cinema and home are stupid to compare.

in a theatre you are in a dark room sitting in one place and you are quiet watching ONE movie for 2 hours roughly

at home you are watching for god knows how long, random channels, shows, commercials, walkign around, takling, its like out, ect. 

How about you wear sunglasses for a week straight whenever the tv is on in your house thuis week and get back to us.

Despite you don't like glasses, your predictions for them look more optimistic than those of most glasses lovers, except the few that think that just because they love them, everybody must. I don't like glasses, but I'm neither a glasses basher, nor a Sony hater, nethertheless I'd predict smaller percentages than you even in the best case.

I can only speak for myself, but... I know many who haven't bought new TVs yet, don't know how that is everywhere else.

Well, 3D content is there (it's not much) and it will rise very quickly IMO. I mean, look 5 years back. There wasn't really much HD content and TVs were incredibly expensive. 2-3 years later there was a lot HD content and TVs were affordable for everyone.

But I think you're right. Most people who have already bought a new TV in the past 2 years won't buy another one in the next 2-3 years. But those who haven't bought one already or those who want to buy a second TV (many households do that) will probably consider buying a 3D TV for just a few hundred dollar more.

Out of six manufacturers (LG, Panasonic, Samsung, Sharp, Sony, Toshiba and probably more), which already have or will have product avaliable this year, three (Samsung, Sharp and Toshiba) are investing in portable glass-less 3D screens as well.

I assume, they took into account how long it will take to monetize R&D and marketing efforts on currently available technology for 3DTVs, so they going with plan "B" before they get burned by losses. That way they could return their investments way quicker rather than just keep investing in glasses-required 3DTVs (Sharp is likely in safest position, since they got a deal with Nintendo =)). Probably, we will see more manufacturers join the party in the future, as well as some other ways to capitalize on "3D ready" home electronics besides 3DTVs. The biggest loser will be the one who will heavily and exclusively invest in 3DTVs. Market is definately rejecting them for the time being, but they will be eventually adopted in form of glass-less big screen 3DTVs. But it will take some time for manufacurers to drive costs down, as well for consumers to show strong demand for such technology (for now they're happy with their newly bought hi-res 2DTVs, I guess).

Pretty much.  The massmarket will wait until the technology is there for what they want.  In the meantime, they'll keep going out to 3D movies, watch DD/BD/broadcast HD content on their recently purchased HDTVs, and probably buy a shit ton of 3DS's.

A lot of people are overlooking or ignoring a very simple truth: current tech 3D HDTVs (that rely on shutter glasses) are dropping rapidly in price to the point where it won't be a major premium feature (ie adds less than $200 to the HDTV itself) for HDTVs in less than two years.

I'll even do a crystal ball prediction and say that in less than 12 months (before holiday 2011), you will be able to pick up a 46" 3D HDTV for under $1,000.

Last week Buy.com had a Samsung 46" 3D plasma HDTV for under $1,300.

Will the majority of consumers in the market for a big panel HDTV complain about the price under this scenario to the point that it prevents them from buying a 3D ready HDTV? I say no.

That's not what I'd consider to be a prohibitive cost for those shopping for big panel HDTVs. Generally when you cut well under the $1,000 price point today you're either buying a budget brand display, or a budget, cut feature model from the big brand names in electronics.

Adding extra pairs of shutter glasses will be the only real added cost to home 3D viewing (which is not neglible at $150 per pair).

A lot of these arguments against current tech 3D HDTVs are also overlooking the fact that over 90% of all content being viewed on these 3D panels, will in fact be regular 2D content, meaning you won't be wearing shutter glasses to watch your HDTV over 90% of the time (unless you insist on watching your handful of 3D movies over and over and only playing 3D enabled games on your PS3).

That's right; when you buy a 3D HDTV, you get a bonus. It's called a regular, glasses free 2D HDTV compatible with all current media and TV programming.

I'll even go a step further in my crystal ball predictions in saying that there will be plenty of 3D ready HDTVs in homes (the kind that require shutter glasses to work) that don't even have more than a pair of shutter glasses (or none at all if they didn't come with the HDTV) within the next 2 years. By then, 3D ready will just be a standard feature for HDTVs.

that 90% is the main thing hurting your whole argument.

oh and lets only mention 3DTV's price dropping and how it will be so close to HDTV price.  Wouldnt' HDTV prices also drop?

No, it really isn't. Currently the amount of 3D content available is a lot less than 10% relative to all the current 2D HD content.

Unless you exclusively watch 3D content on your 3D panel (which a lot of consumers would, if they spent thousands on one), most of the content being watched on a 3D ready panel will in fact be 2D content. When the panels become cheap enough, consumers won't feel "obligated" to watch 3D content because they spent thousands on it. To them it will just be an HDTV that can display 3D if they want it.

And I mention the fact that 3D HDTVs are dropping rapidly in price because a lot of people seem to be under the impression that they currently cost thousands of dollars. It goes without saying that price is one of the most important factors in determining rates of adoption.

All other features being equal, comparing quality 2D displays with current 3D displays the 3D feature doesn't add as much to the price of the HDTV as a lot of people think it does. You still have to shop for the right price (naturally there are 60" Sony 3D HDTVs costing $5,000), but when you can buy a good 46" 3D plasma HDTV for under $1,300, I consider the price premium to be pretty much gone.

as you said less than 10% is in 3D, and please i would love to see a list of what is in 3D.

so now why am i buying a 3D tv to watch tv in 2D, only so many times you can watch Avatar.

Oh and I have 6 people in my family.  that is $900 for us to watch tv in 3D.  And your saying what a 3DTV will go down in price say $1000, and be within a couple hudnred of 2DTV.   Wouldn't those 2Dtv's also go down in price.  Quit comparuing the 3DTV price reduction with the current 2DTV price.

And again your doing the typical search around and find these amazing deals, hell lets bring in the whole I got this tv from my uncles nephew for a deal for shits.  We are talking about MASS MARKET HERE.  Most of all things are bought for the price sticker in the store.  Look at the average price of the 3DTV's being sold, not one example on sale somewhere for one time.  we are not trying to convince each other here to buy a 3DTV, we are discussing what we think will happen to the 3DTV industry in the future.  Whether i personally can get some deal on a TV doesn't mean jack shit to the overal market penetration of 3DTV's. 

and again adding what's my incentive to buy a 3DTV?  We have had a really nice HDTV for a long time and there was a couple years there were there was what like 4-5 channels in HD all else in SD.  Only real reason to have an HDTV was mauinly just its smaller size to hang on wall.  So why am I gouing to buy a 3DTV if only a couple channels in 3D or to just watch movies, and there are only a couple good even in 3D, most is tacked on shit.

also laughiung one more time for those bringing up theatres, yea an extra $2 a ticket compared to a new tv and $150 glasses for each person.

Content.

Content.

Content.

We'll need the videos in 3D, and lots of them.

Otherwise, are you going to spend thousands of dollars just to watch a few movies in 3D?

You could have just go to see it in theater that way for under $20.