# Companies That Will Disappear



## occraig (Jul 8, 2007)

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/01...lws-main-bb|dl4|sec1_lnk3&pLid=130695#photo-8 <---- i was reading this today and it has Tivo as #2 on the list


----------



## mr.unnatural (Feb 2, 2006)

Interesting, but not all that surprising. I had never even heard of about one third of the companies mentioned (and apparently I'm not alone or else they might be doing better). Tivo has always been a niche product that started an industry trend. Unfortunately for Tivo, there are lots of competitors that offer the same basic product at a lower cost. Most cable or satellite subscribers are content to rent their boxes instead of paying an upfront cost and then having to pay a monthly fee on top of their cable or satellite bill. I think if Tivo had leased their boxes at a rate competitive with provider hardware instead of selling them outright they might have a better chance at survival.


----------



## stevel (Aug 23, 2000)

I have heard of all the companies mentioned, and the list does not seem far-fetched. But one never knows. I've worked for two companies that have disappeared (or, rather, been acquired and digested: DEC and Compaq), so I know it can happen. I remember once saying that "A $14B company can't disappear overnight." Oh, yes it can...


----------



## HomieG (Feb 17, 2003)

Not terribly surprised by their list, but thought they could have rounded it to ten by adding BestBuy.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

Somebody mark that article and remind us at the end of the year. I want to see if any of it comes true. Because these financial writers are always so accurate.


----------



## donnoh (Mar 7, 2008)

stevel said:


> I have heard of all the companies mentioned, and the list does not seem far-fetched. But one never knows. I've worked for two companies that have disappeared (or, rather, been acquired and digested: DEC and Compaq), so I know it can happen. I remember once saying that "A $14B company can't disappear overnight." Oh, yes it can...


I remember when DEC wouldn't lay off any of their employees during slow times, you were an employee for life.

I also remember when Compaq bought them and thought about how they were a bit player making portable computers.

HP came along and sucked them up and the end of the VMS operating system was at hand.

We were heavy into DEC computers at one time in our plant and we still have a couple of systems running VMS. We're slowly migrating to Linux.

You once worked for one of the best companies around, sorry for how it worked out.


----------



## Chris Gerhard (Apr 27, 2002)

I would think any company purchasing TiVo will continue to operate the company as TiVo. I don't think TiVo will be sold this year, maybe in a year or two if TiVo can improve their relationship with cable companies. In any event, TiVo doesn't disappear this year.


----------



## AMike (Oct 22, 2004)

Here's a link to last year's story:

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/01/18/10-american-companies-that-will-disappear-in-2011/


----------



## lillevig (Dec 7, 2010)

Actually, all companies will disappear this year when the Mayan Calendar comes to an end.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

Office Depot on last year's list, and Office Max on this year's.

They'll keep picking office supply stores until they get one right, I guess.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

Looking at their 10 Doomed companies from last year, it looks like they were correct on only one...and that was a tip in...Borders.

With their record, being on their list shouldn't bother anyone.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

AMike said:


> Here's a link to last year's story:
> 
> http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/01/18/10-american-companies-that-will-disappear-in-2011/


Yeah. I count three out of ten, and two of those three had all but signed the ink on their papers when that article was written. 'Pretty pathetic prophesy skills they've got there.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

What other 2 went away?


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

hefe said:


> Looking at their 10 Doomed companies from last year, it looks like they were correct on only one...and that was a tip in...Borders.
> 
> With their record, being on their list shouldn't bother anyone.


Well, they are calling being merged into a larger corporation, "disappearing". That beings their batting average to .300. 'Underwhelming.


----------



## hefe (Dec 5, 2000)

lrhorer said:


> Well, they are calling being merged into a larger corporation, "disappearing". That beings their batting average to .300. 'Underwhelming.


But I don't even see that...


----------



## aadam101 (Jul 15, 2002)

I'm sure this was discussed in another thread but a recent episode of 30 Rock had a brief joke about Tivo where they basically said "hey remember Tivo and those cute little noises" Tina Fey and James Marsden then spent 15 seconds making all the little noises that a Tivo makes as he sat on the couch using a DVR that was clearly not a Tivo. For a while, Tivo was mentioned quite often in TV shows as part of the script. I don't hear it talked about very much anymore. The creative side of Hollywood was in love with Tivo for a long time. I think this shows how they feel about it now.


----------



## stevel (Aug 23, 2000)

donnoh said:


> You once worked for one of the best companies around, sorry for how it worked out.


I agree DEC was a great company to work for. But it worked out ok for me - my slice of Compaq was bought by Intel just before HP swallowed Compaq and we're doing just fine...


