Thats because you have not realize that a jump from 1080p to 4320p would be bigger than all jumps in the past decades combined. Which is an expectation you can only have if you lack the perspective of the development in the past (probably because you are young). Thinking 4k TVs are alot more expensive compared to 1080p tvs when they were new (inflation adjusted ofc) is another misjudgment on your part. Ofcourse the technology became more complex the screens became bigger there is not much of a price mark up. I think 1080p was 10k Dollar back in 2004-2005 you can get bigger 4k TVs now for way less than that.  

Most people do not think 4k is 16 times more pixel than 1080p actually you are the first one I have heard of to think that. Most people just need to know 4k= better picture. There is no misleading going on. You mislead yourself, if you think a 16times resolution jump is realistic.   

Do you honestly think the masses realize that 4320p would be 16 times more pixel than 1080p ? People usually do not think about stuff like that.

4k is simpler for the common folk who don't bother to do research. It describes 4X something, and it doesn't really matter what. IF you would have asked even the more educated person about 480 vs 720 10-12 years ago, they would have asked you what the hell you are even talking about. Most people didn't even have any idea about resolution, they just watched tv....

I think 1080p looks good enough, 1440p is outstanding, 4k is overkill, yet definitely best looking.

But I won't deny, idea of having 50 or 60 inch 4K tv is very nice.

it has been called 4k in the film industry way before 1080p/720p were introduced (resolutions close to 1080p were and are still called "2k" in the industry)

Yeah, they just arbitrarily jumped naming conventions.

It should be 2160P.

Doubling 1920x1080 on both axis has always been called 4k long before they hit the consumer market , even when 4k and 8k first hit digital cinemas years ago. If you didn't know that or don't know what "4k" means that's your problem, but its definitely not a new term made up just to mislead the consumer market.

Well they did infact invent arbitralily naming conventions with 1080p and 720p now they are back to the way it was before.

But I would be for a new naming convention

480p is 0.3 Megapixel

720p is 1 Megapixel

1080p is 2 Megapixel

1440p is 4 Megapixel

4k is 8 Megapixel

8k is 32 Megapixel

16k is 128 Megapixel

Like with cameras they should have kept it the same way easier to understand no calculation necessary and you see the number of pixels you get at once.

Seems it's just differing naming conventions and nothing else. Well, that and marketing picking the convenction that gives the better impression. Of course if you're smart, you'll notice there's a pretty big difference between the terms '4k' and '1080p': There's significantly different numbers, and the letters are different. It should really make you wonder what the difference actually is.

what is actually the reason for these atleast for me random numbers in resolutions?

2160p doesn't quite roll of the tongue as 1080p.
4K (UHDTV / UHD / Ultra HDTV) sounds better.

If you want 4320p / 8K / Super Hi-vision you have to wait 4 more years for these to come on the market
http://www.techradar.com/news/television/hdtv/sharp-dazzles-with-8k-tv-prototype-vp-says-production-about-4-years-off-1124330




You should wait anyway until HDMI 2.0 is suppored, otherwise you're stuck with 4K in max 30 fps.

8K broadcasts to start in Japan in 2016
http://sploid.gizmodo.com/8k-tv-films-arrive-to-japan-and-they-feel-like-looking-1464050347

Meanwhile still waiting for proper 1080p broadcasts over here, instead of low bitrate 720p/1080i mpeg 2.