# Lifetime is Far Too Expensive on the Mini



## andrews777

$160 for lifetime service for a device that only connects to another one. Good for them I am already committed to upgrading to a Roamio and replacing my setup with 3 of these or I might have balked. That is far too much when I have already paid for 4 lifetimes (3 TivoHDs, 1 Premiere). Really a nasty scam.

No much to do about it, but I am venting here anyway!


----------



## Dan203

It's only $149. If you count the cost of the Mini and lifetime as a whole it's not that bad. The only reason TiVo split it out like this is because they're a service company and it makes it look better on their books.


----------



## MScottC

I didn't look at is as $100 for hardware and $150 for lifetime service. I looked at it as a $250 box that saved me from having to buy a second TiVo, and from having to pay Comcast for a second outlet all while letting me watch the same pool of shows in another room while managing only one set of "season passes" and "now playings."

Personally I think this is the best TiVo deal since I paid $200 for lifetime for my Series 1 14 years ago, which just got transferred over to my Roamio Plus.

Several weeks ago, after having some issues with some shows on Netflix with my S3, I purchased a Roku3 for $100 which is indeed really cool, but quite frankly, the Mini is worth a whole lot more than 2 1/2 times the value of the Roku. The Roku will still fill some holes that TiVo doesn't, but no it's where as valuable to me as it was a week ago.


----------



## Dan203

The closest comparable product to a TiVo Mini is the Ceton Echo, which is $199. So the Mini is in the same ball park.


----------



## fungflex

Got to be honest it hurt today when I activated my new Roamio w/ Lifetime and 3 Mini's with lifetime.....

However, I think they are worth every penny. I'm already in love with extending Tivo to rooms where I wouldn't normally put a full tivo box like my office. Also, since my last Tivo purchase was back when the Premieres were fairly new I am loving the moca support out of the box, that is working really really well. Very happy to retire my wifi adapters.


----------



## lessd

andrews777 said:


> $160 for lifetime service for a device that only connects to another one. Good for them I am already committed to upgrading to a Roamio and replacing my setup with 3 of these or I might have balked. That is far too much when I have already paid for 4 lifetimes (3 TivoHDs, 1 Premiere). Really a nasty scam.
> 
> No much to do about it, but I am venting here anyway!


I think a *Rolls Royce *is too expensive for just a car, what a scam, but I fixed their wagon, I did not fall for that pricing scam and purchased a much less expensive car and they lost my business.


----------



## BankZ

I sold my TiVo HD for more than the TiVo Mini. I now have more features and saving money on my monthly cable bill. Seemed like a no brainer to me.


----------



## cncb

Dan203 said:


> The closest comparable product to a TiVo Mini is the Ceton Echo, which is $199. So the Mini is in the same ball park.


The Echo has always been $179 so not really in the same ball park but it doesn't offer Netflix or any streaming services.


----------



## Dan203

Hmmm... I thought when I looked it said the MSRP was $199 and it was marked down to $179.

In any case that's still only a $70 difference, which I would consider "in the same ball park". TiVo is cheaper up front and if you pay the monthly fee it would take over a year to reach the price of the Echo. Lower cost of entry is important to some people. In fact that's where TiVo really shines. If you compare an HTPC setup to a TiVo setup with lifetime the prices are about the same. But if you pay TiVo monthly it's significantly cheaper then an HTPC setup and it'll take 2-3 years before you hit the HTPC price point. For people with limited funds or who are unsure about owning a DVR that lower cost of entry is compelling.


----------



## andrews777

A Tivo Mini is not a Rolls, get a little real on this.

The $159 price includes the tax, so that is the price. I didn't see an option to leave that part off.

It is still absurd to buy a remote device that must connect through an existing Tivo and have to pay almost twice the price to get it to work. I know lifetime is a value if I expect to keep it, but that doesn't make the extra cost any more enjoyable.

List price on the Tivo Mini at Amazon is $99.99, so $150 more is still 1.5 times the price of the unit for permanent service. 

Comparing this to the price of a stand-alone device is not a valid comparison. I will be paying $399 soon for lifetime on a Roamio (or more if the other posts are right) which should cover their cut. The $149.99 cost is noted in the product info, but it is still a bit outrageous. Another "because we can" fee.


----------



## TC25D

Why would TiVo sell a Mini, at a one time charge, that in many situations would replace a Roamio that has both a one time charge plus a monthly service charge (or lifetime), and give up the revenue stream? Dumb idea. 

