No, it's common industry practice that "Smart TVs" (i.e. ones with built in ad tracking) are sold at-or-below cost and companies make up the difference by showing ads.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18905408 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21781481

So, maybe a business model of buying a bunch of smart TVs, pulling off the wifi module and reselling them?

Perhaps better yet, install a switch -- a big red toggle on the rear, with even bigger lettering -- to physically dis- and, if desired, re-connect it?

I suppose that the smart part's hardware is below $10, it's not much more advanced than a RPi. OK, $20 if it includes a decent camera for video calls.

But its presence can be sold for a hundred more, because the consumers apparently... want these features? Things like YouTube, Netflix, video calls, etc. And, of course, voice control.

> I suppose that the smart part's hardware is below $10, it's not much more advanced than a RPi. OK, $20 if it includes a decent camera for video calls.

Citation? Because I find that assumption outlandish.

I've watched them replace the control board in my 7 year old Vizio TV, the hardware is significantly better than anything but the highest end current RPi. Dual core cpu, quad core gpu, AC wifi, 8gb of memory, and the ability to push 4k HDR video at 120hz.

You keep saying they're all selling personal data for hundreds of dollars, citation?

> You keep saying they're all selling personal data for hundreds of dollars, citation?

Since you are talking about a Vizio tv, here's some straight from their CTO's mouth:

https://www.theverge.com/2019/1/7/18172397/airplay-2-homekit...

"So look, it’s not just about data collection. It’s about post-purchase monetization of the TV.

This is a cutthroat industry. It’s a 6-percent margin industry, right? I mean, you know it’s pretty ruthless. You could say it’s self-inflicted, or you could say there’s a greater strategy going on here, and there is. The greater strategy is I really don’t need to make money off of the TV. I need to cover my cost."

My idea is that chips themselves, sold in bulk, are but a fraction of the cost of the complete control board. Assembly and testing easily double the cost. For a consumer device like RPi, also shipping, packaging, and markup add, say, 50% on top.

For a TV manufacturer, most of these costs don't appear because they just need to add a few components to an existing PCB, and add more tests for them.

The other part of costs is licensing and/or development of software, its ongoing maintenance, extended tech support (online, phone), maybe sometimes content deals (a free month of Netflix, or something).

Must be nice to be a corporation so when 6o7 hack into people's computers and wiretap their homes you only pay a fine of $1 per victim.

Let's imagine the bill of material is about $30, and that's cheap knowing they have mid to high end embedded SoCs or DSPs being able to move 4K video.

To that price, you also need to add a continuous software development for the OS and some apps (even if they are Open Source, because they need to do at least some modifications). Minor bugs will happen and you would need to solve them.

Also, more complex hardware and software usually equals more complex testing and debugging, and with this more person-hours and a bigger cost. At the end, it might not be $100, but it will be near enough to round it for $100.

To be clear, this is said without having ever worked in a TV manufacturing company, but knowing how this kind of things are made, I think I'm not too far from reality.

That was a part of my point: BOM is not dominating the difference in the price.

The bill of materials for the "smart" parts in a smart tv costs less than $20-$30 US. Nothing more than that.