Is this a good TV deal?

The warehouse has this 42" LCD TV:!SKU=1541009

It's a present for nephew and at the max' our budget can stretch to.

Is there anything about this deal that may not be best!
I wish I could list all his requirements but I don't know them and it's a surprise gift. He's got a PS2 and may want to connect his computer to it also, but that's about all I can think of. Is a 5ms response time OK for sports!

Is there anything about the connections in or out that I should be aware of or that he may need or anything else you can think of that he might need (a bit 'crystal ball', I know, but I'm clueless and not sure what features would suit him that we could actually afford.

Is there a more suitable TV deal out there at the mo'!


geek_dropstix, Aug 16, 1:38 pm

geek_r.g.nixon, Aug 16, 2:32 pm

I personally wouldn't buy an unknown brand like that.

Noel Lemmings are selling 42" Samsung TVs for the same price at the moment. It's a no-brainer.

geek_suicidemonkey, Aug 16, 3:06 pm

JB hifi have this Panasonic for $688
Extra HDMI input and known brand name which always comes top of consumer reliability reports.

geek_stevel_knievel, Aug 16, 3:18 pm

Digital TVIf i am watchingnetwork tvviaordinary sky decoderwill itproduce pictures in HD ( if the programme is in HD) or doessky in their greediness, block it like thierprogrammes unless buy their HDticket .!

geek_elect70, Aug 16, 4:10 pm

Yes, you need a My Sky HDi decoder to get HD.

geek_stevel_knievel, Aug 16, 4:45 pm

It's $10 a month extra. HD content uses more bandwidth therefore costs them more to broadcast. Satellites aren't free. How is that greediness!

geek_suicidemonkey, Aug 16, 4:56 pm

Buy a decent brand, and you probably want LED backlighting so it will be a thinner profile. Non LED displays are pretty old these days. You should be able to get something close to that price when they have sales.

geek_mattnzw, Aug 16, 5:28 pm

Believe it or not they're transmitting the HD content anyway, so can't see your logic there.

SKY has ALWAYS been overpriced since there's NO competition at all.

The VEON is a good set.

geek_kiwikidd77, Aug 16, 5:44 pm

Nothing to do with blocking anything, the standard definition decoders are totally incapable of receiving the DVB-S2 H.264 streams. they were designed in 1998 and are mpeg2 stream only.

geek_spyware, Aug 16, 5:45 pm

Crap brand.

geek_lythande1, Aug 16, 5:48 pm

+1 indeed.

geek_gibler, Aug 16, 6:17 pm

Samsung! Yep.

geek_stevel_knievel, Aug 16, 6:28 pm

No they're not. The SD decoders don't have the hardware to receive HD content, so SD content is transmitted to them.

And I don't think $60-80 a month for the ridiculous amount of channels is expensive, especially if you had any clue what went into broadcasting TV

geek_suicidemonkey, Aug 16, 6:35 pm

HD content is transmitted, it doesn't matter how many receivers there are.

ridiculous amount ofchannels! Most of them are rubbish, and filled with so much advertising you forget what your watching by the time it comes back on.
Oh thanks sky for MASH, hogans heroes, get smart, 20 years of simpsons repeats. it must have been really costly for you to transmit them every day since the first day of skys existence.

geek_black-heart, Aug 16, 6:42 pm

I had heard that they were rebadged transonics, which is what the WH used to sell. I believe that is the WH own inhouse brand.

geek_mattnzw, Aug 16, 6:43 pm

Thats why you get something like a tivo. You never have to watch ads again, and you can just watch what you want to. I never watch live tv.

geek_mattnzw, Aug 16, 6:44 pm

edit: Actually you're not worth arguing with.

geek_suicidemonkey, Aug 16, 6:50 pm

A lot of us TV watchers would say that many of the Sky standard definition channels are such poor image quality, visible compression artifacts to the point of making me sick, that they aren't actually worth paying anything for.

I got Sky back after 4 years but can't watch many of the channels because of the hideous low quality courtesy of Mr Fellet and his 3 Mbps limit. And you can't tell me it is the raw state of the satellite streams into NZ as I know this ain't true, with Auckland based channels like Prime being one of the worst.

Three MTV channels I see, quality so low almost sickening, I doubt they run more than 2 Mbps each.

Sport HD, ESPN and SoHo HD are the only channels fit to view in my opinion.

geek_spyware, Aug 16, 6:57 pm

P.S. The low bitrate debauchery done to Discovery and National Geographic is almost unforgivable in my opinion.

geek_spyware, Aug 16, 6:59 pm

I know nothing about HD/SD distribution, but I would be interested to know suicidemonkeys answer. i would've thought other than the decoder, potentially it's just bandwidth or frequency range that costs extra for HD.

geek_ropes2, Aug 16, 7:24 pm

id go for the warehouse one.i have the same brand but 32 inch.It was on special for $399, full hd, freeview etc.

the equivalent "brand name" was about $699, BUT the warehouse one has a THREE year warranty vs a one year one for the so called better brands.

i figured id much rather save 300 dollars and have painfree hassle free tv for three years.

ive had it a few months now, and its been good.two other people i know got one too. and no complaints so far.

geek_christin, Aug 16, 7:24 pm

With consumer laws in this country it hardly matters

geek_vtecintegra, Aug 16, 7:32 pm

If you don't mind a crap picture go for it, LCD Hz are crap especially when you are buying a low end TV, Samsung 43" High Definition Plasma RRP $699, I would take this option straight away at least the refresh rate would make a clear and smoother tv image, only down fall is plasma shows reflection if you have a sunny room! night time viewing is perfect or just close the curtains during the day

geek_macuser, Aug 16, 8:08 pm

Yeah, there's only two problems with that:
1. The resolution is 1024 by 768.
2. It's Samsung.

geek_stevel_knievel, Aug 16, 8:16 pm

How! TV is broadcast at a set framerate after all.

geek_vtecintegra, Aug 16, 8:20 pm

You want a lcd-LED in europe you only see led on the shelfs

geek_intrade, Aug 16, 11:12 pm

I believe samsung manufactured the lcd panels for some of the warehouse brand TVs anyway. I know that with the veons, they have better quality remotes than the transonics. I'd go for the VEON as it has full HD (1080p) as mentioned above, so is slightly more future proof than the Samsung alternative proposed by some. The warehouse also just changed their returns policy to make it even easier (they already have a 1 year change of mind).