If people don't like the Mini pricing model, don't buy it. Simple solution that will get Tivos attention.


----------



## HenryFarpolo

The ability to get HD live TV in a location that cannot accommodate a full sized box is worth the price for me. The additional bonus of accessing recorded content is the frosting on the cake.


----------



## Davelnlr_

TC25D said:


> If people don't like the Mini pricing model, don't buy it. Simple solution that will get Tivos attention.


I did just that. Got a used TivoHD box with lifetime for about the same price as a mini with lifetime. Now the guests have their own two tuners, and dont steal any of mine.


----------



## TC25D

Davelnlr_ said:


> I did just that. Got a used TivoHD box with lifetime for about the same price as a mini with lifetime. Now the guests have their own two tuners, and dont steal any of mine.


A perfect solution, you get what you want and TiVo loses a Mini sale because of their pricing model.


----------



## ShayL

Dan203 said:


> The closest comparable product to a TiVo Mini is the Ceton Echo, which is $199. So the Mini is in the same ball park.


It is discontinued, but the Moxi Mate was comparable too. It was 300 purchased by itself or 200 when you bought it with a moxi. MOCA was not builtin either.


----------



## Dan203

So in the same ball park as well.

I'm actually surprised TiVo hasn't done more bundle deals with the Mini yet. Seems like a 6 tuner Roamio + 2 Minis for a little discount would be a hot seller and something they could market to Hopper and Genie users.


----------



## aristoBrat

andrews777 said:


> That is far too much when I have already paid for 4 lifetimes (3 TivoHDs, 1 Premiere). Really a nasty scam.


I don't get the scam part of it. It's not like TiVo stops your old TiVos from working when you buy the new Minis?

Shouldn't you be able to sell your three old TiVo HDs, pay for three TiVo Minis + Lifetime, and still walk away with money in your pocket? 

Before the Mini, I'd guess you paid $550 minimum to get TiVo in another room. ($399 Lifetime + the price of the TiVo HDs) Now you're getting TiVo in another room for $250. Granted, a Mini must connect to another TiVo to work, but TiVo's charging you 2.4x less for a Mini than they charge for a "regular" TiVo.

As for the TiVo they connect to, even there, the total price of a box with six tuners + Lifetime is astronomically cheaper than what you had to do to get six tuners a year ago.


----------



## shortys408

this thread just convinced me to order one.


----------



## lessd

HenryFarpolo said:


> The ability to get HD live TV in a location that cannot accommodate a full sized box is worth the price for me. The additional bonus of accessing recorded content is the frosting on the cake.


And one less cable card


----------



## andrews777

aristoBrat said:


> I don't get the scam part of it. It's not like TiVo stops your old TiVos from working when you buy the new Minis?
> 
> Shouldn't you be able to sell your three old TiVo HDs, pay for three TiVo Minis + Lifetime, and still walk away with money in your pocket?
> 
> Before the Mini, I'd guess you paid $550 minimum to get TiVo in another room. ($399 Lifetime + the price of the TiVo HDs) Now you're getting TiVo in another room for $250. Granted, a Mini must connect to another TiVo to work, but TiVo's charging you 2.4x less for a Mini than they charge for a "regular" TiVo.
> 
> As for the TiVo they connect to, even there, the total price of a box with six tuners + Lifetime is astronomically cheaper than what you had to do to get six tuners a year ago.


I doubt I will come out of this without money out of my pocket. Remember the Roamio is around $1K itself. Even accounting for selling my 3 TivoHD and 1 Premiere XL units still is likely to fall short of recouping the entire cost.

I find the "scam" part in that the lifetime cost is significantly more than the box, not true with the Roamio, plus the fact that it is almost 1/2 half the cost of the Roamio lifetime MSD cost.

I do not recall this being the case with my TivoHDs, though that was a while ago. I did get stuck paying monthly for 3 years on one too, before being able to buy lifetime. (It was not available when I bought the unit.)

I would probably have hesitated if I had known I was putting $450 more into the deal rather than just the $270 plus the cost of the Roamio. My fault, but still not pleasant.

And making the "just don't buy it" excuse someone else made does not negate the slimy feel of this.


----------



## aristoBrat

andrews777 said:


> And making the "just don't buy it" excuse someone else made does not negate the slimy feel of this.


The only thing I find slightly slimy with the Roamios/Minis is the $200 price difference between the Roamio Plus and the Roamio Pro.

The only difference between those boxes is the hard drive. Using consumer prices (amazon.com), the cost difference between those drives is about $50. I'd guess that difference is even less for TiVo. Anyhow, TiVo's taking that $50 price difference and charging $200 extra for it.

