Hate to say it, but considering the new Apple iMac has a higher resolution display (and wouldn't doubt if it was better quality as well) AND it's also a computer as well for $2,500 (yes, I know it's a Mac, but still, it's a pretty capable one at that), then I feel $1,400 is too much at this point. Before that iMac came out, this wouldn't have been a bad price, but they'll have to knock at least $200 minimum off the cost for it to be worth it in my opinion. (Yes, I know the screen on the iMac is 4" smaller than this LG, but the iMac is still 27" and thus has a significantly higher ppi) Just my two cents.
The problem with the retina iMac is that for $2400 you get a fantastic Display on a base model system ($500'ish PC price range)... the loaded retina iMac is a much more capable machine but then you're in for $4300 (less if you get some of the super expensive upgrades like memory and hdd yourself). For that kind of money you can have an IPS >30" 4k display and an x99 based machine that will wipe the floor with the iMac. I looked at the new iMac at the Apple store last week, the monitor deserves all the kudo's it's getting, it really is lovely... but it's also quite a bit smaller than my Asus PQ321... and visually it's not HUGELY better (biggest difference between the two other than size is that the iMac display was noticeably brighter and a bit crisper). I've been trying to choose between the loaded iMac and a fairly loaded 4k x99 machine, I'm leaning x99... I just have a hard time paying the same price for such a large performance differential.