Outside the Beltway

Panasonic to Sell 103-inch Plasma TVs

James Joyner
5

Comments

Is your 60-inch plasma television just too darned small? No worries: Panasonic is coming to the rescue.

Panasonic 103-inch Plasma TV Photo eporters look at a Panasonic 103-inch plasma screen at the company's news conference at the 2006 Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas, January 4, 2006. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co. Ltd, the maker of Panasonic brand electronics, said on Monday it hoped to start selling the world's largest plasma television by early next year. (Rick Wilking/Reuters) Matsushita Electric Industrial Co. Ltd. (6752.T), the maker of Panasonic brand electronics, said on Monday it hoped to start selling the world’s largest plasma television by early next year. Measuring 2.4 metres by 1.4 meters and weighing 215 kg, the 103-inch panel is bigger than a double-sized mattress and almost as heavy as an upright piano. The world’s largest consumer electronics maker has yet to set the price but Matsushita’s 65-inch plasma TVs, its largest available now, sell for about $7,500 in Japan.

That’s a mite pricey. Plus, you’d have to have a really big living room to fully enjoy a screen that big. But, heck, if they got it down to $2000 or so, I’d have to get one.

Categories

Tags

, ,

5 responses to “Panasonic to Sell 103-inch Plasma TVs”

  1. yetanotherjohn Avatar
    yetanotherjohn

    “Thatâ??s a mite pricey. Plus, youâ??d have to have a really big living room to fully enjoy a screen that big. But, heck, if they got it down to $2000 or so, Iâ??d have to get one. ”

    So does your living room have some sort of adjustable paramaters associated with the price of things? If the proverbial Intel car getting 200 MPG, going 500 MPH, carrying 50 passengers was available for $200, would that suddenly mean your livingroom could become a garage?

    Maybe I am just strange (yes, insert your own punchline), but I was always raised with the idea you first determined the need (e.g. does it fit in living room) and then determined the affordability. Of course that leaves me with a 36″ TV that I bought for about $300 many moons ago.

    BTW, my back of the envelope calculation is that this would be a 108″ screen (assuming you calculate it on diagonal). Isn’t that a pretty major step up from the current 65″? Has something happened in the industry to allow a major leap forward?

  2. James Joyner Avatar
    James Joyner

    John: A screen that big would fit in my living room, I’m just not sure that the seating arrangement would be ideal in terms of appreciating that big a screen. But, shoot, you’d just HAVE to get one at the right price.

Latest Posts