BEOVISION ECLIPSE

On that i agree completely...the conclusions some have reached could well have been reached any months ago.

And the debate about price a month or so ago (would it be surprisingly / modestly priced?) was misguided i think, as i said at the time. They were never going to sell this at 6 to 6.5k.

Design is always subjective, so on that i can see the merits of waiting to see what it was like, but the rest as you say was largely set in stone.

Seeing is believing i guess.

Millemissen:

Go find and buy something, that you find better picturewise and save the money for a rainy day.

The simple fact that this can now be said worries me.

As recently as two years ago, you'd never have been able to make that statement.  The B&O processing and image quality has always been incredible, but now there are credible alternatives for a lot less money there's real potential for a huge swathe of 'brand loyalists' to defect.

Yes, there will always be the 'ultra-fan' - but these people are becoming rarer and rarer.

Lee

Millemissen:

It is funny how this can come as a surprice.

The partnership with LG was announced long ago and it was known that LG would provide the screen/tv part.

If people don't need or appreciate the 'sound work' of B&O, the integration with other B&O products/NL, the one remote etc, there is really no need to buy the Eclipse.

Go find and buy something, that you find better picturewise and save the money for a rainy day.

MM

A lot people are doing just  that rather parting  with£2-3 k every two years rather buying hi-end.who is right who is wrong is opinions!!!.I looked at pictures the eclipse not seen it in the flesh yet lol  ,the designs  defiantly B&O but asi see it a big modified bc 6-26!!!

The lg combo isn't the surprise for me, the lack of b&o'ness is. I was properly excited to see how b&o would intergrate it, and this is where they sort of left it sort of short imo. Don't get me wrong, i still like it very much and i agree te remote and sound/speaker integration is still top notch. Personally i don't use multiroom and i don't stream much as such. To me atleast its a bit much lg for the price, that is what makes me wonder about "others". The 65" tv/alu fret/ motor stand combo here is €14.250. If that was in the €11k range(€12k max) i'd be less hesitant to buy it. That would still be a very premium price, but much more palatable and i'd be almost certain to buy it. So it may seem like iam negative, but iam not trying to be, as i do like it on many fronts.

Millemissen:

It is funny how this can come as a surprice.

The partnership with LG was announced long ago and it was known that LG would provide the screen/tv part.

There is nothing new in B&O procuring the panels. They have always bought the Plasma / LED panels from others but added their own capabilities to the panel in terms of AV processing and designing the product as a whole, not in parts.

In the case of Eclipse, that process has been broken.

What is funny is that blind devotion to a brand by some without including any other critiques. Isn't that the point of a forum so that readers can read various perspectives and make their own decisions. If this forum is to become just a praise list for pre determined aspects of B&O products, then the B&O brochure will be enough to post and no need for discussion.

For me it's the end of the link to other B&O products. If I get a Loewe Tv, I'll now get Loewe speakers to go with it.

Millemissen:

The partnership with LG was announced long ago and it was known that LG would provide the screen/tv part.

This was indeed announced long ago, but personally I expected a slightly different outcome.

LG's panel was a given. I strongly feel B&O should have taken a more customized approach like Sony, Panasonic or Loewe

I think there's a lot of talk about Loewe mostly because of Eclipse's value proposition. I still question if its price is justified, given the sum of its parts. Also, I feel too much of B&O has been stripped away from the Vision part of this BeoVision.

I never thought that B&O (!!) would just drop an LG C7 "as is" on their soundbar & stand. I was hoping the collaboration would have included B&O's picture processing competences. I also thought the user experience would be customized to be more B&O-like.

High hopes

I agree with what KMA has said that's exactly what i thought!

Chris Townsend:

For me it's the end of the link to other B&O products. If I get a Loewe Tv, I'll now get Loewe speakers to go with it.

 

Its your choice...
But to be honest the Loewe speakers are not to compare with the B&O loudspeakers.

 

KMA:

LG's panel was a given. I strongly feel B&O should have taken a more customized approach like Sony, Panasonic or Loewe

 

B&O was loosing money on the tv-business. Despite the high prices they lacked the sales volume to make highly customized products profitable. Its easier with audio products.

The deal with LG was made out of necessity. If they where to take on a more customized approach, history would just repeat itself, and B&O would continue to loose money on TV's.

And lets face it. The customized B&O TV's usually lacked the newest technology, because they took too long time to develop and build. Here they get access to a new up-to-date tv-part each year, and can stay focused on making the rest work together with their world.

