Bargain hunters make Vizio LCDs most popular in US -- for now

In these difficult times people are looking to buy what's cheap, a state of mind that Vizio's iSuppli's latest press release isn't ashamed to apply, lauding the company's status as the current most popular brand of LCD television in these United States. It owned a 21.6 percent chunk of the US LCD TV market in the first quarter, up from 13.8 in the quarter before and beat out Samsung to be king of the liquid crystal hill -- largely thanks to prices that were, on average, between $150 and $400 lower than the competition. Kudos to the brand and we hope that it enjoys this moment, because with imports of new sets banned out on bond it must be tough paying an extra $2.50 on each one coming through Customs. Full press release after the break.

Update: To be clear: this is actually a press release issued by iSupply talking about Vizio, not by Vizio.

Vizio Takes No.-1 Position in North American LCD-TV shipments in Q1

El Segundo, Calif., May. 7, 2009-U.S. television maker Vizio Inc. surged into the leading position in the North American LCD-TV market in the first quarter, as dwindling disposable incomes sent consumers flocking to buy the company's low-cost sets.

Vizio's share of North American LCD-TV unit shipments rose to 21.6 percent in the first quarter, up 7.8 percentage points from 13.8 percent in the fourth quarter of 2008, according to iSuppli Corp. The company surpassed Samsung to take the No-1 position in the North American region.

"Due to its aggressive pricing, Vizio for some time has maintained its position as North America's top-selling LCD-TV value brand," said Riddhi Patel, principal analyst, television systems, for iSuppli. "However, since the onset of the economic downturn, Vizio's share has risen dramatically. With budgets becoming increasingly tight, consumers are finding the company's inexpensive sets more alluring."

In the first quarter, Vizio's lowest Average Selling Price (ASP) for a 42-inch Cold-Cathode Fluorescent (CCFL) backlit, 60Hz refresh rate, full High-Definition (HD) LCD-TV was $850. In comparison, Samsung and Sony 40-inch LCD-TVs with the same configurations carried ASPs of $1,000 and $1,090 respectively.

When comparing 120Hz models at the 40/42-inch size, the price differential between Vizio and Samsung and Sony was $400, with the Vizio set priced at about $1,000.

After first taking the lead in the North American market in the second quarter of 2007, Vizio's share of LCD-TV shipments dwindled to 8.7 percent in the second quarter of 2008. However, by the first quarter of 2009, the company's market share had risen by two and half times the level of the low in the second quarter of 2008.

While Vizio has maintained its low pricing, it has managed to add newer features to its LCD-TVs, such as 120Hz, making them more competitive with those from premium brands like Samsung and Sony.

Another factor contributing to Vizio's success is the company's use of high-powered retail channels to sell its sets, most notably Wal-Mart.

The attached table presents iSuppli's ranking of LCD-TV brands by unit shipments in the first quarter.

Are LCD-TVs must-have items?

North American LCD-TV shipments in the first quarter amounted 6.3 million units. While this was down 23.2 percent from 8.1 million units in the fourth quarter, the decline follows the normal seasonal pattern of shipments peaking in the fourth-quarter holiday season and falling to the low point of the year in the first quarter. Compared to a year earlier, in the first quarter of 2008, regional shipments in the first quarter of 2009 were up by 10.5 percent, indicating the LCD-TV market remains strong despite the economic downturn that has caused sales of most other consumer-electronics products to decline.

Rather than stopping their purchases of LCD-TVs, consumers are focusing on lower-priced sets.

"With LCD-TV sellers in the first quarter maintaining their promotions from the holiday season, and with prices declining, television sales managed to grow compared to the same period a year earlier," Patel said.

Insignificant others

Vizio posted the largest increase in market share and shipments among the Top-5 North American LCD-TV brands.

The combined market share of the smaller players, accounted in the "others" category in the attached market-share table, saw their portion of shipments plunge to 21.9 percent in the first quarter, a significant drop from 29.4 percent in the fourth quarter of 2008.

"Smaller brands saw their share of shipments decline so rapidly because of increased competition from the premium brands in terms of pricing and availability of 32-inch and smaller sizes," Patel said. "Premium brands priced some of their product lines very competitively with their value alternatives, compelling consumers to go for names that they recognize."