Also FWIW there are several Roamio models. For the $199 model, the cost of the $399 Lifetime is 2x the cost of the box. With the Mini, Lifetime costs 1.5x the cost of the box. IIRC, before the Roamios came out, TiVo was selling Premiers for $149, which made the Lifetime cost 2.67x more than the box! It's all relative to the cost of the box (and apparently you're buying the macdaddy box). 

Either way, a slimy feeling is a slimy feeling. Hopefully in the end, you'll end up loving your new setup, and the sliminess goes away.


----------



## MScottC

At this point, nobody is forcing anyone to buy anything. Everything you own still works. This is the price of technology. I'm more pissed at Apple when they encouraged me to upgrade my iPhone 3Gs to the next iOS and it started to act like a brick. When I tried to revert to the prior OS, it wouldn't let me. The only way for me to get my iPhone working was to buy a new one.

TiVo on the other hand leaves your current box alone. My Series 1 worked perfectly till the day I took it out of service last week. (And not to gloat, but what the hell, the $200 lifetime covered me for close to 14 years, and is now covering me on my new Roamio.) The Series 3, that I was running with a $6.95 msd, I lifetimed that for $100. I have no complaints with TiVo at all. My trick was simple, I didn't buy every new box that came out. I waited patiently till I saw the right boxes to purchase, and the right lifetimes to purchase. YMMV


----------



## Dan203

aristoBrat said:


> The only thing I find slightly slimy with the Roamios/Minis is the $200 price difference between the Roamio Plus and the Roamio Pro.
> 
> The only difference between those boxes is the hard drive. Using consumer prices (amazon.com), the cost difference between those drives is about $50. I'd guess that difference is even less for TiVo. Anyhow, TiVo's taking that $50 price difference and charging $200 extra for it.


This is common practice in the tech industry. Apple charges $100 more for a 32GB iPad vs a 16GB. You can buy a 16GB SD card for $11 on Amazon, so how much do you think Apple pays for those surface mount chips? Dell does the same thing with memory upgrades charging 3-4x what the RAM costs on Amazon or Newegg.


----------



## aristoBrat

Dan203 said:


> This is common practice in the tech industry. Apple charges $100 more for a 32GB iPad vs a 16GB. You can buy a 16GB SD card for $11 on Amazon, so how much do you think Apple pays for those surface mount chips? Dell does the same thing with memory upgrades charging 3-4x what the RAM costs on Amazon or Newegg.


Wasn't the difference in price between the TiVo Premiere (1TB) and Premiere XL (2TB) $149?


----------



## Dan203

The Premiere 4 (500GB) was $249 and the Premiere XL4 (2TB) was $399. So the pattern of $0.10 per GB is holding with the Roamio.


----------



## aristoBrat

Dan203 said:


> The Premiere 4 (500GB) was $249 and the Premiere XL4 (2TB) was $399. So the pattern of $0.10 per GB is holding with the Roamio.


For some reason, I thought the Plus had a 2TB drive.  So much for late night posts from me. :down:


----------



## Dan203

I wish, I would have bought a Plus instead of a Pro if it has 2TB. But my Elite (2TB) was sitting at just over 50% full so I knew 1TB wasn't enough so I had to order a Pro. (will be here today )


----------



## aaronwt

Dan203 said:


> I wish, I would have bought a Plus instead of a Pro if it has 2TB. But my Elite (2TB) was sitting at just over 50% full so I knew 1TB wasn't enough so I had to order a Pro. (will be here today )


It seems like you've been waiting for your Romaio Pro forever. I'm sure you will enjoy it though. It is worth the wait.


----------



## Dan203

aaronwt said:


> It seems like you've been waiting for your Romaio Pro forever. I'm sure you will enjoy it though. It is worth the wait.


Yeah I ordered it almost 2 weeks ago. It shipped later then expected and with the holiday ended up sitting in a UPS warehouse for the last 3 days.


----------



## kherr

So what's the big deal ??? Nobody is putting a gun to the guy's head to buy anything. If he doesn't like the terms ...... vote with the wallet and don't buy .... really simple ...


----------



## CrispyCritter

kherr said:


> So what's the big deal ??? Nobody is putting a gun to the guy's head to buy anything. If he doesn't like the terms ...... vote with the wallet and don't buy .... really simple ...


Absolutely. But we'd like the OP (original poster) to understand what TiVo is doing, so he can make his decision based on the facts.