BTW: Many of the other manufactures of consumer electronics also loose money on their tv-businesses, but they often have a much wider product range to compensate.

  /Lars

A little customisation would've made a big difference imo. Give it curtains (and or the lg pointer thing optionally). WebOs can even be the same, just a different colour font that would make a big difference. Possibly more black to make the text/apps pop of the screen even more.

Lars Ladingkaer:

B&O was loosing money on the tv-business. Despite the high prices they lacked the sales volume to make highly customized products profitable. Its easier with audio products.

Totally agree on the situation assessment but I do question the strategy that's B&O had adopted to manage the loss making TV business . In my opinion , BV TV is and will remain a great way to bring in new customers and then tie them in with the ecosystem . This could have been achieved by revisiting the pricing on the TVs to make them a better value proposition versus trying to squeeze as much as they could do and in my eyes , Value proposition on the Eclipse is very questionable. I wonder how many new customers will be brought to the brand but how many will be lost . In Business , retaining a customer is far more profitable than gaining a new customer . 

svinaik:

What is funny is that blind devotion to a brand by some without including any other critiques. Isn't that the point of a forum so that readers can read various perspectives and make their own decisions. If this forum is to become just a praise list for pre determined aspects of B&O products, then the B&O brochure will be enough to post and no need for discussion.

Why or how has it come so far, that someone, who is trying to see and understand the reasons for how B&O does tv nowadays, must be blamed for this?

(See the post from Lars Ladingkjær for his view here).

Why must someone, who tries to see a B&O tv as the sum of all features, be brandmarked as someone with 'blind devotion'?

The use of the LG tv was no surprice to me, but the excellent audio part surely was!!!

A (modified/upgrated) BSys4 with WiSA tech built-in, a 'built-in BS Core for NL-integration and the powerfull, intelligent 3.0 speaker system has it's price - it actually cost more than the LG screen/tv.

This is a fact that is mostly let out, when comparing prices with other OLED-based tvs.

It is ok, if you don't need that and the other B&O features - plenty of pretty looking 'picture-tvs' out there.

But after all this a B&O forum - why don't we discuss the B&O features of this tv, instead of discussing the 'not-B&O features'?

I realize that a lot of people have had high hopes for something different, expectations for this and that.

For my part - I am just trying to be realistic...

....without this cooperation with LG and concentrating on the core B&O competences there would not have been a new tv from B&O.

Take it or leave it.

MM

Millemissen

The nail on his head
And indeed Take it or leave it, it is as it is or you agree or not.

 

Millemissen:

svinaik:

What is funny is that blind devotion to a brand by some without including any other critiques. Isn't that the point of a forum so that readers can read various perspectives and make their own decisions. If this forum is to become just a praise list for pre determined aspects of B&O products, then the B&O brochure will be enough to post and no need for discussion.

Why or how has it come so far, that someone, who is trying to see and understand the reasons for how B&O does tv nowadays, must be blamed for this?

(See the post from Lars Ladingkjær for his view here).

Why must someone, who tries to see a B&O tv as the sum of all features, be brandmarked as someone with 'blind devotion'?

The use of the LG tv was no surprice to me, but the excellent audio part surely was!!!

A (modified/upgrated) BSys4 with WiSA tech built-in, a 'built-in BS Core for NL-integration and the powerfull, intelligent 3.0 speaker system has it's price - it actually cost more than the LG screen/tv.

This is a fact that is mostly let out, when comparing prices with other OLED-based tvs.

It is ok, if you don't need that and the other B&O features - plenty of pretty looking 'picture-tvs' out there.

But after all this a B&O forum - why don't we discuss the B&O features of this tv, instead of discussing the 'not-B&O features'?

I realize that a lot of people have had high hopes for something different, expectations for this and that.

For my part - I am just trying to be realistic...

....without this cooperation with LG and concentrating on the core B&O competences there would not have been a new tv from B&O.

Take it or leave it.

MM

Yeahhhh

svinaik:

Millemissen:

It is funny how this can come as a surprice.

The partnership with LG was announced long ago and it was known that LG would provide the screen/tv part.

There is nothing new in B&O procuring the panels. They have always bought the Plasma / LED panels from others but added their own capabilities to the panel in terms of AV processing and designing the product as a whole, not in parts.

In the case of Eclipse, that process has been broken.

What is funny is that blind devotion to a brand by some without including any other critiques. Isn't that the point of a forum so that readers can read various perspectives and make their own decisions. If this forum is to become just a praise list for pre determined aspects of B&O products, then the B&O brochure will be enough to post and no need for discussion.

