Toshiba TV29C90 problem; Image fades to black...

"Tom MacIntyre" <tom__macintyre@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:f7jgu0ti1c6pe27hf9o0966i7mk7i6pogh@4ax.com...

| Not even "if available"? I would think that two normal power units on
| the same 15 amp breaker would pop it rather frequently.

Most kitchens are wired with split 220 so just choose the upper for one and
the lower for the other.

N
 
Watch MythBusters. The guys took out 5 magnetrons from (duh) 5 microwaves,
aligned them all to "air at the same target in a makeshift microwave. As
they measured the microwave radiation from different points, what they
recorded was in fact startling to them. The microwaves cancelled each other
out. The likelihood of the magnetrons starting at the exact same point of
the sine wave is very slim. The misalignment of the waves as they converge
causes a disturbance to the individual waves in turn reducing the overall
"effectiveness" of the microwave radiation.
Click to expand...
Wow... I suggest that you find someone who (A) you trust, and (B) who
can reasonably be expected to know something about the subject, and have
them explain to you the many things wrong with that.

--Goedjn
 
Given the fact that the set "sometimes" has a full picture, I believe
you need neither an IC or capacitors, although replacement of the
electrolytic capacitors around the vertical output would be good preventive
maintenance.

Sounds to me like the solder connections have cracked around the pins of
the vertical output IC (very common) and / or other components in that area.
As you so adequately put "toying with it" - you probably momentarily flexed
the circuit board or induced some physical impact that allowed the
connections to "make" and allow the set to develope a full picture for a
moment or so. If you're comfortable with a soldering iron, disconnect AC
power to it and have a good look at the pins of the IC with a magnifier, and
resolder as needed.
 
I am neither defending, or slandering Hitachi here, but I can tell you
this: If MAN made it, it will break. Whenever returning a repaired set to
a customer, I am often asked the age old question, "Is it going to break
again?" Most everyone acts shocked at my quick, honest answer - "Yes, of
course." Sometime in the future, maybe near, maybe a long, long time from
now, that TV, etc., etc. WILL break again. Only Heaven and Earth last
forever. I believe your Hitachi may need convergence output ICs - probably
a small price to pay for 53 inches of viewing pleasure regardless of brand
name. I wish I had even just one dollar apiece from everytime I heard a
phrase like "I will never buy RCA again", or "I will never buy Zenith
again", or, or, - you get the idea... Funny thing is, there's not one brand
(except maybe some obscure name) that I HAVEN'T heard in one of those
statements...

"smann" <smann007@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1105560293.521428.155420@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
I have the same model 53UWX10B HITACHI projection HDTV. Just yesterday
it started to have the exact same problem. The convergence is way off
and magic focus will not fix it. The TV is 3 years old and I called
Hitachi today and they were not very helpful. When I told the guy that
I was surprised that this set went bad so soon, he said, "well the TV
is several years old". So don't expect Hitachi TVs to last more than
3 years. I have a CRT Emerson that has lasted me ten years, so far.
HITACHI SUCKS, I will never by another Hitachi product again.
Click to expand...
 
On 9 Jan 2005 09:13:31 -0800, sidneybek@yahoo.com (Sidney) wrote:

Many public libraries have a limited variety and quantity of consumer
electronics schematics and service manuals so I suggest those techs or
repair shops that are no longer in need of their service literature
that instead of throwing them in the garbage and pollute the
environment take them to your local public library so that in the
future you have a place to go and access them if need be.

So if anyone is a member of repair discussion sites that are pay sites
(not free) if they could post this message there as well as:
Click to expand...
First make sure they will actually keep them any longer than you
would, as my local library has a very bad reputation with me for
discarding books which do not have a high useage. They have to be
"realistic" or they have tons of space taken up. The state library
had a sale of books and I got a bonanza (from my point of view).


Peter Dettmann
 
Good to hear from someone with VERY similar experiences,. I started in SxS,
and of course the new guys always start on the cable crew. Tough job, so I
soon learned how to get involved in 're-grade' of SxS. This got me out of
the cabling, and into a softer job. I never got into X-Bar, so had no
experience with 'troughs'. etc. A lot of PBX jobs, then hired on with the
telco in about 1960, went to COE Engineering in 1966, and retired from toll
equipment engineering in 1984. My calloused hands are now back to normal. I
still have a half-roll of #6 cord which I've saved and I hate to use because
then I'll be out of it <G>.