The fact is that the Mini is a $250 list price device that TiVo has, quite artificially, split into a $100 hardware price and a $150 lifetime price. The buyer can substitute a monthly payment for the $150 lifetime price, if the buyer so chooses (an extra option for the buyer, almost always good.)

It sounds like the OP objects to the particular split and would be happier if, say, he had to pay $150 up front for hardware and only $100 in lifetime. That would make the lifetime not "far too expensive". Some people would prefer that and some people wouldn't. That doesn't really seem to be a good reason for being upset, which is why people have responded, IMO.

It sounds like the OP has an additional complaint of not really realizing the full $250 price of the Mini. That's a much more legitimate complaint, despite the fact that TiVo is pretty careful about always including the monthly service fee in its advertising. But I don't view it as a scam, any more than I view any cell phone advertisement or car lease commercial as scams - they're all the same as long as it is disclosed up front. However, I can understand the OP being upset about that, and I agree that it's up to him whether it's worth it or not.


----------



## b_scott

MScottC said:


> Personally I think this is the best TiVo deal since I paid $200 for lifetime for my Series 1 14 years ago, which just got transferred over to my Roamio Plus.


How did you do this? If I can do that, I'll get a RP and transfer my Tivo Premiere lifetime to a Plus (-$399 total), sell my PXL + lifetime (+$375ish), sell my Premiere (now w/out lifetime, +$60) and buy a Mini w/lifetime (-$250).

That would put me at about -$215 but would save me $120 a year in second outlet charges, and net me two extra tuners.


----------



## jmpage2

b_scott said:


> How did you do this? If I can do that, I'll get a RP and transfer my Tivo Premiere lifetime to a Plus (-$399 total), sell my PXL + lifetime (+$375ish), sell my Premiere (now w/out lifetime, +$60) and buy a Mini w/lifetime (-$250).
> 
> That would put me at about -$215 but would save me $120 a year in second outlet charges, and net me two extra tuners.


You can't do it, because it doesn't exist for your Premiere.

There was a grand-fathered one time transfer of Lifetime for owners of Series 1 TiVos which allows them to move the Lifetime service to another TiVo, one time, then it is "used" and they have to pay for future lifetime service on any other TiVos they acquire.

TiVo service is expensive. The cost of my Roamio Plus as well as two Minis, all with Lifetime membership is MSRP $1300.... even if I paid $40 monthly for DVR rentals from my cable company it would take over two years to break even on the cost (not to mention risk of a TiVo unit breaking outside of warranty, etc).

But here's the thing.... TiVo is WORTH IT to me. It's like driving a German car when a Chevy gets you there too.

For me, even though I don't watch a ton of TV, I get a helluva lot more satisfaction out of watching TV on a TiVo compared to some crappy Scientific Atlanta DVR.

It sounds like many here feel the same way, but seem to balk at the price... kind of like people who felt insulted that Apple had the nerve to sell the original iPhone at $599 without a contract. They were paying the same price more or less for other phones at the time, but something about that lump sump up front payment was "offensive".

It is not like this in all cultures. In Europe it is very common to pay cash for things, and most phones are purchased un-subsidized. Probably results in Europeans, on average, taking better care of their crap than Americans.


----------



## Dan203

jmpage2 said:


> TiVo service is expensive. The cost of my Roamio Plus as well as two Minis, all with Lifetime membership is MSRP $1300.... even if I paid $40 monthly for DVR rentals from my cable company it would take over two years to break even on the cost (not to mention risk of a TiVo unit breaking outside of warranty, etc).


You have to remember that TiVo's also retain value. If you pay your cable company $40/mo for 33 months and then walk away you will have paid $1320 and have nothing to show for it. If you do the same with a TiVo it will likely be worth $500+ at the end of those 33 months, probably more. So if you sell it then it really only cost you $25/mo. And even if you paid monthly and threw the hardware in the trash at 33 months it's still comparable to the cable company prices and you get a better product. ($45/mo vs $40/mo)

Once you get over the initial outlay TiVo is not that expensive. Definitely not BMW vs Chevy expensive.


----------



## jmpage2

No argument Dan, but I guess you could say my point is there is quite the mental hurdle for people to overcome with the Lifetime option, which long term, makes the most sense.

I at one point had two TiVos and wanted a 3rd for a workout room, but could not justify the $500+ outlay (plus cablecard fees) for a box that I would use 2-3 hours every week (I use my Boxee in the workout room more than a TiVo).... even though I could afford it.