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

AMike said:


> Here's a link to last year's story:
> 
> http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/01/18/10-american-companies-that-will-disappear-in-2011/


I was just about to do the same thing. Of their list:
- Saab made it through 2011, barely, but it did it.
- Office Depot. Still here.
- Dean Foods. Not gone.
- Frontier Airlines. Not dead yet.
- Sara Lee. Not even close to gone.
- Borders. Gone in 2011, but that wasn't exactly a reach.
- Gateway. Still around.
- Dollar Thrifty. Yup, you guessed it - still here.
- Answers Corp. Wow, they don't even pick the right .com to go bust!
- E*Trade. Definitely not gone.

So, yeah. Of their 10 in 2011, they got exactly 1 right. Even if we give them Saab, by the simple factor that they just barely limped into 2012, that's still only a 20% success rate.


----------



## mmarlys (Jan 28, 2012)

Hello Fellow TiVo Users,

Two days ago my TiVo Elite downloaded the latest software upgrade. Ever since than I have had lots of trouble with the "keep until feature". Has anyone else had trouble with this? I change the date on some shows that I do not want to watch right than but would later on and the change doesn't stick. When I go back to the show the date is the same as it was prior to what I switched it to.

Any help would be appreciated. Incidently I only have this problem in the high definition menu, if I go into settings and switch to the standard menu than I have no problems (except that I prefer the HD menu...I like the discovery bar and the video window).

mmarlys


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

mmarlys said:


> Hello Fellow TiVo Users,
> 
> Two days ago my TiVo Elite downloaded the latest software upgrade. Ever since than I have had lots of trouble with the "keep until feature". Has anyone else had trouble with this? I change the date on some shows that I do not want to watch right than but would later on and the change doesn't stick. When I go back to the show the date is the same as it was prior to what I switched it to.
> 
> ...


In the interest of greater visibility and increasing your chances of getting useful answers, I suggest you go to the Premiere forum

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/forumdisplay.php?f=67

and start a new thread with your question.


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

aadam101 said:


> I'm sure this was discussed in another thread but a recent episode of 30 Rock had a brief joke about Tivo where they basically said "hey remember Tivo and those cute little noises" Tina Fey and James Marsden then spent 15 seconds making all the little noises that a Tivo makes as he sat on the couch using a DVR that was clearly not a Tivo. For a while, Tivo was mentioned quite often in TV shows as part of the script. I don't hear it talked about very much anymore. The creative side of Hollywood was in love with Tivo for a long time. I think this shows how they feel about it now.


I have a feeling that when the satellite and cable companies brought out their own DVRs they put the pressure on Hollywood to "go generic".


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

LoadStar said:


> I was just about to do the same thing. Of their list:
> - Saab made it through 2011, barely, but it did it.
> - Office Depot. Still here.
> - Dean Foods. Not gone.
> ...


E*Trade can't go away. No one would do that to a baby, would they?


----------



## acvthree (Jan 17, 2004)

stevel said:


> I have heard of all the companies mentioned, and the list does not seem far-fetched. But one never knows. I've worked for two companies that have disappeared (or, rather, been acquired and digested: DEC and Compaq), so I know it can happen. I remember once saying that "A $14B company can't disappear overnight." Oh, yes it can...


I was there as well (realtime group that Compaq sold early on) and it was amazing. A $13B company buys a $14B company and the combined companies, 18 months later, are worth $14B. How does that happen?

It's called right sizing. Hmmm, we have two similar products, we "need" to get rid of one. You do that enough and you cut into half your income.

DEC was amazing.


----------



## SullyND (Dec 30, 2004)

LoadStar said:


> - Sara Lee. Not even close to gone.


Well, it did split itself in two though, right?


----------



## jmpage2 (Jan 21, 2004)

I am not surprised to find TiVo on the list. The numbers are very telling, with only 2M subscribers and TiVo making far more money on patent licensing than designing and selling their own products.

I would not be surprised to see a buyout from someone like Virgin who has already started strong partnerships to sell TiVo products abroad.

Every single competitor to TiVo offers a reasonably priced multi-room streaming solution. Even Dish Network got into the fray with their new "hopper" mult-room DVR that they were showing off at CES this year.

TiVo can't expect to compete with $18 a month cable company DVR offerings that offer MRS as well as on demand services.

The best thing TiVo can do, in my humble opinion is to offer the TiVo as the alternative DVR and make MRS to 3rd party devices FREE *yes, free!*.

TiVo can make it so that you can watch a TiVo recorded show not only on your iPad and iPhone, but on your Boxee Box, Apple TV and Roku.