I'm now completely out of contact with those I worked with, so it is good to
know that I'm not the only one still alive.

Thanks for the walk down Memory Lane.

Ron


"Ross Herbert" <rherber1@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:0254u0tv3jujbhjtjng8u16k4mqu89jr71@4ax.com...
On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 07:34:13 -0800, "Ron" <no one @home.com> wrote:

BOY! These 'How-To' websites certainly bring back memories. These are
the
methods, procedures, & materials we used when I hired on with Western
Electric in the early 50s. In those days we used tons of #6 & #12 cord
for
securing gazillions of feet of telephone cables inside the telephone
company
switching central offices. We also got lots of blisters & calluses
while
making the cabling look neat & secure. Cable mining? YUK!


Ron, with SxS every cable run was intricately planned and the
individual cables in a block had to occupy a pre-determined location
in the block so that the cables would fall out at both ends without
any cross-overs. It was a laborious task and perhaps you recall making
up the block layout sketches and walking the cable route with the
sketch in front of you and turning it in accordance with the twists
and turns, just so that you could verify that you had every cable in
the right location? Planning a cable block layout was a skill in those
days. Cable recovery in step exchanges occurred rarely unless a major
change was required and runway space was insufficient for the new run.
When total overhead cable mesh and free run cabling came in during the
60's with crossbar installations the only cable lacing was at the
equipment rack ends where the wires were formed into looms for
distribution to the respective relayset terminating jacks. With many
more cables required for crossbar the old block lacing methods were no
longer suitable and the view of the overhead cabling in a crossbar
exchange looked like spaghetti junction with cables about 2 feet deep
at certain places. Nobody bothered about recovring the dead cables
because it was almost impossible to do so. Only when these exchanges
were pulled out in the 90's was any cable mining done.
Click to expand...
 
"NSM" <nowrite@to.me> wrote in message
news:bcWFd.94086$dv1.64651@edtnps89...
"N Cook" <diverse2@tcp.co.antyspahm.uk> wrote in message
news:c5udnXrGAvR9kXXcRVn-gA@tcp.co.uk...
| I took pity on this m/c dumped and had been rained on, half a pint of
water
...

| contact. Point tool or rounded cutter or pointed then round ?
| At the moment thinking of grinding back the brushes with a stone about
1.2
| inches diameter and then using
| commutator bedding stone. Anyone know any better or the pitfalls ?
Relieving
| the edges of the commutator

Don't use abrasives anywhere near this.

See any good book on motor repair re turning and undercutting.

N
Click to expand...
I will dig out such a book from the loft.
Inductance measurements on the commutator
are 180mH per diameter and
2.9,1.6,.4,.4,1.6,2.9 mH for 3 contacts either side
of any given contact so no cold shorts anyway.
I don't see what physical mechanism could cause one land to be
7 thou (mil) proud of the others. Also while still in use, why the brushes
weren't ground down to nothing with that sort of irregularity.
Has localised heating caused the copper of that land to somehow permanently
expand by carbon incorporating into the copper ?
 
Also, this is a very common problem with most RPTV designs that use the STK
Convergence Output Devices. The actual devices operate at a high thermal
level and tend to break down internally. Great Design SANKEN produces and
manufacturers purchase for implementation in their sets. Also, many times
some of the low value resistors are damaged in the convergence output
circuit. If you are a service technician then you already know how to
diagnose and repair the set. However, if instead you are just a ranting
consumer then call the local Hitachi Authorized Servicer, pay the $
150 -$300 USD to have the set fixed, or go buy another set that you will
have fail again in another period of normal use.
"Phil Bowser" <pbowser@pa.net> wrote in message
news:qW0Gd.153$4K3.37010@monger.newsread.com...
I am neither defending, or slandering Hitachi here, but I can tell you
this: If MAN made it, it will break. Whenever returning a repaired set
to
a customer, I am often asked the age old question, "Is it going to break
again?" Most everyone acts shocked at my quick, honest answer - "Yes, of
course." Sometime in the future, maybe near, maybe a long, long time from
now, that TV, etc., etc. WILL break again. Only Heaven and Earth last
forever. I believe your Hitachi may need convergence output ICs -
probably
a small price to pay for 53 inches of viewing pleasure regardless of brand
name. I wish I had even just one dollar apiece from everytime I heard a
phrase like "I will never buy RCA again", or "I will never buy Zenith
again", or, or, - you get the idea... Funny thing is, there's not one
brand
(except maybe some obscure name) that I HAVEN'T heard in one of those
statements...