Some people are fanboys, seen it here, and also very much on Apple forums where it's even worse, as they tend to regard Steve Jobs as if he were some kind of saint or demi-god sent down from on high. Fortunately, though we have a few who seem to think that you can polish a turd and aluminum plate it and make stamp B&O on it, we have a fair number who view the products with a more jaundiced, and dare I say accurate, eye.

I've watched and been involved with B&O, with varying degrees of immersion in them, for about 40 years. I've seen them have plenty of near death experiences and manage to bounce back, but I'm less confidant now that they can. I had thought the biggest disappointment I'd seen was when they added a Sony car CD changer as an option to get a CD changing capability into the lineup, but then they surprised me by eventually coming out with the BS9000. But that doesn't begin to compare to the, what I view, as a cop out that is the Eclipse. Maybe seeing one in person would make me change my mind, but, oh, never mind, there are only about a dozen dealers in my country, nearest one is about as far as a vacation in Europe would be. I fully understand why the Eclipse is what it is, but the reasons say nothing good to me about the future prospects of the company. As for TVs, B&O lately has a life expectancy for any one TV that's even shorter than whatever new Afghan war strategy that gets pushed out. How long did the V1 last? Now they're saying the BV14 is not long for this world?

Oh well..

9 LEE:

I can't recall any previous launches where the focus has been so much on the competition.  The 'competition' was never really an issue previously, which further reinforces my comments that buyers are now starting to question value for money rather than just blindly buying..

I am not sure, that you are right on that one.

The 'value for the money' question has always been asked with B&O-tvs.

MM

Millemissen:

I am not sure, that you are right on that one.

The 'value for the money' question has always been asked with B&O-tvs.

Well I cannot speak for everyone but personally, I have never questioned the value proposition on the any of the previous B&O TVs. If I liked something, I would simply accept the price and seek whatever accommodation on the price my dealer could get. This does not mean that I have bought every single one of them but I always liked what I saw. BV9 and FLD (BV7 & Avant 85 are) my most favorite ones and I was about to pull trigger on the Avant 85 2 years back but stopped because of emerging information on the HDR (which is a much more critical development than just 1080P to 4K jump).

Questioning the B&O Value Proposition is a new territory for me and It does not make me any less of B&O fan. On the other fronts, I am thrilled that only B&O could come up with BL 50 (Which I will soon hook to my BV9) but I am also a person with eyes wide open.....

Lars Ladingkaer:

B&O was loosing money on the tv-business. Despite the high prices they lacked the sales volume to make highly customized products profitable. Its easier with audio products.

I think this started to happen when there was a shift from CRTs to LCDs, and even more so when the "SmartTV" revolution happened. Both started to evolve at a rate not seen in Avant CRT's hayday: better panels and new features were coming out every year.

B&O had a hard time keeping up, and indeed sales volume is at question here. In my opinion, the pricing of post-Avant (CRT) BeoVisions got out of hand, relative to competitors. That, in part, resulted in smaller sales volume, which can often lead to a downward financial spiral no matter how high you price your products for better margins.

In my opinion, B&O should have continued with their Video Engine & all the special VisionClear elements they had developed by the time BeoVision 11 came out.

The daily basics of a BV could have remained in the holistic B&O style, where less is more. I always enjoyed it. B&O could have left the smart part up to personal preference: they offer PUC control for this. I'm not going to ditch Apple TV because of WebOS. Many people will not give up nVidia or Roku or whatnot. Is WebOS necessary? For a good B&O user experience, certainly not.

Would B&O have been bleeding as much money with this approach, if they had focused just on the picture quality?

I cannot help thinking that a part of the reason they were bleeding money on BVs was because of mis-steps with software, trying to foray into the SmartTV territory. I suspect they were not bleeding because of what they had already developed, but because of moving away from it (to Android). It seems like a bad business decision, and we all know where it led.

Lars Ladingkaer:

The deal with LG was made out of necessity. If they where to take on a more customized approach, history would just repeat itself, and B&O would continue to loose money on TV's.

This further begs the question of pricing: if BeoVisions were priced more competitively, would they have sold more? I suspect the volume could have brought in more profit than the little they sell with their current BV pricing.

If Loewe can do it, why cannot B&O? After all, they have a lot more good-margin products to sell WITH BeoVisions than Loewe does with their TVs.

Something does not add up.

AngloApulian:

svinaik:

 

B&O has announced that BV 14 (40 and 55 inch) are also being discontinued while the Avant 55 & 75 were already finished, Now it is only Avant 85 but I do feel that this one will go too as B&O completely transitions out of LED TVs.

