What Display Daily thinks: Yes and no. It makes sense because being a good citizen of the world and delivering on the genuine concerns that many people have about climate change, sustainability, and the deleterious effect of constant screen usage is all good.
No because we can’t rely on the companies that deliver the message to have the answers to have the rigor required to make a case for evidence-based approaches to these real problems.
We can say that sustainability, eye health, sleep health – any other benefits that you can fudge as being related to your technology – are all good things in theory. In practice, whether the market will pay for it remains to be seen. This is not new territory, either. I used to sell ergonomic monitors into Scandinavian countries, where refresh rate and eye fatigue standards were pioneered, and yes, you could sell premium monitors, Sony ones at the time, until cheaper competitors came along who hit the ergonomic metrics but didn’t demand a premium for it.
Businesses can claim to be care but P&Ls don’t have the same capacity for compassion. If anything, the opportunity here is to say that sustainability should come for free, not at a premium. Making sustainability a premium value is a short term salve for some of the value proposition shortfalls of your product but it is not going to juice up sales.
The Corporate Science of Display Virtue Signaling
Virtual signaling may be a little triggering as a term, but click-bait and all that, what are you going do. Actually, two recent corporate announcements led us here: the first, a story about how LG’s OLED displays help you sleep better. The second is a recent article in AV Magazine about a recent study conducted by Sony Professional Displays and Solutions Europe upending the common belief that businesses are reluctant to invest in sustainable technology. The research, which surveyed over 1,000 AV professionals across Europe, found that a significant majority of businesses are prepared to pay a premium for AV products that are manufactured sustainably or offer greater energy efficiency. There were probably three key takeaways from the report:
- The EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive is expected to significantly influence the sector, with 34% of respondents acknowledging its impact on their operations over the next two years and prioritizing AV providers with robust sustainability practices. An additional 35% foresee a moderate impact.
- Approximately 83% of businesses, and 90% in the UK, are willing to spend at least 20% more on AV products that adhere to sustainable practices. Notably, over a third of these respondents would consider paying 50% more for such products.
- Sustainability practices play a crucial role in the decision-making process for AV partnerships, with 85% of respondents (75% in the UK) emphasizing the importance of a provider’s sustainability credentials. Moreover, 79% indicated that a lack of sustainability practices would deter them from selecting a provider.
None of this is peer-reviewed or verifiable research. It is self-serving. Someone made the argument to me that LG’s research pitch just says you should turn down the brightness of your TV and has no real basis for assuming that OLED wins over LCD.
The Sony research suggesting businesses are willing to spend at least 20% more on AV products makes me wince a little because I would love to find those people and get them to tell me when they have actually spent even 5% more for sustainable products. Is the 20% premium a way for Sony to tells its systems integrators and dealers that its pricing is fine and suck it up the margins, people?