[Adderz @ May 8th 2009 7:38AM]

Id rather save for an extra few weeks/months than buy a sup par tv. You dont buy tv's everyday but you use them everyday, it makes sense to buy a quality one.

Unless you have cataracts, then buy all means by a Vizio, or any other cheap brand(Soniq, Palsonic, Hitech come to mind)

[Dead_Rebel @ May 8th 2009 8:58AM]

I have a 42" Vizio and the only complaint I have is it's not big enough. :) Vizio's rule and people bash them for 'inferior quality' but they're built very well and perform just as good as the Samsungs and Panasonics they compete with.

Somebody should do a study with generic bezels and "name brand" lcd panels vs. Vizio panels. I bet in a double 'blind' test with settings tweaked, identical blu-ray players and hdmi cables, that nobody would be able to see the difference between 'em.

It's hard to comprehend that Vizio is now a 'name brand' and can stand on their own, but it's true!

[Platinum_Skeet @ May 8th 2009 10:38AM]

Honestly SDTV's are almost pretty much fazed in stores. When you go to buy a TV big or small it's going to be HD. For that average shopper coming in just wanting a TV to replace an SDTV that's blown out and wants something new but not top of the line. Vizio's the perfect choice...

[TheRedMonkey @ May 8th 2009 11:19AM]

I have a 42 inch Vizio that, according to friends and myself, looks as good as my friends nice Sony TV. The sony is not an XBR. I bought my Vizio about 3 months ago for $699. I compared a lot of TVs and did not see the value in paying $300 more for a TV that looks the same and had the same specs. Brands recognition it for dumb people. The big brands and a lot of the "non brands" are the same crap. I spent 10 years in the industry and can tell you that you pay for that label and not the components inside.

[Hooterman @ May 8th 2009 12:04PM]

@ TheRedMonkey

What do you mean you "spent 10 years in the industry"? Does that mean you worked at Radio Shack for 10 years?

If you can't tell the difference between a Vizio and a nice Samsung LCD, then you deserve the Vizio. Leave the quality sets to those of us that can tell the difference.

[OnlyShawn @ May 8th 2009 5:21PM]

wait...so...if you spend MORE you get a higher quality TV? You don't say!!!

again, demand: still sloping downwards. Get off your tech high horses and realize that there is no objectively 'right' answer here; people prefer to spend less to more, and vizio is presenting a great quality TV ***FOR THE MONEY***.

[chefgon_ign @ May 8th 2009 7:38AM]

Shouldn't a lack of money cause people to not buy a new TV at all?

[Dave Chappelle @ May 8th 2009 7:47AM]

obviously Vizio think not, they probably think because there selling the most they are making the most profits... but Sony is laughing, laughing all the way up the stockpile of cash. (i know they made a loss but it was not from their tv's.)

[THizzle7XU @ May 8th 2009 10:12AM]

It's because things aren't really as bad as the media and government make it out to be, in terms of the collective population of the country.

[loopyoyo @ May 8th 2009 7:42AM]

most vizios i have seen have great image quality..to bad you go through them like hookers after a divorce

[OnlyShawn @ May 8th 2009 5:23PM]

hmm. I've had my 60" 720p (plasma, though, not lcd) for almost 2 years, and even moved it up the eastern seaboard. still working like a champ.

oh, and, with the LG screen, it's quite nice.

[marztar @ May 9th 2009 10:59AM]

lol how many times have you been divorced !!

[dandmcd @ May 8th 2009 7:51AM]

The positive thing for other manufacturers of tv's is once all these crappy tv's break on people, or they realize how vastly superior their next door neighbors Panasonic plasma or Samsung B550 is, they'll be back soon to replace their Vizio, most likely with a quality name brand.

I'm surprised Best Buy still refuses to carry Vizio, which everyone asks for there. Them holding out must mean their own generics Dynex and Insignia must be rolling in the cash just like Vizio is experiencing from selling through other channels.

[moldymac @ May 8th 2009 8:03AM]

I have been down the cheap tv road before, will never do that again. Bought by brand new Zenith (dont laugh) Z50PX2D and got rid of it less than a year later. Bought a Panny, and couldnt be happier! My friend bought a vizio about the same time as I bought my panny (About 2 years ago) and his rots in a garage thanks to the quality they dump in those (not!)