TiVo can monetize this by offering their own affordable box that can stream to other TVs in the house for free (think TiVo Preview but without the tuner).

At the very least, TiVo needs to offer the TiVo Preview for consumer purchase, make it available for a reasonable price (that will still net them a profit) of something like $99 or $149 and people who already have a TiVo Premiere might adopt them.

This could stave off defeat long enough for TiVo to try to innovate the next generation device that they are hopefully working on.

Otherwise, I see TiVo getting bought out or being disassembled if not in 2012 then certainly in 2013.


----------



## jpcamaro70 (Nov 23, 2011)

TiVo will be bought, although maybe not this year. But even when it does, I believe it will still operate as TiVo even if it's in name only. Just the other day my receptionist said "i tivo'd it" and she's only 22, and has a cable box. Like i've said before, all they need is the name recognition, get some more commercials out there.


----------



## jpcamaro70 (Nov 23, 2011)

aadam101 said:


> I'm sure this was discussed in another thread but a recent episode of 30 Rock had a brief joke about Tivo where they basically said "hey remember Tivo and those cute little noises" Tina Fey and James Marsden then spent 15 seconds making all the little noises that a Tivo makes as he sat on the couch using a DVR that was clearly not a Tivo. For a while, Tivo was mentioned quite often in TV shows as part of the script. I don't hear it talked about very much anymore. The creative side of Hollywood was in love with Tivo for a long time. I think this shows how they feel about it now.


I certainly laughed at that. And I hate the tivo noises.


----------



## jmpage2 (Jan 21, 2004)

jpcamaro70 said:


> TiVo will be bought, although maybe not this year. But even when it does, I believe it will still operate as TiVo even if it's in name only. Just the other day my receptionist said "i tivo'd it" and she's only 22, and has a cable box. Like i've said before, all they need is the name recognition, get some more commercials out there.


What are commercials going to do? TiVo is having a very hard time getting people to spend even $99 on a box when it costs $20 a month to operate and has a 90 day warranty... plus all the hassles of activating a cable card on it.

$18 gets them a cable company DVR that essentially has a "lifetime upgrade" option since you can always swap the old one for the latest tech out there.. as well as a free warranty that's included as part of the service.

TiVo is screwed as long as their DVR costs more to operate than the Cable Companies in the SHORT TERM (yes, I understand that in the long run the TiVo is cheaper, but try explaining that to your typical consumer who looks at an 18-24 month turnaround time on electronics).


----------



## mikeyts (Jul 10, 2004)

stevel said:


> I agree DEC was a great company to work for. But it worked out ok for me - my slice of Compaq was bought by Intel just before HP swallowed Compaq and we're doing just fine...


I worked for DEC for 7 or 8 years and got RIF'd with a pretty generous severance package about halfway through their disintegration--they were painfully embarrassed to have to lay people off. (I knew a few completely superfluous old employees who were kept around just so they could fully vest their retirement plans).

What happened to them was an abrupt change in the industry. Customers rejected the old "model" of dozens of different proprietary hardware and OS architectures with incompatible hardware and software. Things started to settle on the IBM PC model and a boatload of companies just disappeared. It also didn't help DEC's cause that Ken Olsen, a nice guy but too long at the helm, was quite obviously loosing touch with the industry's direction, proclaiming to the media that PCs were a fad and that Unix was "snake oil" . DEC stock rose a few points on the news of his retirement.

I'm not sure that anything similar is happening in TiVo's market space.


----------



## Brad Bishop (Sep 11, 2001)

Don't forget that DEC became 'The Internet Company' right around around a year before it's death.

That always seemed so stupid to me: The Internet Company


----------



## stevel (Aug 23, 2000)

Brad Bishop said:


> Don't forget that DEC became 'The Internet Company' right around around a year before it's death.
> 
> That always seemed so stupid to me: The Internet Company


I don't remember that at all.


----------



## Brad Bishop (Sep 11, 2001)

I'm having a hard time finding a reference to it.

I thought that they had specifically changed their name from 'Digital Equipment Corporation' to 'The Internet Company' right around 1999.

I'm almost sure of it.

Of course, I may be wrong. They may have just been:

Digital Equipment Corporation
- The Internet Company (tagline)

I'm pretty sure that they changed their name - as it always seemed like a really lame thing to do to me.


----------



## mikeyts (Jul 10, 2004)

I'm pretty sure that it was just a slogan.


----------



## stevel (Aug 23, 2000)

I don't even remember it as a tagline, and I paid a lot of attention to that. They certainly did not change their name. Perhaps you're thinking of some other company.


----------



## mikeyts (Jul 10, 2004)

I did google it and the only reference I could find is this, a scholarly case study of DEC's role in development and advocation of the Internet.


