Panasonic Drops Price of 103" Plasma by $20,000

By Marcus Yam, published on May 8, 2009 at 8:30 PM
Source: Tom's Guide US | Keywords: , , , , | Themes: Home Theater, Display Panels and Monitors
Syndication: Add to your Google homepage Add to My Yahoo!

It's cheaper!

Price drops are great. Who doesn’t like being able to buy cool new gadgets at a lower price than they were just a week ago?

Panasonic today announced that it has dropped the price of its amazing 103-inch plasma 1080p HDTV by $20,000 – enough to buy a car!

Unfortunately, its previous price was $70,000, so the new price tag is still a hefty $50,000 – enough to buy a much nicer car!

How did Panasonic come to such a sizable price drop? Andrew Nelkin, president of Panasonic professional display, explains, "The combination of advancements in Plasma production technology and the tremendous worldwide success of the Panasonic 103-inch Plasma HD Display over the last two plus years have enabled us to increase production as well as efficiencies, and thereby make it available to a wider range of customers at a lower price point."

Panasonic said that demand for this gigantic plasma HDTV exceeded company expectations. Since its debut, more than 6,000 Panasonic 103-inch HD Displays have been installed worldwide.

"When our 103-inch Plasma first debuted, it was a made-to-order product," Nelkin added. "Demand for the 103 exceeded our initial expectations, and its popularity continues."

We’re guessing that most won’t be plunking down the cash for this one, but you can still catch a glimpse of it in action as the Panasonic 103-inch plasma has been installed in a wide range of high-visibility commercial applications in the U.S. including studios at NBC, CBS, TNT. It can also be seen at Sam's Town Hotel & Gambling Hall in Las Vegas, NV; Pechanga Resort and Casino in Temecula, CA; the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office's Inventors Hall of Fame in Alexandria, VA; New York's City Hall; and East Coast Malls in White Plains, NY and Jersey City, NJ.

The official model name for the TV is TH-103PF10UK and features 7-1/2 ft. by 4 ft. of viewing space, supports up to a 5 x 5 video wall natively.

I’ve got the wall, now all I need is the TV.

Comments | Print | Send to a friend
Slideshows related to this news

Sponsored links

Comments

kelfen 05/09/2009 2:45 AM
Hide
-0+

hm awsome time to get it

mcbowler 05/09/2009 2:55 AM
Hide
-0+

I must.. have. can not.. resist. No seriously. I have a new purpose in life. Let's see.. Where can I put this thing? and will my electric co. be able to support the power draw?

dragonfang18 05/09/2009 3:31 AM
Hide
-0+

You know... Because we can all afford $20,000

Anonymous 05/09/2009 4:00 AM
Hide
-4+

103" with only 1080p is a really poor resolution. Kind of like using a Dell Ultrasharp 30" at 480p instead of 1600p

ispyamoose 05/09/2009 4:08 AM
Hide
-3+

Uhh, why not just buy an HD projector?

mamw93 05/09/2009 5:10 AM
Hide
-4+

I have an HD projector and it was MUCH cheaper. Not only was it cheaper but I can make it as large or small as I want it. The max is 200 inches.

christop 05/09/2009 5:46 AM
Hide
-0+

I love my projector... If I was super rich I don't think I would drop that kind of cash on a T.V

starryman 05/09/2009 3:01 PM
Hide
-2+

103" sounds big but not really. Nothing too special. While I enjoy my 42" and 37" plasma and LCD flat panels, I use them for general viewing - simply too small. I thought of getting a 50" screen but like all hi-def, everything is 16:9 hence it's not really that big.

BUT when it's movie night or Monday Night football, I fire up my 3LCD projector and surround sound system. With the latest projectors having very high lumens on the cheap, I can shoot out onto a non-screened wall rendering 146" diag. Cost of my Epson HD/progressive projector $740 w/ rebate (1/2 the price of my 42" plasma). The Panny 103" plasma is surely better BUT for $49,000 less, I have a screen that is bigger and is 95% as sharp and bright when viewing 17" feet back.

ProDigit80 05/09/2009 5:16 PM
Hide
--1+

Who in their right mind would buy a plasma screen so expensive if you know that soon you'll be able to buy a similar OLED screen at half that price?

Besides a 103" LCD costs what, $10.000?

LockPick 05/09/2009 6:01 PM
Hide
-0+

TRINITRON FTW

ta152h 05/10/2009 6:36 AM
Hide
-4+

You guys keep complaining about the price, but it's not really for you, so naturally there are better choices.

When you're making something built to order, it's clearly a niche product, and even if you sell 6000 in a few years, you're still very much in that league.

To be sure, they aren't trying to compete with the projectors that cost 2% of what it does. But, really, $50,000 is a trivial amount of money to a lot of big companies, and if it helps them with their work, or somehow improves productivity, it is well worth it. Even for employee morale, you could make a case, since $50,000 is nothing compared to salaries, especially since it's a tax write-off.