As for the LED vs LCD thing, well that's a false dichotomy, the choice is between LCD-LED and LCD-Flourescent, its just the light source used to shine onto the panel. Maybe in a few years OLED tv's will come out which actually use OLED's as pixels.

geek_kieran211, Aug 16, 11:43 pm

NO unless you pay extra to get HD. HD is free if you use an UHF Aerial.

geek_thewomble1, Aug 16, 11:48 pm

Will all of them honour that 2 years after warranty tho.It's less hassle if already stated 3 years

geek_christin, Aug 17, 7:06 am

Entirely untrue

geek_vtecintegra, Aug 17, 7:43 am

geek_mone, Aug 17, 8:13 am

Hmm. Thanks everyone. It's great to read the comments and I'm learning more as a result. the only downside is that while waiting for some sort of consensus to emerge, the Veon TV sold out. Hahahaha. Probably just as well as it was more than we'd like to be spending anyway.

Hopefully something else surfaces soon.

Thanks again.

geek_dropstix, Aug 17, 8:13 am

Don't be mislead, that's what companies want you to think.not the law.

geek_kieran211, Aug 17, 9:12 am

Here is a good TV deal, also from the warehouse. $599 for 46" Sanyo, 1080p.

Most have sold already.

geek_kieran211, Aug 17, 1:03 pm

Ta thats what I wanted to know

geek_elect70, Aug 17, 4:27 pm

I have seen the older model LED equivalent for about that on special. It was originally about $1600 last year. These things have just got so cheap. Personally I would stick to sony and panasonic for reliability, as they rate highest in consumer.

Also read the consumer ratings. Many have really bad sound quality.

geek_mattnzw, Aug 17, 4:37 pm

there is also no set reasonable time within that law, so its all up to interpretation, therefore leading to more hassle . id personally prefer a warranty that states three years.

geek_christin, Aug 17, 6:06 pm

geek_medsebbs, Aug 17, 6:19 pm

I'd expect a $700 tv to last longer than 3 years. Pretty sure the Disputes Tribunal is there for a reason, not that The Warehouse would actually go to that length if you had to come to words with the manager, they are actually very understanding of consumer law, compared to some retailers.

You are being conned if you think that warranties are a selling point.

geek_kieran211, Aug 17, 6:21 pm

So you only expect your tv to last 3 years! Thats just 1000 days.I would expect a decent brand tv to last closer to 10 years. I have never had one fail within that time

geek_mattnzw, Aug 17, 6:56 pm

in my case the warranty WASNT the selling point, it was the price of $399 for a full hd 32 inch tv for my bedroom.I wasnt comparing it to the warehouse managers, i was talking about someone going back to noel leeming with a tv that was 2.9 years old, had died, with a one year warranty and getting someone whos interpretation of the "reasonable use" was only two years type thing. its happened to someone i know and the hassle they had, so personally took the three year warranty.all things equal (take price out in this case) if one tv had a one year warranty aone had a three, id take the three.

geek_christin, Aug 18, 9:53 am

things do die.computers die wtihin six months sometimes (motherboard failures etc, had many of them!), audio video stuff dies too.Even the good brands.It happens.

Ive had cases of top of the range laptops dying wtihin a few months.high end business ones etc.the brand is no guarantee it will surivive

geek_christin, Aug 18, 9:55 am

i got a 32 inch veon a while ago and its a really good tv. although for $700 you could probably get a brand name one as others have said. i got my veon for $399 and it was the best tv around for that price (at the time anyway)

geek_shaun16, Aug 18, 10:23 am

although that veon is full hd, whereas if you get a better brand one it may not be full hd for that sort of price

geek_shaun16, Aug 18, 10:24 am

Well if people want the easy way then they will get milked.

geek_kieran211, Aug 18, 10:32 am

Generally electronics "die" near the beginning or the end of service. It's called the bathtub curve. Basically, it's more likely for a TV (for example) to break in the first year than the fourth year.

This is how companies make so much money on warranties, they don't want you to know this.

geek_kieran211, Aug 18, 10:38 am

how do you get milked by buying a tv that is cheaper with a three year warranty vs a more expensive one with a one year warranty!

ive never bought an extended warranty, nor do i ever plan to.

geek_christin, Aug 18, 11:36 am

take price out in this case.but then issue is "cheaper.vs.expensive-
". Doesn't that conflict!

Anyway seeing warranties as a selling point is like seeing a car "with wheels included" as a selling point. It's already implied.

geek_kieran211, Aug 18, 5:52 pm

the one i bought was cheaper, but if all things were equal, id buy the one with three year warranty. its not being milked as its not costing me anything extra as everything else is equal.

warranty is implied, but then again as I said, i know someone who had problems getting something fixed at 2 and a half years or around that as he was told "it was more than enough lifespan out of it".

I know of many times computers have had to have faults repaired and paid for as they were out of warranty.

doesnt really matter, my personal preference is to go for the one with the longer warranty.I wouldnt pay MORE for that warranty, but if it was cheaper or equal id choose that one.nothing to lose, and potentially less hassle down the track.

geek_christin, Aug 18, 6:22 pm