----------



## jmpage2 (Jan 21, 2004)

Hey guys, some of us are here to discuss TiVo being on this list, who gives a crap about what happened to DEC 15 years ago?

Seriously, start a "DEC reminiscence" thread if that's what you want to talk about.

I'm sure you will respond with vitriol, but, enough already, this is a TiVo forum.


----------



## uw69 (Jan 25, 2001)

Who are the most likely companies for a potential TiVo purchase?


----------



## jmpage2 (Jan 21, 2004)

Microsoft

or, a cable company provider who feels that they can make money on it via a combination of being able to provide TiVo as an "exclusive" to their customers as well as via continued lawsuits and licensing arrangements.

With 2M subscribers, there is almost no way that TiVo can survive long term. Hopefully whoever buys them out will continue to provide software updates and support for those of us with lifetime TiVos.

As harsh as I might appear to be on TiVo, I really want them to succeed, I am just skeptical. Against my better judgement I purchased lifetime on my new TiVo Elite, when I was originally just going to go month to month on it.


----------



## Speed Daemon (Jan 15, 2012)

jmpage2 said:


> Microsoft


More likely Apple by my estimation.

TiVo's litigious management will fit right into Apple corporate culture. Apple is already Adobe's biggest partner, and if they had their way, Adobe products would be limited to Apple products. By the same token, Microsoft might not be so keen on trying to make TiVo work using Windows and Silverlight. Most likely TiVo will be junked and sold for scrap.

American Airlines is far to big to just disappear. I don't see anything about AA that excludes it from the 30-year tradition of using bankruptcy as an antitrust loophole. Just like every other major airline...

RIM will continue on because it powers the Powers, from the District to beyond the Beltway. Any of the military contractors could take them over. Same for Kodak. Their black projects will always have a home at any munitions vendor.

Of the rest, it's hardly news that the new monopolist movement will leave us with a single retailer in every market.


----------



## jmpage2 (Jan 21, 2004)

There's almost no way that Apple would purchase TiVo, considering the time and effort they have put in to designing their own AppleTV solution.


----------



## mrcase (Jan 1, 2006)

jmpage2 said:


> There's almost no way that Apple would purchase TiVo, considering the time and effort they have put in to designing their own AppleTV solution.


That might actually be a perfect reason for Apple to buy Tivo. It would allow Apple to add DVR functionality to AppleTV without the risk of being sued.

Think of it. If you had Tivo's DVR that actually performed well and had what Apple brings to the table. That would be a pretty nice system.


----------



## jmpage2 (Jan 21, 2004)

mrcase said:


> That might actually be a perfect reason for Apple to buy Tivo. It would allow Apple to add DVR functionality to AppleTV without the risk of being sued.
> 
> Think of it. If you had Tivo's DVR that actually performed well and had what Apple brings to the table. That would be a pretty nice system.


Perhaps, I suppose we'll see.

I don't see an AppleTV using cable cards though or doing OTA. It will have the Apple 'idiot proof' mantra, meaning that more than likely Apple is working deals to have all of this content available via a subscription on-demand type service, and be delivered over the internet directly, bypassing all the normal BS.

For example, they could have the device automatically download all of the network shows to a hard drive, including commercials, and then just cycle through that, as well as other content the user wants.

Whatever Apple does, it will not be something conventional, it will be a new way of getting your content, of that I think you can be assured.


----------



## Charles R (Nov 9, 2000)

jmpage2 said:


> There's almost no way that Apple would purchase TiVo, considering the time and effort they have put in to designing their own AppleTV solution.


_"In the scheme of things, if you [look at] the revenues, we still classify this as a hobby," Cook said
_
http://www.macworld.com/article/164978/2012/01/apple_tv_hobby_nets_1_4m_quarterly_sales.html

To my thinking they haven't taken the Apple TV serious at all. Such as maxing out at 720p in this day and age. If they were serious (trying to go beyond the casual Apple/iTunes/Netflix user) they would have stepped up to the plate by now with stronger hardware and software. Not to say they can't in the future.

Long term best case I see is TiVo becoming strictly a software company licensing their software to the big players. The OTA market will disappear when someone like stream.tv does it right (not quite there yet).

https://www.simple.tv/


----------



## Sapphire (Sep 10, 2002)

mrcase said:


> That might actually be a perfect reason for Apple to buy Tivo. It would allow Apple to add DVR functionality to AppleTV without the risk of being sued.
> 
> Think of it. If you had Tivo's DVR that actually performed well and had what Apple brings to the table. That would be a pretty nice system.