Probably some private people buy it, but they have so much money it is trivial, and it is worth it to improve their lives.

The way people are posting, you'd think this was intended to be a mainstream product designed to sell to you and I. It isn't. Not everything is.

theangrygimp 05/10/2009 8:11 AM
Show
wikiwikiwhat 05/10/2009 7:13 PM
Hide
-2+

theangrygimp,
why are you bitter about the fortunes of others?

Oh, and as far as projectors go. They are very impractical at the mentioned places that have one. Often times, Lighting is an issue. And some of those places the ceiling is a little high.

theangrygimp 05/10/2009 9:53 PM
Hide
-0+

I'm not bitter about the fortunes of others, i'm bitter about how many choose to use them. It doesn't seem wrong to you that a person could give up half their body for their country while getting paid less than most school janitors, or better yet, the people who ran the country into the ground by cheating and lying to people? (AIG, etc.)
wikiwikiwhat: why are you bitter about my personal bitterness? I wonder how many individuals who bought one was some tyrant or family of like kim jung il, living it up while his citizens suffer and starve. BUT it is their choice, and I wouldn't want to change that. Just try and help them see the issues and maybe they would choose for themselves. To me freedom of choice is most important, but what is wrong with anouncing how the gluttony of the high class is hurting the rest of the world. Remember, 3/5ths of the world is below the american poverty line, on the edge of starvation, while 1 in around 100000 is even considered upper class, let alone rich, something isn't right about that, and its mostly due to the choices made by the wealthy, on purpose.

ta152h 05/11/2009 5:06 AM
Hide
-1+

Gimp,

Happiness is contrasts, not absolutes. It is human nature. If you have too much, you appreciate none of it, if you have very little, you appreciate things much more.

The beauty, or ugliness, of life is everyone will suffer and being happy takes a lot of effort regardless of wealth. As you know, most rich people aren't happy, and neither are most poor people. Misery has a lot of ways of entering one's life, and a lot of it is where we choose to be, mentally. We can look at all the bad, or we can think of all the good - the things that make life worth living. If you think someone with billions of dollars is going to get a big kick out of this device, I fundamentally disagree with you.

I really believe life is meant to be a struggle, one way or another. If you don't have it financially, you'll find it somewhere else. You think Bill Gates has had a stress free life? Look at him. He's in his 50s and looks like he's about 10 years older than that. It's tempting, but I'd prefer to keep my life. I have too many things that are important to me, to give them up for something like money, most of which are living (and there's also an Apple IIe in a sealed box :-P).

vfighter 05/11/2009 6:20 AM
Hide
-1+

I saw one of these still in a box awaiting shipment to another location. When I saw it it was before a price drop, in fact when I saw it I didn't even think it was available for pulic purchase at all. It was more than $70,000 at that time, I was under the impression that the est. cost was $100,000+. The stand for it was supposedly $13,000. And of course it was sitting in the warehouse of Osan AB, South Korea, on it's way to an Army base somewhere a bit further south, your tax dollars at work!;) LOL

bin1127 05/11/2009 2:33 PM
Hide
-0+

I've seen one in a japanese electronic shop and they were playing blu-ray on it. No doubt lingers that plasma + blu-ray destroys lcds. Panasonic does an amazing job with their tvs.

gwellin 05/11/2009 4:03 PM
Hide
-0+

ta152h has it all correct. This isn't intended for consumers. I work for a company that install a/v equipment for boardrooms, auditoriums and such. 50 grand isn't nothing to a company that will spend 1.5 million for a boardroom. Hell even the projectors we install in those rooms can cost upwards of $75,000. A $50,000 plasma starts to look good now.

Compare this to someone selling a $70,000 boat for $50,000. You probably weren't going to buy it anyways. But since you just bought your 17' Lund for $47,000 less doesn't mean the $50,000 boat isn't worth every cent to the right person.

gm0n3y 05/11/2009 8:04 PM
Hide
-0+

So assuming that they sold the original 6000 of them for $70000/unit, that gives them a gross profit of $420 million from just one TV model.

theangrygimp 05/12/2009 6:37 AM
Hide
-0+

ta152h :
Gimp,Happiness is contrasts, not absolutes. It is human nature. If you have too much, you appreciate none of it, if you have very little, you appreciate things much more.


You can't be serious. Happiness is contrasts? I don't have to burn to know that being on fire wouldn't be good at all, and I don't have to suffer to know that a BJ feels real good. That is one long of a wasted post. Life is not some karma BS. Good people get the shaft all the time, thousands of children will starve by the weeks end, never knowing anything but hardship. Where is their contrast? And since were getting way off topic anyway, lets just leave it as is, cause I will obviously not see this in your way knowing you have obviously not suffered that badly, or lived in areas of pure devastation in the world to even say things that naive. I won't post again about this cause this is not the place.

Comments are closed on this page.

Sponsored links