"smann" <smann007@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1105560293.521428.155420@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
I have the same model 53UWX10B HITACHI projection HDTV. Just yesterday
it started to have the exact same problem. The convergence is way off
and magic focus will not fix it. The TV is 3 years old and I called
Hitachi today and they were not very helpful. When I told the guy that
I was surprised that this set went bad so soon, he said, "well the TV
is several years old". So don't expect Hitachi TVs to last more than
3 years. I have a CRT Emerson that has lasted me ten years, so far.
HITACHI SUCKS, I will never by another Hitachi product again.
Click to expand...
 
On 15 Jan 2005 01:41:37 -0800, the renowned andreas.manoli@gmail.com
wrote:

Hi,
I live in Europe where the electricity is 240V and 50HZ

I just bought a (WAHL) hair trimmer from the USA. The battery charger
for the hair trimmer is made for USA (input 120VAC, 60HZ, 5W) and has
output 2.0V DC and 1100mA.

Obviously I cannot use this charger here. I think that there are two
ways to charge my trimmer:

a) Buy a variable transformer and replace it (Local shops sell
variable transformers with output 1.5 or 3V and 1000mA ). I called a
shop and they said that with less mA it will just take longer to charge
and it does not matter if the voltage is 1.5 or 3 .He said that the
trimmer's original transformer output shouldn't be exactly 2V anyway.

b) Buy a transformer for the transformer! (transform 240V AC to 120V
AC) . The issue here is bulk, overheating and different frequencies.


The questions are:
1) Is it possible I damage the trimmer's battery or circuitry or motor
by feeding it with 1.5 or 3V instead of 2V?
2) Would I damage anything by feeding with 1000mA instead of 1100mA?
3) Would I damage anything by feeding with 50HZ instead of 60Hz?
4) For option b, the one transformer will sit on top of the other. Are
there any overheating issues here? If I am to use option b, should the
2 transformers be separated by cable so they do not touch each other?
5) Which option would you recommend, a or b ?

Thanx
Click to expand...
I have a 500W box that does b)-- it was not expensive. It also
converts the plugs. I'm going the other way, but it's the same thing.
It's an autotransformer. Not approved, but it's in a metal box and
seems unlikely to burst into flames.

A lot of chargers/adapters are universal these days (100-240VAC
input)-- especially for high-end or high power consumption equipment
such as digital cameras. But not all.


Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com
 
Clive Long,UK Wrote:
Hi,

I have a 10-year old Hitachi CPT2478 TV. This gives a sharp but
warm image and has an unobtrusive cabinet that means it still matches
current "tastes". Now, I have bought a new (but inexpensive) VCR that
has a cluster of output and input options including

RF (aerial)
"Phono"
Scart

The Hitachi only has two inputs, RF and a "7 PIN DIN" (one of
those circular plugs with a "ring of pins" much used by Philips in the
70's and 80's). Does anyone know what the specification or description
of the plug is? Is this 7-pin a video and audio input (I can't see
what else it would be !!)? Can I buy a standard cable that will take
the Scart / "phono" from the video and input it into this socket?

What I am trying to achieve is an improvement on the (not bad)
quality of the signal / image from the VCR over that achieved through
the TV RF input. The RF TV input would remain in place for "non-video
output" signal, in other words "standard TV".

To restate, the aim is to get a cable from the VCR scart / phono
into the TV 7-pin DIN.


Thanks

Clive
Click to expand...
Try this site for pin connections
http://freespace.virgin.net/matt.waite/resource/av/din7a.htm


--
stevec2005
 
Hey Bradley,

You should see better reception on G5 now, since Monday Jan 10, 2005,
Galaxy 12 was put in service to replace the old Galaxy 5 sat, which was
in service for around 15 years or so. It's much better here now....
 
In sci.electronics.repair Bee <in.my.bonnet@shangri-la.com> wrote:
You have just illuminated my point! Philips had a poorly design chassis
some time ago. JVC is promoting itself but using a model from a little
Click to expand...
Exactly 1, yes, and then the trouble with the power switches. This goes
only to show that even large manufacturers (who are forced to cut cost!)
make this mistake. No-name brands, however, do it all the time. About
the power switches: after Philips discovered this problem, they used
another brand. About the Onwa capacitors: if they ever discovered this
problem, it took them 5 to 10 years. By that time the industry standard
for power supply design was alltogether different, so they never
redesigned the thing or selected better quality electrolytics. Instead,
the just abandoned the design in favour of another standard application
note.

known manufacturer. Big names do not guarantee quality or differ little
from the small guys. Consumers are doped and are willing to pay over the
odds for the big names.
Click to expand...
That's not what I said. Although large manufacturers are under great
pressure by people who want something but don't want to pay for it, they
still can throw more money and experience at the design, choice of
components and manufacturing.

