Dangbei Unveils Prime Day 2025 Deals: Up to $800 Off Smart Projectors Across Global Markets
Dangbei Smart Projector Prime Day Picks
Upgrade your home or on-the-go setup with these five smart projectors, all at unbeatable Prime Day prices!
Discover the Dangbei MP1 Max Now on Amazon (US/CA/UK/DE/FR/IT/ES/JP)!
A True 4K Cinema at Home: Projects up to 300" with 3100 ISO lumens brightness, 110% BT.2020 ultra-wide color gamut, and professional ΔE<1 color accuracy.
Effortless Setup with Built-In Stand: Flexible 360° horizontal rotation and 135° vertical tilt for the perfect angle anywhere.
InstanPro AI Image Adjustment: Delivers Auto Focus, Auto Keystone Correction, Screen Fit, Obstacle Avoidance, Eye Protection, Real-time Keystone Correction and AI Brightness Adjustment for perfect viewing experience.
Smart Streaming with Google TV: Offers access to 10,000+ apps + 700,000+ movies and TV shows, including licensed Netflix, Prime Video, YouTube, and more.
Cinematic Sound to Match: Dual 12W speakers with Dolby Audio and DTS Virtual:X deliver rich, room-filling sound.
Convenient Portability: Includes a dedicated EPP carrying case for entertainment on the go.
Discover the Dangbei DBOX02 Now on Amazon (US/CA/UK/DE/FR/IT/ES/JP)!
Stunning 4K visuals up to 200'': With 2450 ISO Lumens super brightness, perfect for brilliant viewing, even in daylight.
Streaming with Google TV: Experience seamless streaming with licensed Netflix, plus access 10,000+ apps including YouTube, Prime Video, and etc, all in one place.
Immersive Sound You Can Feel: Built-in dual 12W speakers and a spacious sound chamber deliver rich, room-filling audio, enhanced by Dolby Audio and DTS Virtual:X for a truly cinematic experience.
InstanPro AI Image Adjustment: Delivers Auto Focus, Auto Keystone Correction, Screen Fit, Obstacle Avoidance, Eye Protection, Real-time Keystone Correction and AI Brightness Adjustment for perfect viewing experience.
Discover the Dangbei Atom Now on Amazon (US/CA/UK/DE/FR/IT/ES/JP)!
Dangbei's first Google TV Mini Laser Projector: Seamless access to licensed Netflix, Prime Video, YouTube, and more.
Compact and sleek design: It is just 48mm thin and weighs only 1.2kg, making it ultra-light and easy to carry anywhere.
Big Screen, Theater-Quality Experience: Experience incredible clarity and color with 1200 ISO Lumens of brightness at Full HD 1080p, enhanced with HDR 10 and immersive Dolby Audio from dual 5W built-in speakers.
InstanPro AI Image Adjustment: Delivers Auto Focus, Auto Keystone Correction, Screen Fit, Obstacle Avoidance, Eye Protection, and Real-time Keystone Correction for perfect viewing experience.
Discover the Dangbei Freedo Now on Amazon (US/CA/UK/DE/FR/IT/ES/JP)!
Built-in Battery: Enjoy up to 2.5 hours of continuous playback on a single charge.
Adjustable Built-in Stand: Offers a 165° tilt for flexible projection angles.
InstanPro AI Image Setup: Delivers Auto Focus, Auto Keystone Correction, Screen Fit, Obstacle Avoidance, Eye Protection, and Real-time Keystone Correction for perfect viewing experience.
Google TV with Licensed Netflix: Access a world of entertainment, including YouTube, Prime Video, and more.
Discover the Dangbei N2 mini Now on Amazon (US/CA/UK/DE/FR/IT/ES/JP)!
Officially licensed Netflix
Sealed optical engine keeps dust out & extend the projector's lifespan.
190° tilting stand for flexible projection
InstanPro AI Image Setup, delivers Auto Focus, Auto Keystone Correction, Screen Fit, and Obstacle Avoidance for perfect viewing experience.
Bright, clear 200 ISO Lumens visuals up to 120''
Prime Day Sale – Eligible Models: MP1 Max, DBOX02, Atom, Freedo, N2 MiniPime Day Period: July 8–14 | Available on Amazon (US/CA/UK/DE/FR/IT/ES/JP)Don't miss out—upgrade your entertainment setup with the latest smart projectors!
About Dangbei
Dangbei is a premium smart entertainment provider specializing in projectors and other innovative products. Trusted by over 200 million users worldwide, Dangbei offers stunning visuals and immersive sound, transforming spaces into vibrant entertainment, work, and life hubs.