The Mini, by just being an extension of another TiVo makes the multi room approach much more palatable to me, even with the higher price.


----------



## Dan203

I've paid monthly on a ton of TiVos over the years. Always seemed practical at the time, but when I look back I regret it. For my last 3 TiVos I bought lifetime without hesitation. It may hurt now, but long term it's a much better deal.


----------



## andrews777

The point here is that the fee seems outrageous, even to someone who has 3 TivoHDs and a Premiere with Lifetime. I clearly decided it was still worthwhile, but it is still a lot of money.

I like the simplicity of not having an entire other unit that could go bad, but it is costly to get that, especially since I effectively have 0 cost now, ignoring possible repair costs down the line.


----------



## Scooby Doo

andrews777 said:


> The point here is that the fee seems outrageous, even to someone who has 3 TivoHDs and a Premiere with Lifetime. I clearly decided it was still worthwhile, but it is still a lot of money.


I don't get it. Tivo HDs with lifetime make about $250 on eBay, so these are a free swap for the Minis. With what you can make selling the Premiere, you are looking at a total cost of maybe $500 to upgrade your system. And you will save on three sets of cablecard fees so it will pay for itself in a couple years. Sounds like a bargain to me.


----------



## jmpage2

Scooby Doo said:


> I don't get it. Tivo HDs with lifetime make about $250 on eBay, so these are a free swap for the Minis. With what you can make selling the Premiere, you are looking at a total cost of maybe $500 to upgrade your system. And you will save on three sets of cablecard fees so it will pay for itself in a couple years. Sounds like a bargain to me.


You are right, it is a bargain for all the new capabilities, better speed, reduced long-term charges for cable-cards, etc.....but he seems to have a hard time with that up front outlay. Everyone's finances are different. For me personally, if I can't pay for things cash via "petty cash" then they are harder to justify. Fortunately I had enough petty cash lying around to finance my Roamio upgrade.


----------



## andrews777

jmpage2 said:


> You are right, it is a bargain for all the new capabilities, better speed, reduced long-term charges for cable-cards, etc.....but he seems to have a hard time with that up front outlay. Everyone's finances are different. For me personally, if I can't pay for things cash via "petty cash" then they are harder to justify. Fortunately I had enough petty cash lying around to finance my Roamio upgrade.


I was mentally expecting the upgrade to the Roamio to be close to break even, but that got wiped out with my unaccounted cost for the whole Mini package.

It seems like paying a lifetime fee for a remote controller rather than a DVR to me though. It isn't, but that is what it feels like.

I think the upgrade cost me almost 2K overall. I will probably recoup about $1K of that. Though I have to decide if I go the Ebay or Craig's List route. I really don't want whoever coming into the house to view the system, but that is a reasonable request if they are giving me cash for it.

I am not happy that the Mini displays worse on my old Emerson pre-HDTV TV as well. I have some cables from Amazon coming in tomorrow or Saturday that may help, but the early results with cables I had collected over the years were not good. I may have to buy a new HDTV for that room as well.

I will note again that Tivo didn't hide the cost, it just didn't seem as obvious and had no MRD.


----------



## aristoBrat

Since the Mini can only be used with another TiVo, it's "multi-room" from the start, no? My thought is that the MRD is already included.


----------



## Dan203

andrews777 said:


> The point here is that the fee seems outrageous


I think people like yourself are hung up the fact that it has a "service fee". I'm betting if the cost was simply $250 out of the gate you'd just accept that as the price and move on. But because they separate it out as a "service fee" you start to wonder what "service" this fee is for. The answer is that it's really not for a "service". It's an accounting trick. It's a way for TiVo to sell an extender while simultaneously bolstering their subscriber numbers. It also allows a lower cost of entry for those wanting to pay monthly. It's not really a "service fee" at all.


----------



## ncbill

Some people buy vehicles.

Some people lease, but whether they want to acknowledge it or not, they are ultimately paying more than those who buy.


----------



## andrews777

Dan203 said:


> I think people like yourself are hung up the fact that it has a "service fee". I'm betting if the cost was simply $250 out of the gate you'd just accept that as the price and move on. But because they separate it out as a "service fee" you start to wonder what "service" this fee is for. The answer is that it's really not for a "service". It's an accounting trick. It's a way for TiVo to sell an extender while simultaneously bolstering their subscriber numbers. It also allows a lower cost of entry for those wanting to pay monthly. It's not really a "service fee" at all.