Good point. You mentioned the leakage of electrolytic condensers due to poor
design. Now we are back to the quality of circuit design. I hope you agree
Click to expand...
And the quality of components (given the poor design, a good capacitor
would have lasted much longer). Two other examples: The Vestel 11AK16
chassis blowing Philips TDA8351 IC's rather often, while the same IC
lasts much longer in a Philips TV. This is mostly attributed to lack of
experience in design. Luckily they did abandon this design after a short
while. In favour of the design used in the next example ;-)

Next example: The Vestel 11AK19 chassis blowing the Philips E/W output
stage. This is contributed to a poorly made E/W correction coil, of
which the turns can short after some usage. No design problem here, only
cutting costs.

Note that the semiconductors used were exactly the same, illustrating
the point that while the exact same key components are used, this does
_not_ mean automatically that the same overall quality is achieved.

with me, as reverend_roger has, that good circuit design has no exclusivity.
The example you cited is simply sheer incompetence, sadly it can inflicts
Click to expand...
While the Onwa design was consistently incompetent, the components used
could have lasted a few years longer if they had been of better quality.

big names as well as small, expensive models as well as cheapos. So, it
follows, and I hope you also agree with me, that these days given a good
design, an inexpensive TV is just as reliable and long lasting as an
expensive model .
Click to expand...
Nope. You are jumping to conclusions, missing my point. Because of
cheep-ass people, larger brands have indeed lost quality, but are mostly
still better than no-name stuff. A good illustration is the JVC example.
First, they decided there is no profit in making 14" sets anymore, so
they use Onwa chassis. Any repairman can tell you they do indeed have a
higher faillure rate. Now they decide, there is no profit in making 4:3
sets anymore, so they let Vestel make them. Quality goes down here as
well. So, if a set can be made more cheaply, thus increasing profit for
JVC, why not let Vestel make all of them? That's because despite
everything, people expect some amount of new techniques and quality in
a still expensive TV set. See my point?

About another name brand: In a Grundig technical publication of the
early eighties, they stated that they purposely overrated every
component by at least 50% and created a good airflow in their new TV
chassis series. Indeed, I have a 1983 Grundig TV set here, still playing
as new with only a few minor repairs needed over the years.

Having typed all this, I notice you ignored some of my comments and
questions, and conclude you indeed have no background in electronics,
making this discussion rather abstract and not as usefull.as one would
hope.

---
Met vriendelijke groet,

Maarten Bakker.
 
<andreas.manoli@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1105782097.489841.247200@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
| Hi,
| I live in Europe where the electricity is 240V and 50HZ
|
| I just bought a (WAHL) hair trimmer from the USA. The battery charger
| for the hair trimmer is made for USA (input 120VAC, 60HZ, 5W) and has
....
| b) Buy a transformer for the transformer! (transform 240V AC to 120V
| AC) . The issue here is bulk, overheating and different frequencies.

120 VAC will smoke the charger. You need a 240 V to 100 V transformer to
allow for the lower frequency. Trust me, I've lost more than my share.

N
 
No, I'm not an electronic engineer or repair technician. In fact my work is
far removed from technology. Something I cherish even more is to be able to
think for myself rationally and clearly, unencumbered by orthodoxy. My
interest in electronics started in my teens. In those days, I built my
audio amplifiers using vacuum valves. (See, I'm still using "condensers"
instead of "capacitors". <g>) The book I mentioned earlier in electronics
was an eye opener showing me the mysteries and delights in circuit designs.
The book is probably forgotten by most now though at the time, end of 70's,
it was very popular. The author later took the chair at MIT. There was
rumour of a 2nd edition in the Practical Electronics in the 90's, but it
never materialised.

Thanks for the history, but that only revealed the poor quality in design
where the other components could not stand the strain and eventually failed.
Yes, I do remember reading something like that in the Wireless World. This
must be 20 years ago. Or, was it a Mullard/Ferguson chassis? Anyway, I
have come to the conclusion, actually about the same time, that big names
meant nothing. Poor design is time and again the villain, and provided that
is controlled, as, for example, in TV where the design is now mature, an
electronic equipment from a small company can be as good as, if not better
than, one from a big one. Not accepting this fact is sticking the head into
sand, and giving away good money at the same time.