Dangbei leads in software for large screens, providing a vast app and content library across entertainment, health, education, and productivity. Learn more at https://us.dangbei.com
A photo accompanying this announcement is available at https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/c9965590-027b-4d4e-bcdd-468115009ea5
CONTACT: Contact Dangbei PR Team E-mail: pr@dangbei.com
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Wall Street Journal
22 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
A Hidden Aspect of Late-Career Job Loss
'Late-Career Job Loss Blurs Retirement' (Personal Journal, July 8) sheds light on the financial outcomes of people who lost their white-collar jobs later in life. Those with substantial retirement accounts and considerable assets that eased their transition to retirement are a uniquely privileged group. We have interviewed those who were financially unscathed and those who had a bumpier ride but possessed enough personal resources to weather late-career job loss. A third group had a much different experience. Prolonged unemployment or back-to-back job losses diminished their financial standing to the extent that even such basic necessities as housing, food and medical expenses became difficult to afford. When we conducted follow-up interviews a decade later, in 2023, those who initially encountered financial difficulties reported a diminished quality of life in their retirement years. Late-career job loss may produce significant hardship at a stage when hiring practices mean that older unemployed workers sometimes have no choice but to withdraw from the labor force regardless of their financial preparations for retirement.
Bloomberg
23 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Reeves Pledges to Reform UK's Ring-Fencing Rules
CC-Transcript 00:00 Now let me turn to the changes I'm making to capital requirements to allow UK banks to do more lending and release more capital for investment into our infrastructure and into our businesses. First, I'm supporting the Bank of England's decision to raise the asset threshold for AML requirements to between 25 and £40 billion. This will both benefit the Challenger banks and bring increased competition and innovation to the market and support those businesses to expand their footprint here in the UK. Second, I am confirming our approach to Basel 3.1 implementing lower capital requirements for domestically focused banks from January 2027, while preserving flexibility on our approach for international banks to ensure that the UK always remains competitive whilst aligning with international standards. Third, I have committed to meaningful reform of the UK's ring fencing regime. Recognizing that now is the time to go further in tackling inefficiency and boosting growth. While retaining the aspects of the regime that support financial stability and protect consumer deposits. And fourth, following the new growth focused remit letter I sent in November, I welcomed the Financial Policy Committee's announcement that it will review the overall level of bank capital needed for UK financial stability. Reporting back to me by the end of this year. The review will inform the work that the Treasury is taking forward with the bank to ensure the prudential framework strikes the optimal balance to deliver resilience, growth and competitiveness.
Bloomberg
23 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Sen. Tillis on Rescissions Package, Not Seeking Reelection
Live on Bloomberg TV CC-Transcript 00:00Does this rescissions package have your hard yes vote? Will it have enough votes to pass in final passage? Yeah. I had actually indicated that I was a lean years before the amendment came out. The main thing that's important about this bill is to make sure that the questions from members who have not yet decided on how they're going to vote get answered. Are there there are commitments that those broad authority that they're providing the administration to make cuts is not going to surprise them in the future. The reason that's important is this is a spiced $9 billion bill. I hate to dismiss the concept of 9 billion, but there's a promise of tens of billions of dollars in rescissions that I hope that we're voting on in the future as a result of some of the government efficiency efforts. And we do not want to erode the support for future rescissions packages by not getting this small one right. It's a great test case, and that's why I'm inclined to support it. This apparently is a test case for some Democrats as well. Senator, it's your point in the grand scheme, $9 billion is a drop in the bucket and a lot of Democrats say you will lose support from any members across the aisle when it comes to crafting a budget for the new fiscal year. Doesn't clawing back congressionally approved funding send the message to Democrats that they can't trust a deal if there is one on spending? I think it's a fair argument, which is exactly what the the advisers, the president's advisers on where these cuts hit really should fit in the category of of fraud or waste or abuse. If you use this with the general support from Republicans to rescind measures that may have been used to negotiate a budget deal in the past, then why on earth would they risk that while on earth would they trust us in the future? So I think getting it right is very important. What I'm talking about our future rescissions votes that I hope that are sent to us and we process like the one before us today. What you're talking about is basic trust. And if we negotiate an appropriate year end appropriations deal that the Democrats feel like they the spirit of that negotiation is not going to be undone with a future rescission. I think that'd be a huge mistake. I can't imagine the president would intuitively want to do it. Hopefully none of his advisers would encourage them that that's a good idea. It's a bad idea. Well, as it may take Democratic cooperation to get appropriations passed, it also will take Democratic cooperation to get crypto legislation through both chambers. As I'm sure you well know, Senator, the House has dubbed it Crypto Week, and yet it seems they're struggling to advance a package of bills, one that would be the genius Act that already passed the chamber, another being the Clarity Act market structure legislation. It seems that the holdouts who did not vote for this procedural advancement are concerned that they cannot make changes to the Genius act that you and your colleagues passed. If they do so, would it be able to pass the Senate once again? Would you do anything if they're able to pass the Clarity Act with it, or would that require change as well? I'm just my Republican colleagues in the House need to hear this. I was one of the four members that teamed up with four Democrats to pass Senate Bill 2155, which was regulatory tailoring for small and