[bitslammer @ May 8th 2009 8:27AM]

I'm happy with both of mine. Bought them a couple years ago and have been trouble free and great picture for the price. they are both pre 120hz models so they obviously don't compete with current ones but hey...I was done waiting so I bought.

[Rifter @ May 8th 2009 1:33PM]

I am in the same boat. I have a 47" and 20". I like them a lot. I am not a hard-core videophile, so I don't notice the differences. I know we have one at the station I work at, and our engineers don't like its quality, but they admit, they are comparing them from 3' away... instead of a normal viewing distance. For the price, Vizio is great. If you are not INTO looking at the highest quality visuals, you most likely won't see the difference. If I LOOK, I can see what the engineers talk about. Normally, though, I can't tell.

[rudolphe @ May 8th 2009 8:27AM]

Just do like everyone else... and pass the cost on to consumers.

[teej @ May 8th 2009 10:19AM]

they really should. it's only $2.50... when you're already spending a few hundred bucks, $2.50 is nothing.

[mitchj @ May 8th 2009 8:37AM]

I bought a 32in Vizio about 3 years ago and its still working just fine. At the time it was significantly cheaper than the more well known name brands so I went for it. So far I have not regretted the purchase.

[Kinger @ May 8th 2009 8:47AM]

Insignia FTW!

[frankm @ May 8th 2009 9:02AM]

mitchj - couldn't agree with you more. Have no complaints at all for the price paid on my Vizio - and at the time, compared others - NOW regarding the Time Warner service I have coming INTO the unit.... All of a sudden all the HD tier channels have developed this nice popping on them - that other channels do not..

[Georgi @ May 8th 2009 8:55AM]

I think Vizio is great for first time HDTV buyers. If you had a big old TV, and get HDTV for the first time, and also get HDTV programming, the quality is so different that you will be satisfied with a Vizio. I'm sure all will agree that there isn't as much difference going from cheap Vizio 47 inch to Sony 47 inch comparing to going from 32 inch big old box to Vizio 47 inch LCD HDTV for the first time.

When I got my 47 Vizio, 47 inch Sony and Sharp HDTVs were in $2200 range, I paid $1650 after coupon at Costco over 2 years ago.

When I consider upgrading my Vizio to something bigger in future, I will have to shop around more this time as I won't be looking for the cheapest thing anymore, and also the price difference between Vizio and other quality brands have shrunk especially in the 32~47 inch range. Once you go up to 52 inch 120Hz you start to see a bigger difference.

By the way, one great thing about getting Vizios (or any other TV) from Costco is that you get 2 year warranty too instead of the standard 1 year. If you think about it, that in itself pays for the $50 annual Costco membership.

[arcsine @ May 8th 2009 9:23AM]

Top of the line 47" Vizio does 6500:1 DCR and has a CCFL backlight. 'Nuff said.

[xconan @ May 10th 2009 10:42PM]

however samsung's 46" not so top of the line 7 series led based has 3,000,000:1 constrast ratio and is 1.2" thick and uses 40% less power in comparison to similar size tvs +/- 1" and no lead, mercury (ccfl), or volatile organic compounds...

[Sno Crash @ May 8th 2009 9:42AM]

I like my sub-par TV. It goes well with my sub-par Comcast cable service and all the wonderful compression they put on the "HD" picture. I'd be pretty mad buying a high-quality screen and having to see that mess in even greater detail.

Sarcastic? Sorta. But seriously, most people buy them because *most* people have cable TV and not BluRay/PS3/360. It just isn't worth it to buy high-end yet.

The content hasn't caught up to the display devices yet.

Even most BluRay titles shown on a high-contrast 1080p high-quality display look aweful. The film grain and other noise/artifacts from the source film show up much more vividly. I watched IronMan in BluRay on a super high-end TV, and it looked worse. All of the special effects became blatantly obvious with that clarity. Deep blacks weren't black, they were grainy and fuzzy. Thats from the source.

It's weird, I know, but a better TV can be a frustrating experience right now.

[Hackettman @ May 8th 2009 9:49AM]

I bought an Olevia and havent been dissatisfied with it......

