn’t as subject to burn-in as plasma, so it’s better for watching CNBC, playing video games, or watching a lot of 4:3 (square) programming on a 16:9 (wide) screen.
  • LCDs can be used in high altitudes where many plasmas have problems. If you live in Denver or the Himalayas, don’t buy a plasma over the Internet – make sure you see and hear it locally – plasmas whine at high altitude.
  • LCDs are less expensive to operate as they use less electricity.

Plasma

  • Today’s plasmas are better than LCD in contrast and black level performance. However, in this respect, both plasma and LCD pale in comparison (literally) to CRT TVs and the newest DLP rear projection units.
  • Today’s plasmas are slightly better than LCD in color fidelity.
  • Due to their lower native resolution, the cheaper EDTV plasmas often do a better job displaying regular NTSC cable or satellite TV than HDTV plasmas or LCD.
  • Plasmas do not need to be "recharged." New plasmas should last at least as long as your traditional CRT TV, though they may lose some brightness well down the road.

-avi

Plasma vs. LCD Read More

CES 2005: Trends

I spent most of my time at CES focused on mobile devices, but did note a few overriding trends:

  • The story of the show was definitely flat panels, which were everywhere.  LG showed off a particularly interesting integrated plasma/HDTV tuner/DVR, and Samsung showed off a plasma so big you couldn’t get it down the stairs and into my basement even if you took out a second mortgage to pay for it.  On the opposite end of the pricing spectrum, there were countless Asian importers with booths at the show displaying large LCD and plasmas at much lower prices.
  • The other big deal at the show was that the focus of the computer industry is solidly on the living room – Microsoft, Intel, and HP all had huge booths dedicated to moving audio and video around the home.  The problem with Media Centers for me has always been cost and form factor.  HP’s new HD Media Center looks especially sweet because once you’re talking about HDTV the price jumps dramatically (the only standalone HD-DVR on the market costs $1,000), and the new horizontal cases look like they belong in your A/V rack, not your desk.
  • Conversely, there were barely any new portable media players introduced other than the Olympus m:robe (a strong iPod mini competitor which I have in for review, and which looks gorgeous).  I take this as an indication that other than the video players (which have problems getting content unless you have a Media Center PC), Apple has this market completely locked up.  Now that the iPod shuffle appears to be the Next Big Thing, watch for copycat products (not that copycats will succeed – when pricing is down to $99 to start with, how do you compete with cachet?).
  • In projectors, CEDIA was the land of $2,500 – $3,000 720p LCD boxes with automatic iris adjustment and great contrast from Panasonic and Sony.  CES was the TI DLP team’s chance to strike back: BenQ showed me a great 720p DLP HD2+ projector for around $3,000 (the 7700).  Several products debuted with TI’s new DarkChip such as BenQ’s 8720; pricing on those is above $10,000, but the HD2+ products were nearly as good. This looks like it will work out so that custom installers will recommend the higher end products while enthusiasts buying/installing on their own will gravitate towards the $3,000 products.  …but we’re not done.  A slew of sub-$2,000 DLP projectors with 480p or 576p resolution were also introduced.  I didn’t see any of them at the show, but Evan Powell over at ProjectorCentral has a good recap.

My final trend is a question: could CES be getting too big to be relevant?  It’s always been hard to get around the show, and the weather didn’t help (when it snows in Vegas it’s fair to say hell has frozen over). Next year CES kicks the Adult Video show out of the Sands and takes over that venue, too.  But at the same time, CEDIA has been getting a lot of the big home theater announcements, the wireless device vendors are saving their news for CTIA, and the mobile media player market is all focused on MacWorld.

-avi

CES 2005: Trends Read More

SED: Time to memorize a new acronym?

A blog quoting a Japanese source suggests that Toshiba is abandoning LCD and plasma and instead putting its display R&D into yet another display technology: SED.  SED stands for Surface-Conduction Electron-emitter Display, which, if I understand it correctly – and I probably don’t – is an array of millions of tiny tube TV sets.  Advantages include many of the same claims made for another technology working its way through the labs, OLED (Organic Light Emitting Diode – don’t you just love these terms?):

  • really really thin
  • incredibly bright, sharp images
  • more energy efficient than plasma
  • a technology that [insert Korean or Japanese competitor here] doesn’t already have locked up

I’m convinced that performance is almost irrelevant: whichever technology is cheapest and can be manufactured in volume will win.  Consumers have shown that they have absolutely no understanding of the technologies, and retailers have shown absoultely no capability of explaining the differences between them.  Resolution and picture quality doesn’t even seem to matter much – consumers are snapping up EDTV panels at far higher rates than HD-capable displays. As such, consumers are basically buying these things based on depth and price. 

I’m sure that next week at CES we’ll see gigantic LCD displays, enormous plasmas, and ever-larger OLED prototypes, and that we’ll all be falling over ourselves discussing why LCD is better than plasma or vice versa.  But thus far, the bottom line has been: is it thin enough not to overwhelm a room, and, if so, how much does it cost?

-avi

SED: Time to memorize a new acronym? Read More

Are Furniture Vendors In Too Deep?

It’s right before CES, and I’m inundated with press releases.  Bell’O sent over a preview of their 2005 lineup, and I noticed something that struck a nerve: like all furniture vendors, they claim that their stands are ideal for hot selling rear projection TVs using digital technologies (DLP, LCD, and LCOS).  They even go so far as to list a few specific models such as Sony’s 60" Grand WEGA LCD TV.  Except that the stand doesn’t match the TV’s depth.  None of them do.  All the stands are at least 19" deep, and most are 21" – 24", while the new TVs range from 6.75" deep for new DLP sets from RCA and InFocus to 14 – 17" deep sets from nearly everyone else. 

This isn’t unique to Bell’O – when I went to buy a stand for my shiny new LCOS-based HDTV I couldn’t find any stands that were the right depth (I ended up making a short term compromise and just getting something super-cheap at IKEA, but that stand will eventually be replaced).

Consumers are willing to spend more money on shallow non-CRT HDTVs precisely because they don’t stick out and dominate the room as much.  Why would they want furniture that negates the shallow depth they paid extra for?

-avi

Are Furniture Vendors In Too Deep? Read More