Plasma TVs suffer similarly if used for static images (I’ve seen some awful burn in on plasmas used as airport departure boards, for example). But used for video, absolutely not a problem. My Panasonic plasma is from mid 2009, and there is not even a hint of burn-in, not even a difference on the edges from the black bars on 4:3 content, which I watch plenty of. (Practically 100% of my viewing is via an Apple TV box, which shows a screen saver after a few minutes, including when video is paused, so the TV is never exposed to long-term static images.) While I do suspect that OLED is more sensitive than plasma, I know I’d be comfortable buying an OLED now.
To check my understanding. Are you saying you'd be happy to buy an OLED TV, but only if it is used for Movies (and other non-static content) ?
Or would you be happy to buy OLED TVs, for massive static image content, such as computer/gaming/live-TV(station channel icon burns) uses ?
Which many households would do, depending on who lives in that household.
The later Plasmas, especially the Panasonic ones, with a claimed (and probably true), 100,000 hour screen life and advanced image retention/burn protections. Would probably have made good purchases at the time, they were readily available. I think the issues were more that mud sticks, and Plasmas had got a bad/poor reputation, from the earliest Plasmas, which did sometimes cause screen issues
But those would have been (the earliest), before the screen manufacturing techniques improved (as regards screen life time), and anti-burn technologies were introduced, and possibly other advancements, to limit/protect the later Plasma TV screens.