Report: Sony's OLED TVs on hold

Nobody, least of all Sony, ever said it would be easy to start cranking out OLED TVs. It doesn't help matters to be in a financial crunch.

So it should come as little surprise that according to a report in Tuesday's Wall Street Journal (subscriber access only), losses in Sony's TV division are driving the electronics giant to put a hold on future OLEDs TVs.

Sony shows off its OLED TVs at CES 2007. That's a 27-inch model in the middle; all the others are 11-inch models.

(Credit: Michael Kanellos/CNET)

Citing people familiar with the matter, the Journal says that new OLED (organic light-emitting diode) production would compound the poor performance at Sony's TV division--which looks likely to lose money again for the sixth straight year, meaning a return to profitability is paramount.

Sony's TV division lost 127 billion yen ($1.34 billion) in fiscal 2008, noted the Journal, accounting for more than half of the company's operating losses for the year.

More than two years ago, Sony showed off its OLED TVs, in 11-inch and 27-inch formats, to great excitement, and the company was hopeful to start getting them out the door sometime in 2008. But the 11-inch model sported a $2,500 price tag, versus 50-inch LCD TVs that cost the same or less.

Compared with today's LCDs, OLED displays are ultrathin, suck up less power, and offer better contrast and colors. The technology is already used by cell phones, MP3 players, and other mobile gadgets.

But creating large OLED displays has been a difficult and expensive challenge. Research firm DisplaySearch says that four of every 10 panels that Sony makes for its 11-inch OLED fail to make the grade and can't be sold, noted the Journal.

While Sony is delaying its OLED production, its rivals aren't standing still, though other units have yet to hit the market. LG revealed a prototype of a 15-inch model at this year's CES, but has said it won't make anything larger for another two or three years.

Samsung has also been busy demoing its OLED prototypes, showing off a 31-inch model at CES 2009. But this unit, too, won't likely hit the shelves for a number of years.

The main competition to OLED may still be the old reliable LCD. Prices keep plummeting while the quality of LCD gets better. Newer LCDs are also thinner, chew up less electricity, and can provide brighter and better colors, noted the Journal.

[chrkeller]

OLED sounds nice on paper, but quite honestly check into Panasonic plasma TVs. Great picture, exceptionally deep blacks, no motion issues and burn in isn't an issue anymore. For a 50 inch plamsa, 2k will be enough. Spending 2k on an 11 inch TV no matter how nice the picture just isn't going to happen. OLED perhaps one day, but right plasma is king in terms of picture quality while LED LCD is closing the gap.

[Ebeale]

I agree, Panasonic Plasma's are great. I have a 50" and it would put most LED's to shame. Sports and Movies look much better. You can't bet them for the price.

[renGek]

Problem though, tv manufacturers want to stop producting plasma because its not as profitable as lcd. I think panasonic is the only one left actively producing plasmas. I love my plasma but their names might be numbered. Too bad canon got sued otherwise we should have had SED tvs by now which basically is the same deal as OLED. Damn people with their crazy lawsuits.

[soccerkrzy]

My Samsung 52" Series 7 LCD begs to differ. LCDs have surpassed plasma now. And soon OLED will surpass LCD.

[zeth006]

And the Plasma vs LCD debate rages on.<br /><br />@renGek, @soccerkrzy<br /><br />LED backlit LCDs have narrowed the gap substantially against plasmas for image quality, and color reproduction. 1 year ago, I would've said plasmas win the TV fight hands-down in all these areas. <br /><br />However...<br /><br />There was an article either on cnet or pcworld that compared a recent generation Panasonic plasma against Samsung's LED backlight. The plasma BARELY squeaked by more than a couple of points for all the criteria mentioned above. <br /><br /><br /><br />When taking into account the size of my living room, a plasma would eat up too much real estate and would at the same time require more space for me to be able to sit back reasonably far while watching a movie. LED backlight TV's, despite their costs (which have been falling quickly at my local Bestbuy) are more expensive, but more practical for my house. I saw a Samsung LED 240hz drop by about $300-400 in a few months time. I'm willing to wait a few more months until the 46" drops to about $1,500 or the 52" drops to $2,000 to jump on either. <br /><br />Yes, I am a Samsung fanboy and yes, I also know about Panasonic's quality plasmas and the fact that they acquired Pioneer's Kuro technology. I'm told that Samsung plasmas aren't too far behind for quality and if anything, are actually decent bargains as well.<br /><br />Let the TV wars begin...seriously. I need an excuse to buy a laptop with HDMI so I can watch my movies and TV shows with HD quality.