Bee.
--
[I have found my Shangri-La in ntlworld.]


<maarten@panic.xx.tudelft.nl> wrote in message
news:csbko9$ghl$1@news.tudelft.nl...
In sci.electronics.repair Bee <in.my.bonnet@shangri-la.com> wrote:
You have just illuminated my point! Philips had a poorly design chassis
some time ago. JVC is promoting itself but using a model from a little

Exactly 1, yes, and then the trouble with the power switches. This goes
only to show that even large manufacturers (who are forced to cut cost!)
make this mistake. No-name brands, however, do it all the time. About
the power switches: after Philips discovered this problem, they used
another brand. About the Onwa capacitors: if they ever discovered this
problem, it took them 5 to 10 years. By that time the industry standard
for power supply design was alltogether different, so they never
redesigned the thing or selected better quality electrolytics. Instead,
the just abandoned the design in favour of another standard application
note.

known manufacturer. Big names do not guarantee quality or differ little
from the small guys. Consumers are doped and are willing to pay over the
odds for the big names.

That's not what I said. Although large manufacturers are under great
pressure by people who want something but don't want to pay for it, they
still can throw more money and experience at the design, choice of
components and manufacturing.

Good point. You mentioned the leakage of electrolytic condensers due to
poor
design. Now we are back to the quality of circuit design. I hope you
agree

And the quality of components (given the poor design, a good capacitor
would have lasted much longer). Two other examples: The Vestel 11AK16
chassis blowing Philips TDA8351 IC's rather often, while the same IC
lasts much longer in a Philips TV. This is mostly attributed to lack of
experience in design. Luckily they did abandon this design after a short
while. In favour of the design used in the next example ;-)

Next example: The Vestel 11AK19 chassis blowing the Philips E/W output
stage. This is contributed to a poorly made E/W correction coil, of
which the turns can short after some usage. No design problem here, only
cutting costs.

Note that the semiconductors used were exactly the same, illustrating
the point that while the exact same key components are used, this does
_not_ mean automatically that the same overall quality is achieved.

with me, as reverend_roger has, that good circuit design has no
exclusivity.
The example you cited is simply sheer incompetence, sadly it can inflicts

While the Onwa design was consistently incompetent, the components used
could have lasted a few years longer if they had been of better quality.

big names as well as small, expensive models as well as cheapos. So, it
follows, and I hope you also agree with me, that these days given a good
design, an inexpensive TV is just as reliable and long lasting as an
expensive model .

Nope. You are jumping to conclusions, missing my point. Because of
cheep-ass people, larger brands have indeed lost quality, but are mostly
still better than no-name stuff. A good illustration is the JVC example.
First, they decided there is no profit in making 14" sets anymore, so
they use Onwa chassis. Any repairman can tell you they do indeed have a
higher faillure rate. Now they decide, there is no profit in making 4:3
sets anymore, so they let Vestel make them. Quality goes down here as
well. So, if a set can be made more cheaply, thus increasing profit for
JVC, why not let Vestel make all of them? That's because despite
everything, people expect some amount of new techniques and quality in
a still expensive TV set. See my point?

About another name brand: In a Grundig technical publication of the
early eighties, they stated that they purposely overrated every
component by at least 50% and created a good airflow in their new TV
chassis series. Indeed, I have a 1983 Grundig TV set here, still playing
as new with only a few minor repairs needed over the years.

Having typed all this, I notice you ignored some of my comments and
questions, and conclude you indeed have no background in electronics,
making this discussion rather abstract and not as usefull.as one would
hope.

---
Met vriendelijke groet,

Maarten Bakker.
Click to expand...
 
"N Cook" <diverse2@tcp.co.antyspahm.uk> wrote in message
news:f9KdneZd3ctCfHXcRVn-iQ@tcp.co.uk...

| I will dig out such a book from the loft.
| Inductance measurements on the commutator
| are 180mH per diameter and
| 2.9,1.6,.4,.4,1.6,2.9 mH for 3 contacts either side
| of any given contact so no cold shorts anyway.
| I don't see what physical mechanism could cause one land to be
| 7 thou (mil) proud of the others. Also while still in use, why the brushes
| weren't ground down to nothing with that sort of irregularity.
| Has localised heating caused the copper of that land to somehow
permanently
| expand by carbon incorporating into the copper ?

