TV model numbers are, I've heard, intentionally screwy.<p>I have a model number that ends in "-1" which I bought from a warehouse store, and this model was only ever sold to a particular chain of warehouse stores. The original model (which you'll find if you look up reviews on the web, or on Amazon) has the same number but ending in "-0", and the only difference is that they traded its second component input for another HDMI input -- something which 99% of people, myself included, will never care about.<p>The reason, they say, is so the big chains can advertise "Guaranteed lowest price!". Nobody else can stock exactly the same model number, so it's technically true, even though it's not uncommon for the almost-identical model to be cheaper elsewhere.
The problem is that people <i>will</i> buy the overpriced used TV. Honestly, I sold my 4 year old 720p for $300 last fall and went out and bought a brand new 1080p for $350! I couldn't believe it. But if people will buy, the price isn't going to change.
OK so this chart really bugs me:<p><a href="https://s3.amazonaws.com/pix-media/TV+Categories.png" rel="nofollow">https://s3.amazonaws.com/pix-media/TV+Categories.png</a><p>Why is the bottom line 8%? and why are the y-axis lines ate 8% intervals? No reason I can see.<p>Is it not obvious that starting at 0 and using intervals of 5 or 10 makes it easier for people to grasp the relevant information clearly?<p></rant>
This is my experience with pretty much all used goods in general. Every day I see some post like, "I bought a bike computer last year and lost all the parts. It cost $250 so I'm going to sell it for $249 because of the missing parts. Any takers?"<p>Nope. I'd take it for $30, though, if you really want to get rid of it.
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endowment_effect" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endowment_effect</a> - things seem more valuable when they're yours.<p>Regarding the two examples given (<a href="https://s3.amazonaws.com/pix-media/TV+Categories.png" rel="nofollow">https://s3.amazonaws.com/pix-media/TV+Categories.png</a>): used headphones are icky and cellphones are distorted by cell phone plans that hide their real cost.
The mundane television set has changed. No longer is it a thing to watch some movie in it.It is now a gadget that either adds or substracts to your social standing. Just like Apple did with the i-line of gadgets. TV makers are doing it as well.<p>Your TV doesn't have those little side-lights to add "ambiance"? You are behind. Buy a better one. It doesn't have that Symphony remote control with the little color LCD at the top? Ditto. Wait, you mean your TV is not 3D? Or that it doesn't have internet access to watch Netflix? Ditto, Ditto.<p>That is why the TV prices are so high. They are now a status symbol. The same way people trade-up their cell new cell phones for the newest model, people trade up their new TVs.<p>The price problem is a direct effect of this.Most people need to re-coup the cost of buying the high-end TV to buy another one.So they don't budge on the selling price. They keep it high to lower the amount of money needed to buy the other TV.As a result they create a niche market with its own social standing phenomenon.You see people bragging about paying high prices for an used TV, They might say "But its the XCVFRHTH-1234-TV with a digital remote, and dual LED Ambiance lights".<p>So, in summary, its not that the TV prices are high. Is that people cannot afford the latest gadget, and need to re-coup their money in some way. There is a a sub market of people who cant dream of buying the TV new, but can scrounge up the money to buy it used. And so, the circle of TVs keeps on going.<p>It does not happen to phones, because everything looks like an i-phone these days. But you can't confuse an Sony high end TV with one made my Emerson.<p>Same with cars, tools, bycicles...
It amazes me how many people will list something for sale on Craigslist without publishing obvious facts like model numbers. There's an upside if you a buyer who compares your price for the used item with the price for a new-but-superior item. However, the downside risk of wasting your time with people who walk away once learning the details of the item seems to outweigh this benefit.<p>Perhaps the greatest downside is that people like me will determine that the person selling the item is an idiot and apply a discount factor for the risk of even dealing with them.
It's amazing how much cheaper new TVs are getting, it's one tiny indicator of how much the quality of our lives (or at least or technology) is improving.
So, this is really a symptom of a much more interesting effect. What happens when established markets suddenly experience dramatic change? A good example is the used car market. Post 2008 meltdown leasing and buying new dropped dramatically. The recession also convinced people to buy used rather than new. Given the normal 3 year lease by 2011 there was a dearth of used cars yet due to the recession still a strong demand for used cars. Many people began grossly overpaying for used cars relative to new cars. It's one of the factors highlighted in the rebound of this years new auto sales - buyers began connecting the dots.<p>TV's are less of a supply and more of a price issue but it's still the same thing. A dramatic external shock hasn't flowed through the market yet. BTW, TV's make for horrible landfill so either way use that TV as long as you can.
I imagine the same would be true for laptops then, but it doesn't appear to be. I guess people are just more used to the falling prices of computers than they are for TVs.
