Flat Plasma: Worth the W.A.F. Premium?

Well,one of my favorite sayings is "compared to what". Plasma,compared to the same $$in an overhead projector,I think not. However this is only based on 'everything 'I read, and two demos in stores that have both on display. I would say once in a while,let the wife choose;unless she too wants the best for the money. I say, if you can, take the wife out and give a look together .Things like this help marriages to have hidden dividends.

Avguygeorge: Thank you. To clarify, I am torn between sticking with my original plans to buy the 34" HDTV widescreen (Maybe Panasonic, probably Phillips) and paying the WAF premium. I have not seen them side by side, but I am imagining that the TV picture would look much better than the plasma, especially one of the lower priced models around $8-10,000. If anyone has a clue, I would be very grateful for advice.

Plasma screen technology is still developing. If you do go for plasma ask the dealer about "acceptable" defects. I have heard horror stories about people buying the screens and then a pixel or group of pixels turn colors and stay that way - very annoying. Some manufactures say, "Oh well, we are not going to give you a new TV for a couple of pixels." Then you are on your own and then try to get it fixed or sell it. Read the warranty carefully and ask lots of questions about what's a failure and what's not. Ten grand is a lot of money to be left hanging by the manufacturer. Good luck - Dan

What is your time frame for the purchase? Reason is, alot of interesting news from the recent CES show in Vegas regarding flat panel (big plasma improvements, plus watch for Samsung--that's right, Samsung--new FLCD set, supposedly it looks superb). However, for now, to answer your question...in the $8-10K range, direct view CRT wins, hands-down. For more detail as to why, refer to my earlier response to similar questions you posted a week or two ago. Good luck!