Comment by 3RTB297
5 days ago
The hitch is that it would be more expensive, making it a "premium" product and limiting the market. Smart TV pricing typically includes subsidies based on the assumed data sales from each user over the lifetime of the device.
Yes I am suggesting a premium product, there’s at least $600-$1000 more the market is willing to pay just for aesthetics based on Samsung Frame tv, which is a premium product with mid-range LCD component quality. It’s priced about $200 underneath Samsung’s top of the line OLED
I really doubt the user data for a smart tv user is all that valuable. Meta has infinitely more rich data and an entire tightly optimized ad system and is on a platform where people commonly make large purchases and makes around $10 per user per year.
> I really doubt the user data for a smart tv user is all that valuable.
According to a 2021 article about Vizio's user-hostile advert display devices, they boast of an average revenue of $13/yr - up from $7.30/yr, though consider this was 2020 when more people were at-home watching TV instead of going outside, meeting people, touching grass, the usual.
https://deadline.com/2021/03/vizio-smart-tv-streaming-ipo-12...
> A range of advertising opportunities drive revenue, including revenue sharing with programmers and distribution partners as well as activations on the device home screen. In the fourth quarter of 2020, the company said average revenue per user on SmartCast was $12.99, up from $7.31 in the same period of 2019.
-------------
If you'll allow me to make an arbitrary assumption that a new TV set bought today will last about 10 years, then $13/yr means the advertising revenue implies Vizio has reduced the sale-price of their TVs by $130 compared to before we had no-opt-out advertising displayed on our own property as a condition for the privilege of using said device.
How much are my eyeballs worth over the lifetime of a TV?
In the race to the bottom, ads will outcompete others by pushing price lower. But how much lower?