It's interesting - on the Dutch eBay site (Marktplaats, has a craiglist type model), there actually really is a price point /alternate economy for most types of goods. The great deals are when people don't know what they're selling, but most sellers will either have a idea of what they think it's worth (too high) or will look at other listings and come to a similar price. It especially works on items like phones which have a relatively high supply.
"The Human Mind Cannot Comprehend How Quickly Prices Fall"<p>heh, i thought this immediately after reading the intro.<p>the problem stems from the fact that the LCD market is still not at an equilibrium despite the apparent proliferation of large, flat displays. once it becomes a commodity, the prices will level off for each screen size and there will be much less variance and fluctuation in prices over time and much more predictable depreciation rates.
I think its due to the perception that TVs work for a long time without failure, and hence hold their value since they can still be used for many years to come.
I'm surprised they didn't also cover PCs. That's another area in classified ads where people can't believe that prices have already dropped for your PC once you have paid for it and put it in the trunk.<p>Those who are unclear about brand/model names (and I see a lot of those, especially with lesser Android tablets) provide two benefits: 1) It makes it easier for those of us in the know to write detailed ads and sell our stuff, and 2) It acts as a filter when searching for TVs, etc. I'd rather buy a gadget from someone who knows the specs than someone who just posts "TV for sale."
For a post openly inviting HN comments, <a href="https://s3.amazonaws.com/pix-media/TV+Categories.png" rel="nofollow">https://s3.amazonaws.com/pix-media/TV+Categories.png</a> is an astoundingly bad chart.
A month or so ago, I shopped on Craigslist for a used 42"-ish TV. As the article states, people wanted way too much for them and didn't state specific model numbers. I ended up buying a low-end new TV with some stacked-up promotions as suggested by a Slickdeals.net commenter.
I charged about the same as the "new" price for my TV (which was about half what I paid for it), because it was better. The old one supports more video formats, has better color and nicer speakers than the model that was supposed to replace it.
Would bulk be a factor here?<p>As the size of the consumable increases so does it's shipping cost and difficulty. Which in turn might imply that fewer people would buy a TV online, than say a piece of clothing or a DVD. This is turn would force consumers to overpay for their TVs, not many high street shops can compete on price. This inflated price is in turn passed on to the 2nd hand buyer when the original purcahser experiences regret for the high price they paid.<p>Then again, I could be completely wrong.
Irrelevant fun fact : In germany, if you have tv you have to pay yearly ~271$ as a tax ( and it doesn't matter if it's 50000$ super hd 3d or ~30$ old crt )
I'm not sure if it's unique to my area, but I've found the same issue with computers on CL.<p>I work with quite a few non-profits and they're always looking for newer computers to replace their aging or outright broken P3 era machines running XP or even 98.<p>I have a few RSS feeds for about a 35 mile radius and 95% of the listing are some crap machine with a Celeron-D or Sempron. "Top of the line! Bought at Walmart 4 years ago for $800, selling for $500 FIRM. Has blue screen on startup, but it should be a simple fix."<p>Every 5-6 months or so something worthwhile like a P4 w/ HT or a C2D with a dead HD will show up for $30-50.
Taken in the aggregate, the findings are probably true. However, some particular models can command a high resale value because they have particularly unique features. My Samsung TV, for example, is one of the few models made that has an antiglare screen.<p>To my knowledge Samsung no longer manufactures flat-panel HD sets with antiglare screens, so I would expect to sell it at a premium.
I've certainly noticed this myself. I always assumed it was because people overpaid originally. Paying sales tax, not buying on a deep sale, etc. Then I come along and use deal shopping tools which pick out TVs on websites that skirt local taxes.
Very interesting article<p>And they finish up saying "The used TV market is broken"<p>But actually I would say: "the TV market is broken"<p>One could say the price reductions are due to less demand (computers, internet, etc), or maybe because of improving technology<p>But really something that falls in value so fast has of course a value for the user (watching TV) but not a "market value"<p>Tvs are (more or less) fungible, there's basically no incentive of getting the latest model and if it breaks you just get another one.<p>So it's actually worse than the car market in some ways
Isn't this the equivalent of buying an expensive frame for a cheap painting?<p>We buy expensive TVs to look at because the stuff on the TV channel is just rubbish.<p>"of course Simon Cowell's insights into modern pop industry are worth watching Pop Idols got American Talent for - I mean I paid more for that TV than my car..."
Why does Priceonomics posts always make it to the front page of Hacker News? The stories are interesting, but not THAT interesting. Seems like there's some gaming going on here.
It'll be interesting to see what happens when Apple's TV is released. I suspect the resale value of all other televisions will crater as everyone tries to sell their old TV (and potential used purchasers instead purchase new Apple TVs).