Perhaps. Though it also possible I would have said "looks nice" and kept running with the setup I had since it did work. The only strongly motivating factor was that the unit we have in our bedroom, which rarely gets used, can have quite loud hard drive activity in the middle of the night for no apparent reason. It is normally fairly quiet, but I do like the idea of removing the hard drive completely from there.

I also liked the idea of downsizing 4 cable cards to 1, but that was not enough savings by itself.

I think it is still too pricey at $250 and I would bet they do too, which is why they split it out to make it "seem better," at least at first. People will be more hesitant to return something they have, even if they find the cost a bit too high when they sign it up for service.


----------



## TC25D

I'm glad the majority of people live by the Serenity Prayer, even if they are not aware of it. Otherwise, discussion forums would need to be renamed.


----------



## aaronwt

andrews777 said:


> Perhaps. Though it also possible I would have said "looks nice" and kept running with the setup I had since it did work. The only strongly motivating factor was that the unit we have in our bedroom, which rarely gets used, can have quite loud hard drive activity in the middle of the night for no apparent reason. It is normally fairly quiet, but I do like the idea of removing the hard drive completely from there.
> 
> I also liked the idea of downsizing 4 cable cards to 1, but that was not enough savings by itself.
> 
> I think it is still too pricey at $250 and I would bet they do too, which is why they split it out to make it "seem better," at least at first. People will be more hesitant to return something they have, even if they find the cost a bit too high when they sign it up for service.


You have thirty days to return the hardware or get a refund on the lifetime service.


----------



## andrews777

aaronwt said:


> You have thirty days to return the hardware or get a refund on the lifetime service.


True, but that still involves work on my part. I was fairly invested when the 3 Tivo Mini's arrived from Amazon via UPS and the Roamio through Walmart was on its way. I could have sent things back, but it did not seem worth it at that point.

I think this is the same reason places like Home Depot have such a generous return policy. People probably keep a good portion of the items they don't need, which they only bought because they knew they could return them.

Allowing easy returns can help sales from what I have read, in many product areas.


----------



## Dan203

So you didn't know ahead of time that they required service? That does kind of suck, but sort of your fault for not doing your research.


----------



## prisk

When I was talking to the sales rep at TiVo yesterday and mentioned the price of the lifetime, she said it was "already discounted." "Discounted from what?" I asked. She didn't have an answer to that. Having said that, lookig at the price of the Mini holistically, I agree with other posters that the device costs $240. This basically gets me a fully functioning TiVo with HD in any room in my house. Far cheaper than yeseterday's alternatives, where I had to buy a whole new TiVo, plus lifetime ($700 total, at least), PLUS (and this is the truly galling part), an additional $9.95 each month to Comcast. So, looked at in that perspective, it's not a bad deal.

True, if you have an old setup like I do (S2, S3 and S4) then I'd have to buy a Roamio Plus and get the Mini's to replace the other TiVo's, then it is a substantial investment. However, the older TiVo's, all with lifetime service, have a residual value on Ebay of about $800, making my net investment about $900 to effectively put a HD TiVo in 4 rooms in my house, and that's about $225 per room. That is a bargain. AND, I save $31 a month by not paying Comcast a bunch of "additional outlet" fees each month, or $360 per year. And there is the added bonus of being able to move or stream shows to my iPad when I travel. All around, a good deal. The savings in Comcast fees pays for the entire TiVo setup in 26-30 months. And THAT is a really good deal.


----------



## aristoBrat

andrews777 said:


> I think it is still too pricey at $250


Here's how I look at it.

$2500 would have been around the minimum cost for your old setup (Premiere XL + three TiVo HDs), had you gotten Lifetime Service with each of them.

$1750 should be around what your setup (Roamio Pro + three Minis) with Lifetime Service cost you.

At the end of the day, your new setup --

- costs 30% less for the hardware + Lifetime Service
- saves you money monthly on cable card/multiple outlet fees
- saves you money monthly on electrical use
- removes a tuning adapter + associated wires/power from extra rooms
- gives you the ability to stream/download programs to mobile devices
- includes MoCa capability

With your new setup, you're probably paying about 2x more for your Roamio Pro than you paid for your Premiere XL. But the new setup still comes in 30% cheaper that your old setup... because of how inexpensive the Minis are (at $250 for hardware + Lifetime Service).

More power to your thought that they're still too pricey. Laying the numbers out, I'm personally just not seeing that.


