09-28-202010:15 AM (Last edited 09-28-202010:24 AM) in
Sorry to say that none of the silly suggestions they give will do anything beyond waste your time. Its silly to think that an hdmi cable, device or anything else would magically fix a defective piece of hardware that is damaged. Especially since its almost certain that the design flaw revolves around the inability for the tvs to manage the heat which causes damage exponentially over time. As the damage compunds it destroys the components that are used to disperse the heat thus making the problem worse and worse. They want to remain a powerhouse in the tv industry and they gladly do so at the LED purchasers expense. In order to remain relevant they need to have the best (tech wise) at low prices. So they designed their LED tvs to be as compact, light weight and as inexpensive as possible (no big surprise thats the goal of all electronic products for all companies). Within 2 years (likely way earlier) they found out that they had a design flaw and that the tvs couldnt handle the heat that wasnt being dispersed over time. But their analysts determined that the financial gain was higher to ignore it at the cost of their LED tv customers. The cost for r&d + the cost of losing market domination of technology to cost ratio in the overall tv industry is greater then the loss of customers that get the short end of it. when new tvs are reviewed all that matters is the technology included, the weight and thickness of the tv and the price. The fact that the tv will be junk in 13-24 months is not known or of consequence to Samsungs appearance to having the best tvs at a low cost. At best the review will say the tv seems to run a little hot but that its not a safety or performance issue (and its true at the point where the tv is brand new). But over time its becomes a huge safety and performance issue. Unfortunatly all companies care about is their bottom line. Its the same with all companies, in all industries. One of the worst comparissons for this is the automobile industry. For example, lets say xyz company releases a new model of their popular car in 2023 and they sell 500,000 of the cars in the first 3 months and have 100,000 in inventory across the globe at retailers ready to be sold as well still. At this point a catostrophic malfunction causes a owner to crash and become severly injured or deceased. They investigate and learn that the cause of the accident was a design flaw and their fault. So they have their actuary do the math and learn that approximatly 0.13% of all of the 500,000 vehicles + the 100,000 in inventory will likely malfunction and cause severe injuries and deaths to the drivers/passangers and other vehicles hit in the accidents. The actuary then determines that the lawsuits from those customers will cost them around $3bil. On the other hand the cost to issue a recall and replace the part that causes it for all 600,000 vehicles would cost them $1.9bil but that they would also lose another $1.5bil from the bad press and resulting blemish that will follow their vehicle reviews for the next few years. Since the recall results in them admitting they produced and sold a vehicle that has a catsastrophic component failure. But without they recall they admit nothing and no one ever hears anything about it. The lawsuits all result in settlements that include a non disclosure agreement so they plantiffs cant say anything about it. This math is done daily by all the companies in the world. Cost of losing customers + lawsuits vs cost of admitting fault and fixing it. Everyone says you cant put a price on a human life but sadly I can tell you that companies but a price on everything including your life, every day. The cost for Samsung to admit this is a design flaw and fix it for all of us is likely well worth the cost to keep our loyalty but the cost of the resulting reputation loss that their mathmaticians calculated to follow them for x months or years, resulting in loss of new customers they would of gained is far to great to them to care about us at all. This is the reason punitive damages exist. Did the women that burned herself with mcdonalds coffee deserve $2.9mil? Of course not but the jury was willing to award her that in punitive damages to punish mcdonalds for all the other people in the world that suffered losses from the same thing that would never sue mcdonalds for it. The default "fixes" suggested for this issue is the same dafault nonsense stated for every single issue you could ever mention. Because its really just a tactic used by all companies to try to convince you that they are not the bad guys. If you try one of these default suggestions and say the issue goes away then they just convinced you not to be mad at them for selling you junk when really the tv just dont use that piece of hardware when you you do whatever it is. For example uou complain that your tv is blurred when using your 4k dvd player in your ps5 and they ask you to try the tv with another device like your cable box and you say it works fine then and they say see its the playstation that is the issue. Knowing full well that the tv is the issue and that the cable box works fine because its not 4k and that clearly some component involving 4k resolution is faulty in the tv.
... View more
Dont get all excited about them acting like they can be helpful by messaging them. Waste of time! Offered me $199.99 to buy my t.v that worked for all of 1500 hours of use before bleeding white light which quickly gets worse week after week. Even if the tv was 30 years old, i dropped it and for some reason they where willing to pay me $199.99 for it I wouldnt do it because $200 is not worth the trouble of filling out paperwork and preparing to ship and then shipping this junk. I certainly would not; ever sell away my legal right to sue them for breaking their implied warranties and fraud for selling LED tvs with the same deisgn flaw for 5+ years for $199.99 Love to see them try denying that its fraud when this case is filed. They got away from the fraud charge in the current case for older tvs because it wasnt possible to prove that they knew of the design flaw even thou anyone would come to the conclusion thag they had to have known with the endless complaints on these forums and on consumer reports about all their LED tv's. But its gonna be real easy to prove they knew when they where selling tvs with the same design flaw while being sued for the issue. The implied warranty being broken is a slam dunk case just like it is in the current court case for older samsung models. Their box, advertising and manuals promise 4k resolution but the light bleed starts shortly after their 1 year express warranty and way before the reasonable life time of a LED tv which is a breach of the implied warranty. In fact im not sure about the specifics required for false advertisment but I would bet that false advertisment will be a valid claim also and easy to prove. They knew that 4k resolution was not a true claim since they knew their design flaw would cause light bleed and/or extreme over heating way before the life expectancy of the tv. i have meetings setup with 3 major law firms in NY with the help of my law professor from my alma mater at the end of October and beggining of November. If the expected monetary result is enough to merit the time and expense that I would incur then I will file a lawsuit or possibly a class action. I will inform my fellow frauded consumers if a class action suit is filed for the models made after the last model in the current law suit until current models. Basically everything I own is Samsung. Most of their products are great and ive never had a issue. But my dryer and this tv both have major issues that are wide spread and they refuse to admit any fault and to do anything for both products. So its clear they dont care about their customers, only the bottom line and their actuary clearly found that they would make more money by continuing to sell LED tvs for almost a decade that have a design flaw that allow them to make it much cheaper then competitors and that the resulting lawsuits would be cheaper then the cost of R&D. One can hope with such a large and blatent attempt to take advantage of so many consumers that the jury will assign a huge sum for punitive damages that ensures they lost money by purposely selling its customers faulty merchandise and never choose to try that route again. But regardless im done with samsung products. As the time comes to replace my items i will be going with another company(s).
... View more