Hacker News Reader

Comment by hulitu | Hacker News Reader

To be honest that's what they want you to believe. Last time i opened a smart TV looked like the most expensive thing was the standing foot and the plastic frame. The rest was power supply (which was broken - planned - died just when warranty expired) and a cheap android computer. I think they cannot resist to the idea that if they have Android why not sell some ads.

View on HN

Oh I really hate this meme because even folks at HN repeat it like a broken record though nobody even cared to back it with a real BOM analysis.

Only source I've seen so far for this ridiculous claim is "an executive of Sony said so in an interview". Yeah, a really neutral source of information, indeed.

55" open cell panel costs less than $100 and this is by far the single most expensive component in a TV.

So a $300 Walmart special Roku TV might needed to be subsidized a little, but doing the same on a fancy LG, Samsung or Sony would be purely out of greed.

I think you're underestimating just how much money there is to be made after the sale. Vizio now makes more money on ads and data harvesting than on hardware sales.

Somehow I doubt the large OLED panel in my TV is cheaper than its little stand.

Netflix / Disney pre-installed on the smart TV are probably the features that allow the manufacturer to reduce the price thanks to subsidize from those subscription vendors.

Does Netflix (still) subsidize TV vendors to include their app? Or is it the case that TV vendors would not be able to sell their products if they didn't come with built-in Netflix?

I read some representative from Nvidia Shield explaining that they were forced to add a Netflix button to their remote in 2019 because Netflix would no longer allow their app to be installed on devices without a dedicated button.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com