Is 3DTV Just a Gimmick? NO!

The rose-colored 3D goggles are on!

In the last 48 hours leading up to the CES hype-a-thon, a constellation of companies has announced plans for the third dimension:

* The ESPN 3D network will premiere in June at the FIFA World Cup, and will carry at least 85 live events in the first 12 months, with Sony as a key sponsor;

* Discovery Communications, Sony and IMAX will jointly launch a 24-hour linear 3D service to launch in 2011 with movies, documentaries, children’s programming and other content;

* DirecTV plans to debut three 3D channels in June that use RealD’s video-encoding format and will be sponsored exclusively by Panasonic;

* CE companies including Sony, Panasonic, Samsung, LG Electronics, Toshiba and Vizio announced 3D televisions and 3D Blu-ray Disc players-with Panasonic bragging about its world-beating hugest HD 3D plasma display with a gargantuan 152-inch screen size.

Obviously, the availability of 3D content will be a key driver for people to buy 3DTV sets in the first place. About 25% of U.S. Internet users surveyed plan to buy a 3DTV within the next three years, according to a recent survey conducted by the Consumer Electronics Association in conjunction with the University of Southern California’s Entertainment Technology Center. Of those, 67% said they will be more likely to buy one if they can watch 3D television programs over the air or through cable, satellite or telco TV service.

But is all this just a gimmick?

HD more clearly applies across the board to all video, while 3D doesn’t lend itself as naturally to every type of programming. Sports and movies are events, but does anyone want to see, say, Headline News or Seinfeld reruns in 3D?

On 3D, seeing is believing, according to the CEA/USC survey. Before experiencing 3D firsthand, roughly 16% of U.S. Internet users surveyed had the impression 3D was “gimmicky.” However, only 8% thought so after seeing 3D for themselves.

In addition, 43% of those who have seen a 3D movie or event in the last year say they would prefer to watch movies and television shows in 3D instead of 2D, according to the CEA/USC survey.Still, that’s hardly a groundswell of excitement for 3D. Someone might argue that they don’t need HD, or don’t care about it, but you would probably be hard-pressed to find someone who thought HDTV was a parlor trick.

In any case, it will certainly take a while for 3DTV to hit mass-market status, and one of the gotchas could be the cost of the 3D glasses, said Bruce Leichtman, president and Principal Analyst of the Leichtman Research Group. Consumer uptake will be inhibited if they cost $50 or more apiece, he said.

As Leichtman noted, Discovery and ESPN were the first two networks to dip their toes into HD — and it took several years for viewers to arrive in significant quantities.

“Did they have tremendous success [with HD]? Not necessarily at first,” Leichtman said. “But when it started taking off, they were in a position to succeed. Those companies learned that being the leader has its advantages.”

Some other data points from the CEA/USC study:

· 33% of those who have seen a 3D movie or event in the last 12 months report they would like to watch all television programs in 3D, while 36% say the primary reason to buy a 3DTV is to play 3D video games in their home and 65% say the primary reason to buy a 3DTV is to watch 3D movies in their home.

· 69% of those who have seen 3D movie or event in the last year believe a 3DTV should have a screen of more than 40 inches (compared with 49% for those that haven’t seen a 3D show/event in the last year).

· 57% of those planning to buy a 3DTV within the next 3 years consider themselves an early adopter of technology.