 

 

 

I wonder what the replacement for the BV14 will be and when it will be announced?

isn't it called the Eclipse?

KMA:

Something does not add up.

You aren't listening properly, you don't understand.....................apparently!

KMA:

This further begs the question of pricing: if BeoVisions were priced more competitively, would they have sold more? I suspect the volume could have brought in more profit than the little they sell with their current BV pricing.

 

But when you loose money with each TV you sell, selling more at a lower price just mean you loose more money, not that you gain more.

  /Lars

Lars Ladingkaer:

KMA:

This further begs the question of pricing: if BeoVisions were priced more competitively, would they have sold more? I suspect the volume could have brought in more profit than the little they sell with their current BV pricing.

 

But when you loose money with each TV you sell, selling more at a lower price just mean you loose more money, not that you gain more.

  /Lars

.................unless you sell more speakers to go with the TVs!

Puncher:

You aren't listening properly, you don't understand.....................apparently!

Ban boring signatures!

Apparently

I just cannot fathom that B&O ended up selling LG TVs. Seems like a lazy effort. But that's just my thinking.

Lars Ladingkaer:

But when you loose money with each TV you sell, selling more at a lower price just mean you loose more money, not that you gain more.

Lars, there are fixed costs in the business and there are variable costs. When you sell more volume, you spread the fixed cost over larger number so you net cost  per TV will come down. I do not think the B&O looses money purely based upon the material / panel costs. It is the fixed overheads which have to be absorbed by the volume. If more volume, less cost per TV and if less volume, more cost per TV.

What's the saying, if you can't do what's right, you only do what's left....

This is what they are left doing. Is it a bad package? No, it's pretty damn good, if requiring a little adjustment from those with previous BV's

Does it make the value proposition a little harder to justify? Yes most likely.

I don't need a new TV, so not an issue for me yet. But I'd really do anything to avoid going back to separate non integrated systems

Lars Ladingkaer:

But when you loose money with each TV you sell, selling more at a lower price just mean you loose more money, not that you gain more.

/Lars

Editor in Chief, recordere.dk Danish online magazine for consumer electronics

That's what I'm trying to understand: WHY were B&O losing money? This certainly cannot have always been the case with BeoVisions.

We'll see how the strategy they've now chosen after their own Video Engine & competence, and after adventures in the Androidland, will pan out.

I'm looking forward with interest the future fruits of the B&O / LG partnership.

Maybe they'll at least add the Magic to BeoRemote

svinaik:

Totally agree on the situation assessment but I do question the strategy that's B&O had adopted to manage the loss making TV business . In my opinion , BV TV is and will remain a great way to bring in new customers and then tie them in with the ecosystem . This could have been achieved by revisiting the pricing on the TVs to make them a better value proposition versus trying to squeeze as much as they could do and in my eyes , Value proposition on the Eclipse is very questionable. I wonder how many new customers will be brought to the brand but how many will be lost . In Business , retaining a customer is far more profitable than gaining a new customer .

Exactly

svinaik:

Lars, there are fixed costs in the business and there are variable costs. When you sell more volume, you spread the fixed cost over larger number so you net cost  per TV will come down. I do not think the B&O looses money purely based upon the material / panel costs. It is the fixed overheads which have to be absorbed by the volume. If more volume, less cost per TV and if less volume, more cost per TV.

 

Ok, here's some figures for your business case:

In 2015 B&O made around 40.000 TV-sets

The LG deal saves the company approx. 27 billion euro a year.

 

  /Lars

Millemissen:

The 'value for the money' question has always been asked with B&O-tvs.

(Edit)

Perhaps more vigorously now, because the TV part of the B&O-tv is no longer B&O.

I'm going overboard with this example just to make a point:

What if I buy a BeoLab 7.6, mount a Sony A1 on top of it, and slap a B&O logo in the front, is it a BeoVision?

No, it's a Sony TV with a B&O speaker.

+

=

And hey – they would look pretty good together, even in a bad Photoshop! Plus the picture would be better.

I may have just come up with "BeoLabVision"

The scary (?) part is that the above "DIYvision" could be easily done: buy a 2nd hand BL7.6 with a table stand and 55" Sony A1. Place the A1 (that has a kick-stand) on the speaker and "Hey presto": OLED TV with B&O sound.

svinaik:

Lars, there are fixed costs in the business and there are variable costs. When you sell more volume, you spread the fixed cost over larger number so you net cost  per TV will come down. I do not think the B&O looses money purely based upon the material / panel costs. It is the fixed overheads which have to be absorbed by the volume. If more volume, less cost per TV and if less volume, more cost per TV.