----------



## b_scott

spoke with my wife about the possible sale / purchase scenario. Upfront a Roamio Plus and a Mini (both with lifetime) is $1050. I'd recoup maybe $750-800 from selling my two current lifetimed boxes, if that. So still out $250. However we'd pick up two tuners total, and we'd not be paying $120 a year for the extra cable outlet. After two years it'd cover the cost. Still, baby on the way in Dec and not looking to spend any money we don't have to, so for now it's on hold.


----------



## andrews777

b_scott said:


> spoke with my wife about the possible sale / purchase scenario. Upfront a Roamio Plus and a Mini (both with lifetime) is $1050. I'd recoup maybe $750-800 from selling my two current lifetimed boxes, if that. So still out $250. However we'd pick up two tuners total, and we'd not be paying $120 a year for the extra cable outlet. After two years it'd cover the cost. Still, baby on the way in Dec and not looking to spend any money we don't have to, so for now it's on hold.


And that would be a main point. I didn't consult my wife closely for this (I generally handle electronics) and I believe the cost is ultimately worthwhile, but it is still too expensive.

It is likely the business model of Tivo that is ultimately the problem and their organizational structure. Most modern thing either drastically drop in price or add significant numbers of new features, though many do both. Tivo has very minimal competition, so they can get away with a slight monopoly position.

I also see that even their "one box" offering is missing a great deal of things that are on something like Roku and that could be their biggest long term problem.

Different thread issue however, though it does impact my assertion that they are overpriced. They are because you don't have an alternative. Kind of like complaining about Dish or DirectTV equipment if you use them as your provider, not many options work well. (I have had Dish in the past.)

Monopolies generally lose out to more nimble competitors, but it can take a tech shift to bring that about.


----------



## jmpage2

You are arguing that TiVo should be in a "race to the bottom" like a TV or BD player and that the price should plummet as a result. 

TiVo is in the service business. They design the box themselves to optimize the customer experience, similar to what Apple does. 

Even if the hardware was a cheap commodity they would still try for these service prices. Clearly customers are willing to pay for TiVo over a provider DVR because it is perceived to be better. 

A Chevy will get me to the office as well as my BMW but the BMW is worth the price premium because, for me, driving it is much more enjoyable.


----------



## aristoBrat

andrews777 said:


> Most modern thing either drastically drop in price or add significant numbers of new features, though many do both.


TiVo's dropped the price of getting TiVo in additional rooms from ~$600 to $250 (not including the costs you save from not having to rent cable cards and multi-outlet fees).

That's a 58% price drop.

At what price point (device + Lifetime) would you consider TiVo in another room to _not be_ expensive?


----------



## jmpage2

aristoBrat said:


> TiVo's dropped the price of getting TiVo in additional rooms from ~$600 to $250 (not including the costs you save from not having to rent cable cards and multi-outlet fees).
> 
> That's a 58% price drop.
> 
> At what price point (device + Lifetime) would you consider TiVo in another room to _not be_ expensive?


He has already implied that it should be priced competitively with boxes like Roku. In other words, boxes that offer apps but don't offer the ability to watch live or recorded TV.


----------



## b_scott

no, I didn't read that as him saying it should be priced the same as Roku (one time cost of around $100). He's saying it should do what Roku does the same or better than Roku, because of the high cost.

Tivo uses already available guide data and tailors it to their system. Otherwise, most of Tivo that you see is the box and the apps and functions built into the physical box.


----------



## Dan203

andrews777 said:


> And that would be a main point. I didn't consult my wife closely for this (I generally handle electronics) and I believe the cost is ultimately worthwhile, but it is still too expensive.


This is why me and my wife keep our money separate. I buy whatever I want and she can't complain about it. She buys whatever she wants and I don't complain about it. (except when she buys godawful crap she actually wants to display in our house) Makes buying stuff like this a lot easier.


----------



## Big Cab Daddy

MScottC said:


> I didn't look at is as $100 for hardware and $150 for lifetime service. I looked at it as a $250 box that saved me from having to buy a second TiVo, and from having to pay Comcast for a second outlet all while letting me watch the same pool of shows in another room while managing only one set of "season passes" and "now playings."
> 
> Personally I think this is the best TiVo deal since I paid $200 for lifetime for my Series 1 14 years ago, which just got transferred over to my Roamio Plus.
> 
> Several weeks ago, after having some issues with some shows on Netflix with my S3, I purchased a Roku3 for $100 which is indeed really cool, but quite frankly, the Mini is worth a whole lot more than 2 1/2 times the value of the Roku. The Roku will still fill some holes that TiVo doesn't, but no it's where as valuable to me as it was a week ago.


