I spoke to the staff in Selfridges regarding the latest 32" LCD TVs. They seem to be pushing the Panasonic Viera LCD screen and claimed that all the magazines were recommending them. Actually the reviews I'd seen had said that the picture was good but it wasn't high definition compatible and lacked DVI or HDMI inputs. I'd gone in hoping to see the new Sharp Aquos Titanium range or the Philips 32PF9986, of which they had neither. The new Sharps haven't received a good response in the press or by some people on these forums, so I'm strongly considering buying the Philips. The salesman's point of view was that the Viera and Sonys (KLV-L32MRX1 and KLV-L32M1) had the best pictures. He hadn't seen the new Aquos panels, but said that they did have the 32PF9986 before it was recalled. He said that the Philips was good when using the demonstration DVD, but was very poor when displaying normal TV pictures. How do owners of the 32PF9986 find it copes with analogue TV pictures and Sky broadcasts? Is it likely that Selfridges didn't set the TV up properly, which is why the pictures looked bad or perhaps that the cable or signal they used was poor? How does the screen cope with fast moving sports like football (how does it cope with big camera movements with people running etc.) or tennis (clearly display the small ball moving fast)? I did see the Viera displaying cricket and I was impressed with how well it displayed the detail and coped with the camera pans without any artifacts. Overall, when viewing regular TV, how do people find the Philips' picture compares to the Sony or Panasonic?