I sure hope someone from B&O will read this so they can go back and re-do their pricing and product planning (joke/sarcasm - sorry).  

B&O have been in the TV and electronics manufacturing business for a long time so I'm sure they fully understand fixed vs. variable costs and where their price points need to be so everybody makes money.  Yet, they were losing money so something had to change.  When they had their internal picture team, everybody complained about lack of "specs", and B&O said "specs don't matter.  Look at the beautiful picture!", and the reviewers said "great picture, but doesn't have the specs which every other TV at this price point must have (even though there is little to no content available that exploits these specs, but there might be some day) so thumbs down!"  Now they produce a fully up to date screen that supports all the latest "specs", and everybody complains about the "lack of B&O".  I guess we all want it both ways, but apparently this is impossible because I think B&O was trying to do this before partnering with LG.  

I'm going to put on my "TripEnglish" hat and say "All this complaining is because you poor, unwashed folks cannot afford it!"

I kind of like it, but can't afford it so I guess it doesn't really matter what I think.

That is all.

 

I think that, for one of the, size for size, most expensive TV's on the planet it is not unreasonable to expect both full "B&Oness" and the best picture! (as it used to be).

Millemissen:

Why or how has it come so far, that someone, who is trying to see and understand the reasons for how B&O does tv nowadays, must be blamed for this?

(See the post from Lars Ladingkjær for his view here).

Why must someone, who tries to see a B&O tv as the sum of all features, be brandmarked as someone with 'blind devotion'?

The use of the LG tv was no surprice to me, but the excellent audio part surely was!!!

A (modified/upgrated) BSys4 with WiSA tech built-in, a 'built-in BS Core for NL-integration and the powerfull, intelligent 3.0 speaker system has it's price - it actually cost more than the LG screen/tv.

This is a fact that is mostly let out, when comparing prices with other OLED-based tvs.

It is ok, if you don't need that and the other B&O features - plenty of pretty looking 'picture-tvs' out there.

But after all this a B&O forum - why don't we discuss the B&O features of this tv, instead of discussing the 'not-B&O features'?

I realize that a lot of people have had high hopes for something different, expectations for this and that.

For my part - I am just trying to be realistic...

....without this cooperation with LG and concentrating on the core B&O competences there would not have been a new tv from B&O.

Take it or leave it.

MM

There is a tv - and there is a BV.

Well put MM

Hiort:

Well put MM

Very well put!

Agree!

It is not an "upgraded Bsys4", that included video processing - it is a B&O soundbar with WISA etc. and stand (however nice they may be).

 

There is a tv - and there is an LG.

svinaik:

There is nothing new in B&O procuring the panels. They have always bought the Plasma / LED panels from others but added their own capabilities to the panel in terms of AV processing and designing the product as a whole, not in parts.

In the case of Eclipse, that process has been broken.

You took it out of my mouth, thank you !

Puncher:

It is not an "upgraded Bsys4", that included video processing - it is a B&O soundbar with WISA etc. and stand (however nice they may be).

There is a tv - and there is an LG.

For the record, I wrote: 'A (modified/upgrated) BSys4 with WiSA tech built-in, a 'built-in BS Core for NL-integration and the powerfull, intelligent 3.0 speaker system .

You may call it what you like, that does not change the functionality and the worth.

There is a tv - and there is still a BV

MM

Millemissen:

Puncher:

It is not an "upgraded Bsys4", that included video processing - it is a B&O soundbar with WISA etc. and stand (however nice they may be).

There is a tv - and there is an LG.

For the record, I wrote: 'A (modified/upgrated) BSys4 with WiSA tech built-in, a 'built-in BS Core for NL-integration and the powerfull, intelligent 3.0 speaker system .

You may call it what you like, that does not change the functionality and the worth.

There is a tv - and there is still a BV

MM

....and I wrote, (paraphrasing), "it is not a BSys"!

See where the Eclipse thread is going after a few days !

We should discuss about how extraordinary this new tv is and voilà the result.

The cause for me ? 11.400 € 55".

At 9.000 € ("only" nearly 100 % more than the Loewe) it would have been in the corner of my room (after MX, Avant, 10 and 11).

How can you outsource every single part from Struer, forget about vision clear, contrast screen... and keep the sky high prices ?

Just read that to have Netflix built-in you need the remote button and sell 1 million sets a year.

If Netflix doesn't work any more on 2018 Eclipse it won't be a surprise...