regional banks. We had an agreement that that bill wasn't going to change, and we carried it all the way through, over the objections of Sherrod Brown, the chair, and Elizabeth Warren on the Banking Committee. If our House members send an amended bill back to us that doesn't fit, or is it already pre-conference with the Democrats who helped us pass that bill out, they can expect that that bill will never see the light of day. So I respect that they may want to make some changes, but they may want to send that in a separate vehicle to us and go ahead and send the Genius Act to the president's desk. If they don't, then they may own they the responsibility for not getting that done. And it's a great start, but we've got a lot of work to do. And, of course, Senator, you also found yourself on the same side as many Democrats in voting against the president's so-called big, beautiful bill. And it led to a major decision for you to decide to bring your Senate career to a close here. President Trump talked about your vote here. If you didn't hear what he said, let's bring it to our listeners and viewers here on Bloomberg. Tell us. I guess it was an owl, right? He was an owl. And he they said he was brave. He said no to the president, but he resigned the following morning. So anyway, that was terrible, I thought. Senator, weigh in on that as you please. That was from yesterday at the White House, by the way. Have you talked to President Trump? Has he called you or have you called him since that happened? Oh, we haven't spoken since. But the president knew that night before. Number one, that I was a no because I told him personally. And number two, I told him now would be a good time to start looking for my replacement. And it was after that that the president posted that he'd be seeking, you know, interviews for my replacement. But I was pretty clear with the president, unless he forgot that discussion the night before, I noticed he was trying to check to see if I voted no, but I was pretty clear I was going to be a no. The reason I was a no. And the reason it was so difficult for me is the vast majority that Bill I supported. I was here to vote for jobs and tax cuts, and I wanted that back in place. There were a number of provisions. The House bill for the Medicaid market was fine, but here's my challenge to anyone. We have fully released our analysis of the hit of the Medicaid bill that the president signed on July 4th. I would love nothing more than somebody to do the work to discredit the analysis. This this is it words. This is math. We did the math. We have three independent assessments that came to the same conclusion. This is going to be very difficult for states like North Carolina and many others to absorb. We already have a member today. I think it was Josh Hawley who's filing a bill to try and fix the Medicaid damage that he voted on last week. I decided that what we ought to do is go back to the house, Mark, great work, work requirements. The $800 billion in savings. Waste, fraud and abuse. The whole difference between me and the president came down to something that somebody in the White House suggested that the Senate put in the bill that saved 200 billion more dollars. But it's going to cost this country and potentially this party elections next year, in the coming years, as it gets implemented. It just seemed like it wasn't very well thought out. And I think the president was given bad advice to put it into the bill. Well, I wonder, Senator, if we should expect there to be more differences between you and President Trump or the majority leader, for that matter, as you said, when you decided not to seek reelection, that it gives you the freedom to call balls and strikes? Are you still a reliable Republican? Yes. Vote. Yeah. A lot of effort that happens from here. I need to be very clear. I am a transaction person. What I wanted to make clear was that if anybody thought that my decisions are driven by whether or not I can get reelected or get an endorsement, I wanted to take that off the table. That's not how I operate. I am a trained management consultant who looks at everything that we do here through the lens of execution. Will this work? Can the states absorb the change? Is it in the best interest of our country and our party in that order? And in my judgment, it was in every future transaction will not be influenced by this Medicaid vote. Hopefully, we can fix a lot of the damage that occurred by rushing it through for a 4th of July signature. But I'm on to the next transaction and I will do everything I can to try and make the defects in that bill work. Or, like I said, the U.S. government has probably access to more research capability than anyone else. Don't tell me that my estimates are wrong because you believe they're wrong. We provided all this information, the methodology for the impact, disprove it. I'd love nothing more than to know that I was wrong, because that means I don't have a lot of work to do to get North Carolina ready to potentially take 663 people, thousand people, off of Medicaid in a couple of years. Sure. Well, Senator, a lot of people think that that makes you one of the more brave members of the Senate right now. We had Democrats calling this a profile in courage. And I wonder, with that said, what that means when President Trump reaches out, when John Thune reaches out, will this be the same conversation when they need your support for legislation? How does this change your view? The only thing that I've tried to encourage the president, I've seen several and said, look, the president of the United States has a difficult job. He can't possibly be expected to be an expert in any area. What I'm trying to advise him on is that he has people advising him who pretend like they're him when he's not in the office and sometimes are not thinking through policy. I happen to have the rare combination of execution discipline with Fortune 500 companies and 20 years in legislative service, including Speaker of the House. So I've been able to understand the execution maybe a little bit better than other people, certainly people who have never been elected and who have never had a political role before, who advising the president. I'm just simply saying, take my advice for what it's worth, but it may help you look around a few corners. And I think that that's where we'll ultimately end up on this Medicaid provision in an otherwise big, beautiful bountiful. Old baby Bill. Whatever they want to call it. The fact of the matter is, most of the bill is good. I was talking about this one area that it ended up getting into that over $200 billion. We ended up having that sort of a dust up. It doesn't make sense to me. But again, I don't think it was the president's call. I think he had somebody want to put their foot on the accelerator. And I respectfully disagree with that. That was.