But it seems as though Apple thinks traditional TV delivery is dead. So why buy a company whose main product is a DVR for traditional TV?


----------



## nrc (Nov 17, 1999)

While TiVo is doing better than they've done in years, it's probably more likely that they could disappear as a company this year than any time in the past 10 years. The chances are still very slim, but the fact that they've evidently allowed their poison pill to expire means that the cost of acquiring them might not be too high for someone like Microsoft to pay just to obtain their IP and quash any lawsuits.

But let's remember that everyone says that TiVo is doomed based on their business model and that their proven IP has a limited shelf life. So unless TiVo suffers some serious setbacks in court or in their results, I don't see anyone considering TiVo to be worth the price of an acquisition.

All of that aside, the specifics of this piece are nonsense.



> TiVo will almost certainly sell its hardware business to a cable, satellite, or set-top box company, and continue its successful effort to monetize its patents.


What a load of garbage. Nobody is going to buy TiVo for their "hardware business". Nobody needs their "hardware business" and without their IP as a lever to generate supplier agreements they would be even more doomed than they supposedly are now. Moreover, the notion that TiVo's ambition is just to live on as a patent troll is nonsense. TiVo would rather have supplier agreements with these companies than be forced to take them to court.


----------



## jpcamaro70 (Nov 23, 2011)

jmpage2 said:


> What are commercials going to do? TiVo is having a very hard time getting people to spend even $99 on a box when it costs $20 a month to operate and has a 90 day warranty... plus all the hassles of activating a cable card on it.
> 
> $18 gets them a cable company DVR that essentially has a "lifetime upgrade" option since you can always swap the old one for the latest tech out there.. as well as a free warranty that's included as part of the service.
> 
> TiVo is screwed as long as their DVR costs more to operate than the Cable Companies in the SHORT TERM (yes, I understand that in the long run the TiVo is cheaper, but try explaining that to your typical consumer who looks at an 18-24 month turnaround time on electronics).


Yes, i understand that pricing structure is holding them back, but that's why someone will aquire them and use their name. If they can generate that buzz that long ago defined TiVo, some major company will scoop the up.

What if dish bought tivo? After they clear the directv loophole, they'll be able to advertise as the "exclusive" TiVo provider and take some subs from dtv.


----------



## jmpage2 (Jan 21, 2004)

jpcamaro70 said:


> Yes, i understand that pricing structure is holding them back, but that's why someone will aquire them and use their name. If they can generate that buzz that long ago defined TiVo, some major company will scoop the up.
> 
> What if dish bought tivo? After they clear the directv loophole, they'll be able to advertise as the "exclusive" TiVo provider and take some subs from dtv.


I think someone else made a very deft point. Traditional TV delivery is dead, the industry just doesn't know it yet.

TiVo's IP is losing mindshare every quarter that goes by that they don't embrace a true hybrid model of delivering shows in which a show can not only be recorded via CC, but also streamed/stored directly from providers.

If TiVo can't get this done (cracking this nut) and Apple/Google/MSFT can, then TiVo is screwed, and based on their management ineptitude that seems somewhat inevitable, whether it takes one year or three.


----------



## 241705 (Mar 9, 2010)

jmpage2 said:


> Traditional TV delivery is dead, the industry just doesn't know it yet.


Apparently, neither do the more than 80% of Americans who are said to subscribe to cable or satellite TV.


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

jmpage2 said:


> I think someone else made a very deft point. Traditional TV delivery is dead, the industry just doesn't know it yet.


I guess your idea and mine of what dead is is very different. Our current delivery system of OTA/Cable/Satellite will be around for a significant period of time, none of us knows for how long but in 5 years OTA/Cable/Satellite will still be the major delivery system. So unless you consider yourself dead now because someday you will die I find your statement a little premature.



jmpage2 said:


> TiVo's IP is losing mindshare every quarter that goes by that they don't embrace a true hybrid model of delivering shows in which a show can not only be recorded via CC, but also streamed/stored directly from providers.
> 
> If TiVo can't get this done (cracking this nut) and Apple/Google/MSFT can, then TiVo is screwed, and based on their management ineptitude that seems somewhat inevitable, whether it takes one year or three.


Content providers control how TV is delivered. Do you really see any indication that they are going to let IP streaming be anything but a supplement to OTA/cable/satellite? Your idea of supplementing normal cable with streaming is the reality now, several channels/cable providers allow you to stream shows only after logging in with your cable ID and password. However no one in the TV industry is going to allow Apple/Google/MSFT or TiVo to do what Apple did to the music industry any time soon. They will retain control.


----------



## shwru980r (Jun 22, 2008)

Speed Daemon said:


> More likely Apple by my estimation.