[moldymac @ May 8th 2009 10:16AM]

Same here. Got it cheap at compusa (the old compusa) Had it for a week and returned it. picture quality was ok, not great. But it had annoying features like HDMI audio sync menu. The audio was NEVER in sync.

[Mike @ May 8th 2009 10:14AM]

We come in peace...

For now!

[Chrisc @ May 8th 2009 11:39AM]

Point 1- I bought a Vizio and what I assume is the hvps blew within 6 days of purchase. I exchanged it and haven't had a problem since.
Point 2 - I bought a Sony 40" XBR4, I haven't had a problem with it at all.
... nuff said.

I have a PS3 and have watched both BluRay and non BluRay on both units. I can absolutely tell the difference (granted the Vizio is only 720p/1080i). Even with playing a video game such as Killzone2, you can see visable differences. I think someone commented on the fact of people can't see the difference. I sell TV's in a major department store and have customers all the time tell me that they see the difference (specificaly the grey washout on the XVT for example). The reason that people buy vizio is that price vs. quality. If people are ok with gettting a certain quality for "X" price, then they are happy. Which is what vizio customers are. They aren't the type to buy a PS3, a Sony 550 (BluRay player), or a Panasonic BD 85 (BluRay Player), and expect to get home and hook it up to a TV and go "THIS IS JUST LIKE THE MOVIES." They are people that either don't have the money or don't know any better and got talked in to something. And for the person who thinks I have alot of money, I am a full time college student who works a part time job.

[phantasyhero @ May 8th 2009 12:30PM]

I recently was browsing through 32" LCD televisions, and while VIZIO's 52", and maybe 47" models are satisfactory, the 32" lack color depth, clarity, and ability to display standard def well.

I purchased a 32" Panasonic Viera, and it is absolutely gorgeous. Standard def programming looks fantasic, which is something a lot of HDTV's lack in.

Vizio is cheap, and has a lower quality construction. Normal use will wear out a vizio tv within 5 years, higher quality brands could last much longer, but nowadays 5 years feels about right to get a new tv.

[Cary Gordon @ May 8th 2009 12:08PM]

As long as the unit meets the quality standards you want andf the warranty is good I would consider buying a Vizio. I believe they have become a big enough operation that they are nearly as good as some of the big name manufacturers, maybe even better depending on the product line.

That being said I currently am saddled with a POS 32" marketed by Soyo under the GoVideo brand that I absolutely hat, but:
a. It was bought over the 'Net without looking at one first and
b. It was a gift from my SO because it was on sale and had only good reviews on the retailer's website.
And I might be happier with it now if any of the analog inputs looked any good or if Soyo had actually replaced it when I had been told they would by their tech support.

[SupaKing @ May 8th 2009 12:25PM]

I'm a vizio owner and a samsung owner (the vizio is a secondary tv) and anyone who says the vizios are crap either:
a) bought the wrong model (maybe some of them were junk)
or
b) hasn't calibrated it

I calibrated my sammy and my vizio and when set properly they aren't nearly as different as people make them out to be.

[Bill @ May 8th 2009 12:41PM]

Off-brands like Vizio are cheap, but they do use older-generation panels.

The biggest concern is service, both during and after the warranty period.

Most off-brands require you to mail it in (at your expense) if there is a problem in-warranty (forget any service out of warranty)

As others have posted, if you want an off-brand, buy it at Costco for the extra year of warranty.

But after those 2 years are up, consider it disposable.

[AJ @ May 8th 2009 1:51PM]

Well I see that a lot of you are bashing Vizio TV's.

I live in a really large house and we have 4 HDTV's. 2 Sony, and 2 VIZIO LCD's

I use these as a TV and double them as a monitor.
For all intensive purposes they are all the same. if you want to use it a monitor make sure it's 1080p. 120 Hz makes for a better quality rendering high speed objects in movies or sports games. and ...

Honestly those of you who buy for the brand are just not smart enough. (My oldest HDTV is now 3.5 year old VIZIO and it still performs as it did on day 1.) Of course I don't use this one as the monitor as it is only a 1080i and text does not look as good, but my newer VIZIO is 1080p and 120 HZ this is a much better and bigger than my either of my sony TV's.

