And that's also its achilles heel. Every light source made by man wears out slowly, it's simple physics. With LED not a problem, it doesn't effect the color or the individual pixels. With OLED, it all depends on how evenly each pixel wears, per color, or per location with static images. The most used pixels wear out faster, it's simple physics.
I don't disagree that OLED's strength (per-pixel illumination) is also a weakness but as I've stated, mines is 2 years in and there are no noticable signs of burn-in. If I get 5 years of optimal (or near-optimal) viewing out of the set, I'll be more than happy. There are countless examples of tech which degrades over time - it's not to say that this fact should be celebrated but it is not specific to OLEDs. That said, a non-OLED will last you longer without issue. So that's the choice really - the best viewing experience for the medium-term or a slightly lesser experience for the longer term. 'Pop' is a bit of a vague term I guess but the ability for neighbouring pixels to display completely independently means that the detail in contrast is dramatic - that's what I was getting at.
I feel I'm starting to repeat myself now and as I've said before - I'm by no means a TV expert but the almost universal acclaim for OLEDs from almost every reviewer out there must mean something...
The Galaxy S8's & the iPhone X's celebrated screens are both OLED - and Apple apparently paid Samsung a fortune for the privilege. In general critics have been raving about both screens - so it's definitely not a case of the Emperor's new clothes. As you've said - if you sat in front of one in the right conditions then I'm sure you'd see what everyone else is seeing :)
I listen to about 4 or 5 gaming podcasts a week and a good chunk of those journalists have either invested in an OLED or intend to when the prices drop. And none of them have complained of burn-in (yet anyway).
Anyway, I'm sure you're TV is also great!