Apple would want to charge a fee for every show you record. 99 cents per show.


----------



## SullyND (Dec 30, 2004)

shwru980r said:


> Apple would want to charge a fee for every show you record. 99 cents per show.


Exactly! Just like they do with each song you rip off a CD into iTunes!

Hey, wait....


----------



## aadam101 (Jul 15, 2002)

blackngold75 said:


> Apparently, neither do the more than 80% of Americans who are said to subscribe to cable or satellite TV.


That number is shrinking though. It's no longer a growing market and things can change very quickly. At one point more than 80% had home phones too. No idea what the number is now but it is certainly well below 80%.

I wouldn't call traditional TV dead but it certainly is "dying".


----------



## aadam101 (Jul 15, 2002)

atmuscarella said:


> However no one in the TV industry is going to allow Apple/Google/MSFT or TiVo to do what Apple did to the music industry any time soon. They will retain control.


That's exactly the attitude that the music industry had. Then Napster and Apple came along and they had no choice. They either had to sell out to Apple or Napster (and other file sharing programs) were going to kill them. The TV industry already has one foot in the water in the streaming boat. They have given up a lot of control already and it's only a matter of time before they end up right where the music industry is.


----------



## unitron (Apr 28, 2006)

shwru980r said:


> Apple would want to charge a fee for every show you record. 99 cents per show.


As opposed to the MPAA, who want 99 cents everytime you watch.


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

aadam101 said:


> That's exactly the attitude that the music industry had. Then Napster and Apple came along and they had no choice. They either had to sell out to Apple or Napster (and other file sharing programs) were going to kill them. The TV industry already has one foot in the water in the streaming boat. They have given up a lot of control already and it's only a matter of time before they end up right where the music industry is.


I don't think so, the music industry just wanted digital delivery of music to not exist and when they finally couldn't stop it got suckered by Apple into a deal that allowed Apple to control delivery of their content.

That is not going to happen with video. The content providers are aggressively keeping control of their content and will not allow one company to control digital delivery. They may or may not deliver the content themselves but no one company is going to control digital video delivery like Apple did with digital music delivery.


----------



## atmuscarella (Oct 11, 2005)

aadam101 said:


> That number is shrinking though. It's no longer a growing market and things can change very quickly. At one point more than 80% had home phones too. No idea what the number is now but it is certainly well below 80%.
> 
> I wouldn't call traditional TV dead but it certainly is "dying".


Well actually the number of households with a paid TV service is pretty flat so you are correct that it did not grow in 2011 but there is little consensus on why (economy or other reasons). Oh and by the way the most traditional TV delivery system I know is OTA, so you have to add the people receiving TV via OTA to Cable/Satellite numbers to come up with the total number of people getting TV through "traditional" delivery systems.

Which puts you at about 99% of household still getting TV through traditional delivery systems. Now many households also get TV delivered through non-traditional sources (Internet streaming/downloads). I am not sure what percentage that is but it is growing and significant.

So does the fact that maybe 1% of household do not get any TV delivered through traditional TV delivery sources and that many household use both traditional and nontraditional TV delivery sources tell us that traditional TV delivery systems are dying? Or that we are just going to have more TV delivery sources? Remember at one time all we had was OTA, then we added cable, then satellite, and now Internet streaming.

My bet is that all these systems continue and nothing dyes.


----------



## classicsat (Feb 18, 2004)

jmpage2 said:


> Hey guys, some of us are here to discuss TiVo being on this list, who gives a crap about what happened to DEC 15 years ago?


DEC is a case study in how a formerly relevant hardware/software company
adapted to a changing landscape.


----------



## tiassa (Jul 2, 2008)

classicsat said:


> DEC is a case study in how a formerly relevant hardware/software company
> adapted to a changing landscape. NOT!!


fyp


----------



## Slipknotfan1985 (Feb 2, 2012)

TiVo is not going under I have no worries about this we are selling new service everyday of the week so all those who are enjoying there service know that TiVo is going no where


----------



## Slipknotfan1985 (Feb 2, 2012)

TiVo is not going anywhere they are selling new service daily so all those who are out there enjoying service dont worrie we are still holding strong!


----------



## aadam101 (Jul 15, 2002)

atmuscarella said:


> My bet is that all these systems continue and nothing dyes.


You may be right. Cable will be just like a copper phone line. Nobody has them but there are still lines everywhere. Luckily for cable, they have re-purposed those lines to carry internet as well so it's not a total waste.


----------



## jrm01 (Oct 17, 2003)

aadam101 said:


> That number is shrinking though. It's no longer a growing market and things can change very quickly. At one point more than 80% had home phones too. No idea what the number is now but it is certainly well below 80%.


