£29 HDMI cable from Currys?

[Johnboy54]

Getting a bit deep now!
Just to update - Took it back today and got my money refunded without a problem.
Except... what the lad said was a half-price £60 cable at £29.99 was actually charged at £39.99! He showed me the £29.99 on the screen at the time?
I know you only have my word, as Lucid said, but my family know me as the intro from Meatloaf's 'Wasted Youth'... 'I REMEMBER EVERYTHING'. That's not me shouting, it's Meatloaf.
And I do. It's a curse. Ask the wife.
Interestingly, the one today said the cable I was sold was probably a 'bit over the top' for what I needed.
If it had been a 4k TV fed by Sky etc, then it would have been fine, he said.
If the cable packs up every 3 years, I'll spend another couple of quid on another.
After 6 years it'll have cost me about £4 as opposed to the £40 I've almost wasted.
In 6 years we'll all probably need an expensive cable to use the TV's that will be available anyway.
I did show him the edited responses from you all, by the way.
Thanks very much to all for adding sense to my complaint.
John

 

[JBR]

Did you get £39.99 refunded or £29.99?

 

[Johnboy54]

Yes, I got the £39.99. I'm sure it was just an 'oversight' on the salesman's part.
I hadn't noticed because the dog chewed up all the paperwork as soon as I put the box down.
I had to tape it up best I could.
The paperwork, not the dog.

 

[SimonH2]

I had to tape it up best I could.
The paperwork, not the dog.

On occasions I've been tempted to do it the other way round

 

[JBR]

Why haven't you done your homework?
Please sir, the dog chewed it up, sir!

 

[Replicant]

If your HDMI cable does not work. Swap the ends around and try again. This sometimes works.

 

[winston1]

Interestingly, the one today said the cable I was sold was probably a 'bit over the top' for what I needed.
If it had been a 4k TV fed by Sky etc, then it would have been fine, he said.

Still rubbish. It is still digital ones and zeros. Anyway sky don't even broadcast 4K so why would a special cable be needed?

 

[gregers]

thats why i bought 1 from pound land.works fine.

 

[Monkeh]

Interestingly, the one today said the cable I was sold was probably a 'bit over the top' for what I needed.
If it had been a 4k TV fed by Sky etc, then it would have been fine, he said.

Still rubbish. It is still digital ones and zeros.

The bitrate for 2160p24 is four times that of 1080p24. If you think cable quality doesn't matter at that point, you're kidding yourself.

 

[winston1]

Interestingly, the one today said the cable I was sold was probably a 'bit over the top' for what I needed.
If it had been a 4k TV fed by Sky etc, then it would have been fine, he said.

Still rubbish. It is still digital ones and zeros.

The bitrate for 2160p24 is four times that of 1080p24. If you think cable quality doesn't matter at that point, you're kidding yourself.

As I said sky don't broadcast 4K so it is all academic.

But I doubt if an expensive cable is any better than a 99p one because test have shown this not to be the case.

 

[SimonH2]

But I doubt if an expensive cable is any better than a 99p one because test have shown this not to be the case.

It may work in cases where the cheaper one doesn't - which is only likely to be the case when pushing the boundaries (eg long cables). But if the cheap cable works, then an expensive cable will not perform any better. It's very much "it works or it doesn't" and there's only a very very small grey area in between these two states.