Well go and buy what you please but there is a reason VIZIO's are selling so well. Price and Quality that is unmatched by the so called name brands.

[OnlyShawn @ May 8th 2009 5:26PM]

*wince* "intents and purposes"

/grammarnazi

[ShadowMage @ May 8th 2009 1:59PM]

See, some people who don't know what they are talking about tend to spew things that aren't true.

I bought a Vizio 47" 1080p HDTV LCD panel back in early 2007. Since then, I have only had the mainboard short out about 2 months after I bought it. I called Vizio and, no questions asked, sent a tech to my house the next day FOR FREE with an updated mainboard with the latest firmware. Its now May'09 and I still use the set today. With all the inputs it has, its the center to my home theater system, with PC hooked up via HDMI, cable hooked up via Compnent, and a PS3 via HDMI as well.

I know that bigger brand names may look better overall, but is it really worth paying that $400-500 premium to see Cable/Satelite in 1080i the same way as a Vizio set?

And I do use my PS3 for games and movies. Nobody has ever complained about picture quality. In fact, all I hear are compliments.

(I should mention, it helped that I live in Irvine, where the Vizio home office is located. But the tech I talked to told me that Vizio does that all over the country.)

[Sporkinum @ May 8th 2009 3:09PM]

I just delayed getting a new TV by a few more years by keeping an eye on craig's list. Got a 60" CRT rear projector for free. It took about $30 in new CRT coolant and about 5 hours of work to get it back in service. It's isn't HD, but none of my video is. The only problem with a monster screen is that you need to be at least 7ft away from it. Other than that, coming from a 27" to a 60" was pretty astounding. BTW, if you are looking at 16:9 stuff, it is the equivalent of a 55" widescreen.

[miko34 @ May 8th 2009 3:28PM]

There are people who enjoy watching a Roland Emmerich flick on a Vizio while drinking a Miller Lite.

And then there are people who enjoy watching a Coen Bros. movie on a Panasonic Kuro while drinking a Guinness.
I'm part of the second group.

If a Vizio is all you can afford or if you don't notice a difference, that's fine.
There's nothing wrong with a Vizio, but there is a difference for those who can tell.
Sometimes, I wish I couldn't tell the difference because I'd be saving quite a bit of money.
For me, I'd rather get a smaller screen size Kuro, than a larger Vizio.

[miko34 @ May 8th 2009 3:32PM]

Oops, I meant Pioneer Kuro or a Panasonic Plasma. Either one will do just fine.
Stupid TV companies with their P names. ;)

[tawoody84 @ May 8th 2009 7:27PM]

This just in...now, more than ever before, more people are watching bargain priced LCDs instead of buying a plasma for the exact same price but having much much better picture quality. Amazing how that happens.

[Sinh Truong @ May 9th 2009 3:00PM]

Vizio's are ok and compare well to entry level sets from Samsung. But when their LCD's are compared to panasonic plasmas I just laugh. Their sets all matte screens and dim backlights have horrible viewing angles, lack color definition, and in no way compare to samsung's higher end LCD's.

I use to have a 42" gf42l 1080p lcd. I loved it for its features but hated it cause of the lack of great contrast. The glowing letter box bars when watching movies irked the hell out of me. Then after 6 months weird things started to happen and I was losing a picture. I had to pull the power to turn it off. I called vizio and they did nothing to help me out. Got a plasma and couldn't be happier.

[Erasure25 @ May 12th 2009 4:00AM]

I have a 47" Vizio and it works great. My friend has a Samsung and it has problems recognizing input from DVD players (sometimes it doesn't think there's a DVD connected and stops displaying a picture). My Vizio has never had a single problem. The picture quality looks great, too... I think my Vizio looks better than my friends Aquos (although that could be the cable provider, etc.). All in all, I've had it for 3 years and no problems whatsoever. Blu-ray looks fantastic too!

[chavezchavez @ May 13th 2009 8:44AM]

Cheap TVs

Are unbranded cheap televisions are a false economy?

Before you buy a Television or other consumer electronics item you ought to take into account not only the purchase price of the product but additionally the probability of it going faulty, the features and the performance, and the life expectancy of the product.