[sting7k]

I was excited for OLED. And the 11" Sony model that is at some Best Buys look awesome. But LCD is getting better. The new Samsung LCDs with LED backlights are pretty sweet and way thin.

[SactoGuy018]

I agree that Samsung's LED-backlit LCD panels are excellent units, but even that is a power guzzler compared to the potential of OLED panels, which don't even need backlighting at all and offer plasma-like contrast ratios. <br /> <br />I would not be surprised that the first company to really take advantage of OLED panels will be either Samsung or LG Electronics, with VIZIO following behind about a year later with lower-cost units.

[download llama]

Sony's OLED tv is an amazing piece of technology, but unfortunatly it isnt worth the price tag that it has been stuck with, especially since Samsung's release of its 42" LED tv. Samsung's tv boasts triple the contrast ratio of Sony's (3 million to 1 million) and is less expensive than Sony's. If Sony's tv division has indeed lost money for the sixth straight year, it may be time for a total revamp of the company. Sony seems to believe that its name possesses enough incentive to buy their products at vastly higher prices, but the fact that they have been losing money for so long may be an indication towards the end, if theyre ego cannot be modified to fit what is happening.

[download llama]

Sony's OLED tv is an amazing piece of technology, but unfortunatly it isnt worth the price tag that it has been stuck with, especially since Samsung's release of its 42" LED tv. Samsung's tv boasts triple the contrast ratio of Sony's (3 million to 1 million) and is less expensive than Sony's. If Sony's tv division has indeed lost money for the sixth straight year, it may be time for a total revamp of the company. Sony seems to believe that its name possesses enough incentive to buy their products at vastly higher prices, but the fact that they have been losing money for so long may be an indication towards the end, if theyre ego cannot be modified to fit what is happening.

[sythara]

Give it time. When LCDs first rolled out they were expensive and hard to make. Same goes for plasma... Remember the first generation plasmas and their 5,000 hour life span? <br /> <br />Give it time. <br /> <br />What Sony should do it go into the PC monitor market with OLEDs. Yes it won't be practical for mass consumption, but it will give a good revenue boost while testing all the necessary technology for larger TVs.,

[zeth006]

Here's the problem:<br /><br />1. Sony needs to reach financial solvency. <br /><br />2. Related to #1 tangentially, it has the patents for OLED technology, but no factories and insufficient cash reserves for investing in factories. Samsung, Sharp, and perhaps Vizio as well have access to in-house manufacturing facilities and 3rd party vendors it can get the components from. If Sony had been able to obtain the parts to manufacture LED backlit monitors, it would've done so already. Problem is, Samsung is one of few companies that knows how to make white LEDs, but refuses to hand them over to Sony. It only offers the glass substrates, which aren't difficult to make.

[heading-west]

Interesting how little thought is given to power usage in these comments. The cost of power is going to quickly rise over the next ten years, making the total cost of electricity to run a large screen more expensive than the actual TV over it's life span.<br /><br />I just bought an LCD but when I went to the LG site I couldn't find the power usage of either the LCD or plasma listed. Interesting that I can find it for every other appliance in the house.

[littleM]

For those who are looking for an expensive ultra-thin laptop, like the Macbook Air, OLED makes a lot of sense. The same goes for iPhones, which are hard to read in sunlight. Another market is in the automobile, where harsh lighting is common. If you are paying $4,000 for a DVD navigation system, then you expect something like an OLED display.

[Kegtapper]

My suggestion is in the interim while others are perfecting OLED and other devices, why not marry the both. On laptop displays the most common fault (other than screen breakage) is the backlight failure. <br /><br />Either due to age (going dim) or the CFT tube is broken. This backlight could be replaced with white LED's and sustain lower power consumption that currently used. But while trying to advance in leaps, why not in steps using existing technology?

[trueace16]

sony first may want to drop the price of their tvs. at sears the teh 46 xbr 9 is 2199 while the 7000 series led samsung is 1699. which one u think customers are going to jump on. i know technically the 8000 series is the model to compare but even then the sony v5100 is more expensive at 1899 so it doesnt even matter.

[xophaser]

Sony in general needs to lower its prices to compete. I wanted a Sony Bravia, but got a equal to better Samsung in the same price range. OLED is amazingly thin, but the price is not worth the consideration.