Can you just not connect the TV? Absolutely, yes. That’s how low the bar is, that simply not giving the TV a connection and using 1 extra device in between is all it takes to come out ahead. That’s a gamble worth it to Samsung. I have a Samsung TV, and that’s all I need to do to come out ahead. But many, many people think the TV needs to do it all and just give it a data connection.
I used to run trainings on personal cybersecurity and explaining to people how much their data is worth. I’ve been paid to study this.
So, specific data about what you’re worth to a company is proprietary. I can’t find a link to a PWC or McKinsey report, but IoT device data typically sells for a range that’s an estimate of cost per user per year. On the upper end, I’ve seen estimates of up to $50 per user per year. Low end is $1. So if the assumed lifetime of the TV is 4 years and a “household” is 2 adults and 2 kids, you end up at ($50x2 and $25 x 2)= $150 x 4 years = $600. So if Samsung sudsidizes the cost of a smart TV by $400, they’re coming out ahead $200 on average, just on the subsidy. That’s the kind of math going on for TV sales. Again, that’s proprietary data, so short of trying to track down reports I saw years ago, all I can explain is that data monetization is a well-known cornerstone of business. Here’s a quote for you about companies needing to know the value:
That’s for companies operating legally and in the clear. What’s crazy is that our data is treated sort of like student loan debt with them, because it’s seen by them as debt we owe to the company and paid back over the life of the device. For criminals, it’s pennies-on-the-dollar fire sales because nothing is guaranteed to work. So the data needed to steal your identity as a single line on a spreadsheet might only be $20 a person because the list of 10,000 records might only contain 200 winners. So you buy a $200,000 spreadsheet and hope to commit at least $1,000 per successful hit to come out ahead. which is a fairly low bar for fraud. Then the whole list is burned and you start over.
Interesting, but is that figure among those that actually register with the built in smart tv, or average for all purchases? The attach rate i would think for the smart features would be challenged by google and apple and roku pushing streaming sticks. The streaming sticks can probably just assume 100% attach but still seem to price with a little positive margin.
That figure is assumed from people who connect a start TV to the internet. Once the TV is online, it’s collecting data non-stop, even when it’s “off” and regardless of what services used. Samsung doesn’t offer streaming services, so their value is derived easily from tracking what you’re watching even when it’s not streaming services, like live TV, cable, etc. to sell it themselves, regardless of what other apps are installed. Since they’re all typically Android-based apps, the typical other permissions apply, like Amazon Prime being able to see what you have installed as well. But as the TV maker can take screenshots or see info about what you watch over an HDMI port, that’s of huge value to them over years of time.
The cost of that TV is heavily subsidized on the expectation that you connect it to the internet and it feeds Samsung data on you.
Just don’t do that? The same argument could be made for their phones.
I think you’re talking out of your ass.
Oh my sweet summer child. The privacy community is all over this and any economics course will explain how we got here.
Anyone making equipment needs to come in just below competitors in terms of price. How? By using telemetry and data collection to sell for advertising. This is seen as a subsidy to make the equipment more competitive to get it in more homes for long-term rent-seeking for income lasting years from every user. Same as with any smart appliance. The TV, connected to the internet, monitors what you watch even when you’ve connected by HDMI.
Can you just not connect the TV? Absolutely, yes. That’s how low the bar is, that simply not giving the TV a connection and using 1 extra device in between is all it takes to come out ahead. That’s a gamble worth it to Samsung. I have a Samsung TV, and that’s all I need to do to come out ahead. But many, many people think the TV needs to do it all and just give it a data connection.
Whole that may be somewhat true, I don’t think the magnitude of that expectation is that huge.
lol, ok.
https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2024/nov/smart-tv-tracking-raises-privacy-concerns
https://www.reddit.com/r/samsung/comments/1kpulqw/samsung_smart_tvs_privacy_nightmare_massive/
https://www.consumerreports.org/electronics/privacy/how-to-turn-off-smart-tv-snooping-features-a4840102036/
https://www.reddit.com/r/privacy/comments/1fsri2c/my_wakeup_call_how_i_discovered_my_smart_tv_was/
https://www.securityweek.com/smart-tv-surveillance-how-samsung-and-lgs-acr-technology-tracks-what-you-watch/
I’m not saying they don’t track, I’m saying the amount of money they expect from it is not as large as hundreds of dollars a unit.
I used to run trainings on personal cybersecurity and explaining to people how much their data is worth. I’ve been paid to study this.
So, specific data about what you’re worth to a company is proprietary. I can’t find a link to a PWC or McKinsey report, but IoT device data typically sells for a range that’s an estimate of cost per user per year. On the upper end, I’ve seen estimates of up to $50 per user per year. Low end is $1. So if the assumed lifetime of the TV is 4 years and a “household” is 2 adults and 2 kids, you end up at ($50x2 and $25 x 2)= $150 x 4 years = $600. So if Samsung sudsidizes the cost of a smart TV by $400, they’re coming out ahead $200 on average, just on the subsidy. That’s the kind of math going on for TV sales. Again, that’s proprietary data, so short of trying to track down reports I saw years ago, all I can explain is that data monetization is a well-known cornerstone of business. Here’s a quote for you about companies needing to know the value:
That’s for companies operating legally and in the clear. What’s crazy is that our data is treated sort of like student loan debt with them, because it’s seen by them as debt we owe to the company and paid back over the life of the device. For criminals, it’s pennies-on-the-dollar fire sales because nothing is guaranteed to work. So the data needed to steal your identity as a single line on a spreadsheet might only be $20 a person because the list of 10,000 records might only contain 200 winners. So you buy a $200,000 spreadsheet and hope to commit at least $1,000 per successful hit to come out ahead. which is a fairly low bar for fraud. Then the whole list is burned and you start over.
Interesting, but is that figure among those that actually register with the built in smart tv, or average for all purchases? The attach rate i would think for the smart features would be challenged by google and apple and roku pushing streaming sticks. The streaming sticks can probably just assume 100% attach but still seem to price with a little positive margin.
That figure is assumed from people who connect a start TV to the internet. Once the TV is online, it’s collecting data non-stop, even when it’s “off” and regardless of what services used. Samsung doesn’t offer streaming services, so their value is derived easily from tracking what you’re watching even when it’s not streaming services, like live TV, cable, etc. to sell it themselves, regardless of what other apps are installed. Since they’re all typically Android-based apps, the typical other permissions apply, like Amazon Prime being able to see what you have installed as well. But as the TV maker can take screenshots or see info about what you watch over an HDMI port, that’s of huge value to them over years of time.