The best idea I can come up with was that this was made on a Monday and got
through whatever QC they have, unless it was a factory reject. Disturbing.

N
 
I think Mythbusters botched that one. Had they properly terminated and
combined the magnetrons there should have been some degree of injection
lock and therefore, coherence. I have toyed with this idea for an EME
(moonbounce) experiment. I don't recall what they used to measure power
with, but a thermal power meter would have shown some additive power
regadless of "coherence".

The RFI-EMI Guy

Isaac Wingfield wrote:

In article <v1XFd.6954$4I2.3916@attbi_s01>,
"chillermfg" <chillermfg@insightbb.com> wrote:



Watch MythBusters. The guys took out 5 magnetrons from (duh) 5 microwaves,
aligned them all to "air at the same target in a makeshift microwave. As
they measured the microwave radiation from different points, what they
recorded was in fact startling to them. The microwaves cancelled each other
out. The likelihood of the magnetrons starting at the exact same point of
the sine wave is very slim. The misalignment of the waves as they converge
causes a disturbance to the individual waves in turn reducing the overall
"effectiveness" of the microwave radiation.



There is ZERO chance that five magnetrons (or even two) would be
operating at the same frequency, much less the same phase. If they're
not on the same frequency, they cannot operate coherently, and if
they're not coherent, their powers cannot "add".

Isaac
Click to expand...
--
Joe Leikhim K4SAT
"The RFI-EMI-GUY"

The Lost Deep Thoughts By: Jack Handey
Before a mad scientist goes mad, there's probably a time
when he's only partially mad. And this is the time when he's
going to throw his best parties.
 
Bee <in.my.bonnet@Shangri-La.com> wrote:

Thanks for the history, but that only revealed the poor quality in design
where the other components could not stand the strain and eventually failed.
Yes, I do remember reading something like that in the Wireless World. This
must be 20 years ago. Or, was it a Mullard/Ferguson chassis? Anyway, I
have come to the conclusion, actually about the same time, that big names
meant nothing. Poor design is time and again the villain, and provided that
is controlled, as, for example, in TV where the design is now mature, an
electronic equipment from a small company can be as good as, if not better
than, one from a big one. Not accepting this fact is sticking the head into
sand, and giving away good money at the same time.
Click to expand...
We're not comparing small with big companies.

We're comparing a factory that produces low-grade, disposable TVs for a
variety of manufacturers to one who produces a quality product.
--
Steve H 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
http://www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - MZ ETZ300
VW Golf GL Cabrio - Alfa 75 TS - VW Passat 1.8T 20V SE - COSOC KOTL
BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #
 
Capitol <capitol@spamfree.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:

The low cost Chinese
manufacturers are now very good in most cases at producing a reliable
product in the TV market. If you look at the number of failures on a
production % basis you will likely find that they are better than most
big brand names which actually have no sales volume!
Click to expand...
As someone who used to make a living out of selling consumer electrical
goods, I can tell you that cheap goods have a _significantly_ higher
returns rate than a good-quality branded product (note, I don't just say
branded, as a lot of the big brands do 'budget' ranges which are just
rebadged cheap brands).
--
Steve H 'You're not a real petrolhead unless you've owned an Alfa Romeo'
http://www.italiancar.co.uk - Honda VFR800 - MZ ETZ300
VW Golf GL Cabrio - Alfa 75 TS - VW Passat 1.8T 20V SE - COSOC KOTL
BoTAFOT #87 - BoTAFOF #18 - MRO # - UKRMSBC #7 - Apostle #2 - YTC #
 
"SteveH" <steve@italiancar.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1gqg8j4.kjz6cx19on319N%steve@italiancar.co.uk...
| Capitol <capitol@spamfree.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
|
| > The low cost Chinese
| > manufacturers are now very good in most cases at producing a reliable
| > product in the TV market. If you look at the number of failures on a
| > production % basis you will likely find that they are better than most
| > big brand names which actually have no sales volume!
|
| As someone who used to make a living out of selling consumer electrical
| goods, I can tell you that cheap goods have a _significantly_ higher
| returns rate than a good-quality branded product (note, I don't just say
| branded, as a lot of the big brands do 'budget' ranges which are just
| rebadged cheap brands).

The Wal-Mart factor?

N
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top