|
|
Posted by NunYa Bidness on 11/01/05 13:34
On Tue, 1 Nov 2005 00:03:19 -0800, "Alpha" <none@none.net> Gave us:
>
>"NunYa Bidness" <nunyabidness@nunyabidness.org> wrote in message
>news:pt9dm1dmtrbdfvtl21fhpi03udil1k8roe@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 31 Oct 2005 21:39:51 GMT, "Biz" <spamoff@sbcglobal.net> Gave
>> us:
>>
>>>
>>>"Monte Castleman" <qmdcastleman@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>>>news:W5o9f.2502$2y.2134@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>>>> Anyone care to speculate on when HDTV might become affordable to the
>>>> masses. I've been thinking about buying in for a long time, but it seems
>>>> the cheapest projection model has never gotten below a 1,000, and the
>>>> cheapest rear projector that does 1080i has never gotten below 2,500.
>>>> Seems the trend it to bigger screen sizes, not smaller prices.
>>>
>>>Depends on what you define as "affordable for the masses"
>>>
>>>THis past weekend there was a 51" HD-capable widescreen rear projection
>>>for
>>>under $900, 1080 capable...
>>>My 35" MITS tube tv was $1600 back in the day(about 10-12 years ago). So
>>>to
>>>me, HDTV's are extremely affordable...
>>>
>> The easy way to do this is by ratio and proportion.
>>
>> TV in 1961, color 25" was around $350. Average wage was not even
>> over $2 an hour.
>
>
>Our family bought one and it was $550-750 around that time. Using the money
>calculators available, that is
>minimum $3,380 today.
>
Thank you.
Basically, boys... If you want to play, you have to pay.
Nothing has changed.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|