Judging by this forum’s threads, it would appear that for almost every current flatscreen TV that the specialist media showers with praise, 5-star ratings and awards, owners in the 'real world' experience faults and flaws, such as backlight-bleed/clouding, motion blur, decreasing black-levels, judder et al. Furthermore, it seems that far too many current TVs also have reliability/build-quality issues, confirmed by the following BBC.co.uk News article - 'Top 10 consumer complaints revealed' (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8483788.stm) - which cited TVs as no-2 for complaints: 1. Second-hand cars from independent traders 2. TELEVISIONS 3. Mobile phone service agreements 4. Mobile phone hardware 5. Laptops, notebooks and tablet PCs Source: Consumer Direct IME, I've had four flatscreen TVs since 2003, ALL of which developed faults: a 26in Philips LCD - can't recall model nos, it had a silver front with full-height, built-in speakers at sides & a curved, white back - which had clouding/backlight-bleed issues; a 32in Samsung LCD - gloss-black with a silver V-shape lower edge, BBC's F1 folks use same model in the après-GP Forum - when 2 yrs old it suddenly emitted a very loud 'phuttt' and filled my living room with thick, acrid smoke that smelt of formaldehyde(!), thereafter the speakers constantly 'buzzed' & the picture quality (PQ) was 'soft'; a Panasonic TH42PX70 plasma, when 2.5 yrs old it developed a full-length vertical green line, centre screen; a Philips 47PFL7404 LCD (my current TV) that has issues with ever-increasing clouding/backlight-bleed + headache-inducing (literally) motion blur. Were it not for the Consumer Direct survey's findings, I'd suspect that I am cursed re TVs. However, among the tat it seems there was/is a gem: Pioneer's Kuro range. Relatively complex initial setup aside, it appears that the Kuros were/are without flaw, subjective or objective, re PQ and that owners' experiences matched the specialist media's verdicts/reviews? Meanwhile, from what I can gather, Kuros are also more reliable in the long-term? For example, I know three Kuro owners and none have had reliability issues - coincidence? Of course, Kuros were not exactly 'bargain priced' - but perhaps that's the point? To produce a flatscreen TV that performs well AND is also reliable, a manufacturer has to price its products accordingly (Pioneer's perceived 'premium brand' loading accepted)? Was the Kuro range a classic example of you-get-what-you-pay-for, while other manufacturers' cost-cutting to match consumers' price expectations produces sub-standard products? Granted, consumers should not expect life-like, crisp PQ when paying c. £700 for a 50in TV but we are entitled to products that don't fail after relatively short-term use. Are TV manufacturers simply taking too many short cuts during R&D and sourcing/producing too many low-quality components, in order to frequently re-new their ranges - seemingly every six months - and offer so-called improved products? Whatever the permutations of cost-cutting, fast-paced R&D, poor-quality components etc may be, surely it's clear that the current world of TV hardware production is fundamentally flawed. Therefore, perhaps other members of this forum will join me in urging What HiFi? Sound & Vision to please use its reputation and influence to actively campaign for improved overall standards from TV manufacturers? Thanks.