According to a CBS News report last year 26.6% of homes were wireless only, but 44% of homes headed by 18-30 year olds were wireless only.


----------



## aadam101 (Jul 15, 2002)

jrm01 said:


> According to a CBS News report last year 26.6% of homes were wireless only, but 44% of homes headed by 18-30 year olds were wireless only.


I would guess a big part of that is the "bundling" offered by cable companies. Verizon was recently giving out $500 prepaid gift cards as long as you got the bundle. A Verizon tech told me he had several customers tell him not to bother hooking up the phone. They just wanted the gift card.

Of those that do get it hooked up, I have to wonder how often it's actually being used.

My parents finally gave up their land line last year. My mother was really hesitant for a long time. Then one day she realized how little she used it and how much she was paying for it and she let it go. Who wants to have two phones anyway? Life is complicated enough.


----------



## jmpage2 (Jan 21, 2004)

I would not be surprised if a venture capital firm, a la Silver Lake partners, etc, bought TiVo so that they could kill the set top box part of the company and then try to sell the IP/patent portfolio.

Wouldn't be the first time a venture capital firm has done it.


----------



## Joe01880 (Feb 8, 2009)

Wasnt Gateway on last years list, hasnt that been owned by Acer since like 07?


----------



## Brad Bishop (Sep 11, 2001)

What's amazing about the phone companies is that their pricing never changed. They were losing business to cellular phones which were offering more for less (phone + text + caller ID + voice mail + voice mail indicator + data).

The phone (land lines) still wanted:
basic land line: $25
touch tone service: $2.50
voice mail: $10
voice mail indicator: $5 (something like a flashing light working on your phone or the stutter tone)
caller ID: $5
Caller ID 2/ Name Display: $10

Plus all of the other useful/non-useful services that were always hard to remember (Dial *14 for 'something'). Basically you'd end up with a $60 bill for land line service out of the gate and it wasn't hard for that to get close to $70 or $80 because they'd do the bundling of services (like phone + caller ID + caller ID w/ name + all of the * services would be $60) but they'd always charge you extra for stupid things like touch tone and voice mail (and of course extra for the indicator for voice mail so you knew you had a message). I haven't looked in about 10 years but my guess is that their pricing structure hasn't changed. You can see the same thing with their DSL pricing structure. They'll let you in the door for $20-25/month (for a year contract) but after that it's back up to $55 for something that is about 1/5 the speed of the similarly priced cable connection.

I think the land-line phone companies, because they were protected by the PUCs and are guaranteed a profit (this was the case, I assume it still is), simply don't know how to compete. Their like a privately run government agency.

I just look at it and think, "How do you guys not get this?"

If their pricing had dropped over the years to compete with mobile phones and cable I might still have a land-line phone. Right now I'd place it's worth at less than $20/month. I'd put the high-end DSL service (512Kbps/6Mbps) at about the same cost of around $20/month. I'd consider that as a cheaper alternative if they'd offer it. Nope. It has to be $55/month for something that was outdated 5+ years ago.


----------



## GreenMonkey (May 28, 2008)

There's a lot of DSL companies offering service at around $20/mo.

Even my AT&T 12mbit U-verse is only $39/mo (after negotiating down from $49).


----------



## classicsat (Feb 18, 2004)

Our phone bill is $32/month, including taxes, 911 fee, and Voice Mail (which includes the stutter tone/line reversal, which triggers that LED).
DTMF and most of the */# codes are included in the base phone line price. But here in Canada they are strictly CRTC regulated, to the degree they are regulated at all. It has been about that for some time (at least since they de-regulated long distance).

My high speed telco Internet has always been $29.95+$5.00 modem rental+taxes, since I got it in 2004.


----------



## TooMuchTime (Jun 29, 2008)

> Actually, all companies will disappear this year when the Mayan Calendar comes to an end.


*@lillevig* -- this is not directed at you!

Anyone that believes the world will end on December 21, 2012, I have a proposition. I will buy all of your property; house, cars, clothes, appliances, etc., for $1,000.00. _With possession to take place on December 22, 2012._ If the world ends on the 21st, you get $1,000.00 to do with as you please from now until then. If it doesn't, I get everything you own. So, I'm willing to put *MY* money where your mouth is.


----------



## TooMuchTime (Jun 29, 2008)

> My parents finally gave up their land line last year. My mother was really hesitant for a long time. Then one day she realized how little she used it and how much she was paying for it and she let it go. Who wants to have two phones anyway?


