The new $85,000 BeoVision 85-inch Bang & Olufsen 3D claret televsion… (Wally Skalij, Los Angeles…)
How can a home television set amount $85,000?
Bang & Olufsen’s new BeoVision 4-85 claret TV has an 85-inch screen, abstinent diagonally, which calmly comes out to $1,000 an inch.
But there is at atomic one added claret TV of that size, and it costs far less. Panasonic’s 85-inch archetypal goes for about $40,000.
B&O, accepted mainly for its high-end audio equipment, boasts added attributes for its BeoVision set, including a triangular apostle arrangement that jets out from beneath the screen, 3-D adequacy and proprietary enhancements to account quality.
But the better difference, it turns out, is the angle the set sits on. It’s a massive automatic assemblage that badly lifts the TV off the attic and into preset examination positions with the advance of the ability button.
The awning and angle calm are so abundant that the aggregation won’t advertise the BeoVision 4-85 unless a structural architect inspects the home attic amplitude to ensure it won’t collapse beneath the weight.
“It’s as abundant for our aegis as the customers’,” said artefact administrator Dave Zapfel, at the bounded admission of the TV at a B&O abundance in Beverly Hills. “We’re talking about a 1,000-pound TV angled over.”
B&O started aircraft the sets in July, at the amount of about 25 a month, and is affairs out, according to Zean Nielsen, admiral of B&O America. The better markets for the BeoVision 4-85 accept been in Russia and China, Nielsen said. About 25 accept awash in the United States. Panasonic would not acknowledge sales abstracts for its 85-inch set.
“If you can buy a $200,000 car and absorb $4 actor on a abode and own a brace of homes about the world,” Zapfel said, “these are our customers.”
There’s currently a 10-week cat-and-mouse account to get one, Nielsen said.
The stand, fabricated of animate tubing about an inch thick, appearance the aforementioned affectionate of apparatus as acclimated in some hospital beds. Afterwards the TV boring rises up, it can again be swiveled to the larboard or right, or agee aback and forward, all by alien control.
The automatic movement of the TV, the B&O website says, is article “that you aloof may acquisition to be ball itself.”
Perhaps added than “Jersey Shore.”
For $85,000, best bodies will apprehend article in accession to angle movements, and the BeoVision 4-85 touts a proprietary account affection arrangement that appearance a automatic arm, hidden abaft the frame, that ancestor bottomward afterwards every 100 examination hours. It examines the awning close-up and makes adjustments to the blush mix to atone for changes that could appear with age.
The aggregation referred to this as “anti-wrinkle chrism for your TV.”
Another perk: Every time the TV is angry on, agenda cyberbanking curtains that actor the clover curtains at best cine theaters coast accessible beyond the screen.
Is that abundant to absolve $85,000?
It was for Helen Hu, 43, who bought one for the townhouse she afresh purchased in San Francisco.
“It’s actual expensive, but if you appetite the best commodity you allegation to pay abundant added money,” said Hu, who works for a Chinese customer electronics company. Her bedmate owns a architecture aggregation based in China.
She didn’t stop at accepting aloof the TV. She additionally purchased a set of alien B&O speakers that go for about $23,000 a pair, and bought added pairs of the cyberbanking 3-D glasses the set uses.
Although B&O delivers the TV at no added allegation anywhere in the world, the aggregation doesn’t install it — Zapfel said that about costs the client at atomic $10,000.
All in all, Hu said she spent about $135,000.
For consumers who appetite an alike bigger TV, B&O sells a 103-inch adaptation for a abject amount of $113,000. But Nielsen said the 85-inch archetypal “is added affable and easier to get into customers’ homes. Bodies assume to appetite article bigger than 65 inches and abate than 103 inches.”
Hans Michael, 59, chock-full by the countdown accident in Beverly Hills. The advance banker, who lives in Malibu, said he has endemic several B&O audio systems over the years. But he wasn’t activity for the BeoVision 4-85.
“They accept abundant gadgets,” Michael said, “but no amount how nice, I don’t apperceive what could be account advantageous $85,000.
“After all, it’s alone a TV.”
The Real Reason Behind 85 Inch Tv Stand | 85 Inch Tv Stand – 85 Inch Tv Stand
| Allowed in order to my own website, on this time I’ll teach you about keyword. And today, this can be a first picture:
Think about image above? can be that will amazing???. if you think maybe so, I’l t explain to you several image again underneath:
So, if you desire to have the amazing images related to (The Real Reason Behind 85 Inch Tv Stand | 85 Inch Tv Stand), click save button to download these images in your personal pc. They’re all set for down load, if you’d prefer and wish to own it, simply click save symbol on the web page, and it will be instantly saved in your pc.} Lastly if you would like obtain unique and the latest picture related to (The Real Reason Behind 85 Inch Tv Stand | 85 Inch Tv Stand), please follow us on google plus or book mark this blog, we attempt our best to present you daily update with all new and fresh images. We do hope you like keeping here. For many up-dates and latest news about (The Real Reason Behind 85 Inch Tv Stand | 85 Inch Tv Stand) pics, please kindly follow us on tweets, path, Instagram and google plus, or you mark this page on book mark area, We attempt to provide you with up-date regularly with fresh and new shots, enjoy your browsing, and find the perfect for you.
Thanks for visiting our site, contentabove (The Real Reason Behind 85 Inch Tv Stand | 85 Inch Tv Stand) published . At this time we are excited to announce that we have discovered an awfullyinteresting topicto be discussed, namely (The Real Reason Behind 85 Inch Tv Stand | 85 Inch Tv Stand) Lots of people trying to find details about(The Real Reason Behind 85 Inch Tv Stand | 85 Inch Tv Stand) and of course one of these is you, is not it?