Cheap unbranded LCD televisions and cheap unbranded plasma TVs that are manufactured by anonymous factories may appear to be excellent value for money. Usually they are sold at lower prices than the equal sized models from dependable known brands such as JVC, LG, Hitachi, Philips, Panasonic, Pioneer, Samsung, Sharp, Sony, Toshiba and Sharp. The specification that they offer may appear comparable to the main brands of televisions and often the styling isnt dissimilar.

How do the major brands of televisions justify the premium?

Evidently when you buy a known brand of TV you are paying a premium for the brand, which you dont do on the unknown brand cheaper TVs. But is this the only difference?

One obvious reason for the known brands being more pricey is that they have UK staff, offices and warehouses unlike the cheaper brand TVs that are imported straight into the UK by importers from in China and Eastern Europe and are delivered straight to the retailer.

The manufacturers of unbranded cheap televisions dont have the same incentive to protect their TV's from being unreliable or poor quality. It isn't important to them if the televisions are unreliable or if they last for 4 years or 7years. Ultimately you wont know which factory manufactured the TV, as a result you wont be able to avoid it in the future if you purchase an unreliable Television.

The probability of unbranded Cheap televisions becoming faulty at some point in the first year or after is greater than for branded televisions since they don't have the same stringent quality control systems.

The circuit design and internal components on unknown cheap TV brands are not of the same quality as the main brands of TVs, again increasing the likelihood of the TV going faulty. Reliability surveys carried out by the consumer magazine Which have again and again found that TV brands such as Panasonic and Sony regularly out perform the cheaper unknown cheap Television brands.

It is more difficult to repair cheap televisions from unknown brands

The major brand manufacturers of televisions stock spare parts to expedite repairs this doesnt happen for the unknown cheaper Television brands. Often it is very difficult to obtain replacement parts for the unbranded cheap TVs .

Also it is more difficult to repair unknown cheaper brand TVs for the reason that they haven't got the technical support in the UK that the main brands do. Therefore if an repair engineer struggles to carry out the repair he cant ask the manufacturer for assistance therefore it will be more likely that the TV cant be repaired. During the first year this isn't a problem as the dealer that sold you the cheap TV will have to repair it or replace it. Although after this period it means that it is more likely that you will have to replace the cheaper unknown brand TV earlier than a main brand TV.

In situations where a TV has had a poor service history with recurring problems it isn't unknown for main brand TV manufacturers to exchange the product up to 1 year outside of the original guarantee. This might also come about if the TV became un-repairable. This type of assistance isn't obtainable on the unbranded cheaper televisions.

How does the performance of cheaper unknown Television brands compare to known TV Brands?

Another reason for the difference in the price between unknown brands and known main brands is that the main manufacturers invest in research and development to discover methods of advancing current technology to improve the performance compared to unfamiliar brands. Quite often the technology and specification of cheaper LCD televisions and cheaper Plasma televisions from unknown brands is at least a year or more behind the technology in the equivalent major brand LCD televisions or Plasma TV's. The consequence of this is that the performance of known brands is superior to the cheaper unheard of brands. Ultimately magazines such as What Video and What Hifi give the unfamiliar brands of cheap TV's low ratings compared to the known brand of televisions.

Conclusion

The cheaper brands of televisions aren't as reliable and don't boast the same specification and performance as recognized brands such as Panasonic, Sony, Toshiba, Philip, Hitachi, LG, Pioneer, JVC etc. For the small premium that major brand televisions sell for over cheaper unknown and poorly supported cheap Television brands, it isn't worth buying the cheaper ones since you will almost certainly pay more in the long run - Especially if you spread the price difference over the lifetime of the TV. In fact in all probability the cheaper TV's are more costly when all factors are considered. So buy a known major brand of TV and save money in the long run.

Armadeus Cornelius is an Home Entertainment enthusiast and expert with nearly 2 decades experience in electronics. His website at www.digitaldirect.co.uk offers Cheap LCD and Plasma TV's and a large selection of AV products at low prices. You may also find these links useful televisions cheap and cheap 26 LCD TV.

www.digitaldirect.co.uk have over 10 years experience selling leading brand electrical products at low prices via their web site. have a look at the web site, www.digitaldirect.co.uk today or phone http://www.digitaldirect.co.uk/

http://www.digitaldirect.co.uk/