When I had a standard land line, I had to have two phones; one for personal and one for business, since I worked from home. But because a standard phone line is a _gov't regulated utility,_ to get long distance and other options on the business line, I had to get it on the primary line, too. No, I couldn't switch the business line to the primary. The cost for all that useless gov't intervention in the phone business was $150 per month.

Then I got U-Verse (have since dropped them). The cost for the phone lines was $50 a month. I saved $100 a month when I got rid of the gov't regulations. I now have Comcast Cable and pay about $40 a month for one line; no longer need the second business line.

It's all gov't regulations.


----------



## jmpage2 (Jan 21, 2004)

It would be nice if you could reply without having to put your political commentary into the discussion.

For the record, I don't believe what you are referring to are federal regulations at all, as I had two different lines at home, one for telecommuting, through QWEST and had completely different packages on each line (the telecommuter line was a "life line" without even call waiting and was about $28 a month including taxes).

Since then I've switched to Ooma, and pay about $150 a year for two lines with unlimited long distance.

Anyways, this discussion has tacked severely off the heading for discussion of TiVo and their prospects for buyout in 2012.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

AMike said:


> Here's a link to last year's story:
> 
> http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/01/18/10-american-companies-that-will-disappear-in-2011/


The funniest one on the list is Office Depot. The reasoning is almost identical to the reason they listed Office Max this year. Apparently in one year Office Depot not only didn't go under but some how pulled ahead and pushed Office Max into the #3 spot. Just goes to show these guys are always just talking out of their asses.

Dan


----------



## jmpage2 (Jan 21, 2004)

Dan203 said:


> The funniest one on the list is Office Depot. The reasoning is almost identical to the reason they listed Office Max this year. Apparently in one year Office Depot not only didn't go under but some how pulled ahead and pushed Office Max into the #3 spot. Just goes to show these guys are always just talking out of their asses.
> 
> Dan


Sarah Lee, Saab, Borders, they are all gone. I'd say that batting at least 330 is not bad for "having your head up your ass".


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

jmpage2 said:


> Sarah Lee, Saab, Borders, they are all gone. I'd say that batting at least 330 is not bad for "having your head up your ass".


Sara Lee isn't gone.

Yes, they split off the international business into it's own company, but the North American business is still around. (And AFAIK, both still operate under the Sara Lee corporate name.)

And technically, they missed Saab (but only by a number of days... it folded very shortly into the new year.)


----------



## Sapphire (Sep 10, 2002)

aadam101 said:


> That number is shrinking though. It's no longer a growing market and things can change very quickly. At one point more than 80% had home phones too. No idea what the number is now but it is certainly well below 80%.
> 
> I wouldn't call traditional TV dead but it certainly is "dying".


Part of the problem is that people are substituting their cable tv subscriptions with piracy in part. Solve the piracy problem and cord cutting won't be as popular.

Ultimately the studios and the networks have control of the content. They dictate where the market is heading not the viewers.


----------



## classicsat (Feb 18, 2004)

I woul like to say (I have no definitive proof, just a hunch), that Netflix and other legitimate online services, in concert with set-top boxes such as Roku or Apple TV, are the major cause of cord dutting, not piracy. TV show piracy has been around for nearly 10 years, becoming popular 5 years or so ago. Piracy is less of a proble, but a problem still.

What need to be done to fix a good part of piracy, is to make the content being pirated, available just as easy as through a pirate network, for reasonable cost. To fix cord cutting, cable need to have reasonable choices for reasonable prices.


----------



## AMike (Oct 22, 2004)

jmpage2 said:


> It would be nice if you could reply without having to put your political commentary into the discussion.
> 
> For the record, I don't believe what you are referring to are federal regulations at all, as I had two different lines at home, one for telecommuting, through QWEST and had completely different packages on each line (the telecommuter line was a "life line" without even call waiting and was about $28 a month including taxes).
> 
> ...


I've been an Ooma subscriber for the past 2 plus years which has been great. I work from my home so I have one line dedicated to work and the other for home.

Because I have a warped sense of humor, I enjoy getting calls from the cable company asking if I'm interested in home phone service to see what their response will be when I tell them what I'm paying for Ooma. It always throws them off their script!

Back on topic, when I initially became a TiVo subscriber from the onset, I seem to recall that the naysayers were throwing dirt on the TiVo grave then. The so-called experts thought that Replay was going to be the big winner in the DVR market, and look where they are today.


----------



## HerronScott (Jan 1, 2002)

hefe said:


> Somebody mark that article and remind us at the end of the year. I want to see if any of it comes true. Because these financial writers are always so accurate.


Well TiVo isn't gone yet (nor sold their hardware business).

Scott


----------