How did you get lifetime transferred?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free


----------



## aristoBrat

Big Cab Daddy said:


> How did you get lifetime transferred?


IIRC, that's a deal that applies only to Series 1s.



MScottC said:


> Again, you can buy any of the Roamio models from Weaknees, Best Buy, Amazon or any other reseller, often with better deals on price, taxes or shipping and TiVo will honor the grandfather deal on Series 1s purchased before the January 20, 2000 (?). I know, as I just did this. My Roamio Plus is now lifetimed based on this.


----------



## b_scott

Dan203 said:


> This is why me and my wife keep our money separate. I buy whatever I want and she can't complain about it. She buys whatever she wants and I don't complain about it. (except when she buys godawful crap she actually wants to display in our house) Makes buying stuff like this a lot easier.


yeah we've done that for 8 years, but with a house and now a car, and the fact that I make over 50% more than her, we're going to start pooling here soon with the baby coming.


----------



## CrispyCritter

andrews777 said:


> Monopolies generally lose out to more nimble competitors, but it can take a tech shift to bring that about.


Except for patent settlements, TiVo has lost money in almost every quarter since they were founded (they basically broke even in two quarters.) They are a monopoly because they have shown that there is no money to be made in the pure standalone market. People won't pay enough money for TiVo, or anybody, to make a profit in the standalone market, so TiVo has no competitors.

TiVo needs to get more money from its customers in order to make a profit - you're objecting to the Mini price; what do you suggest TiVo should do to actually have you contribute to a profit for them overall?


----------



## prisk

The TiVo Mini is more or less like a Slingbox. Granted there are some differences, but it is the same basic idea and does the same thing to a large extent with many devices. So, a Slingbox is $180 or $300. A Mini is $250. Right in the middle.

In the past year I've been trying to find a way to:
a. reduce the amount I pay Comcast each month
b. download (not necessarily stream) shows to my iPad so I could watch them on a plane or overseas.

Slingbox would have helped with B, but not A. The Mini, costing about the same, does both. It's not a "bargain", like it's $9.99 or something, but it is a fair price for what it is.

The reason TiVo prefers lifetime service over selling equipment is because it is valued differently as a service provider vs. a hardware manufacturer. The $150 fee is recognized as revenue over 2 or 3 years (depends on their accounting practices), which allows them to show a steadier and more predictable stream of income. That "predictable" part is a very big deal. Even if they are showing a "loss" for many quarters, they can point to the many lifetime subscriptions (or contracts) they have in the pipe and show how much revenue they will be recognizing for the next 2-3 years, at a minimum. This is viewed as a very stable source of income for a company. 
Lots of companies do this. If you buy an insurance policy, for example, they will spread out and recognize the revenue over the course of the policy life, not the month or quarter you bought it.


----------



## SullyND

The mini is not like a slingbox, and does not do B.


----------



## jmpage2

Having replaced a Slingcatcher (which pulls video from a Slingbox) with a Mini, I can say that they are nothing alike actually.

Sure, both let you view your TiVo recordings and Live TV.

The Slingbox can only do what the host TiVo does (no local apps for example) and has terrible remote lag. It also has reduced audio video quality compared to the direct feed of the Mini. You can also only stream from a Slingbox on a TiVo to a single receiving device, where-as with the Roamio+Minis you can have several remotes watching TV and recordings at the same time.

I rarely used my SlingCatcher (or later Sling app on Boxee Box) because it was just a headache trying to skip through commercials with all of the delay, audio/video quality not that great, etc.

Now that I have a Mini in the same location I use it all the time. It's literally like having a full blown TiVo in the room it is in, and that alone justifies the $230 or so cost of the Mini + Lifetime.


----------



## andrews777

CrispyCritter said:


> Except for patent settlements, TiVo has lost money in almost every quarter since they were founded (they basically broke even in two quarters.) They are a monopoly because they have shown that there is no money to be made in the pure standalone market. People won't pay enough money for TiVo, or anybody, to make a profit in the standalone market, so TiVo has no competitors.
> 
> TiVo needs to get more money from its customers in order to make a profit - you're objecting to the Mini price; what do you suggest TiVo should do to actually have you contribute to a profit for them overall?


I am not in management at Tivo, but they certainly should pay serious attention to how they will gain market share in the future. Customers can never be demanded on to keep a company afloat (unless you are the government of course, though it only goes so far even then).

Their lack of competition is probably the worst problem they face as it removes the need to truly innovate and can allow any any company to get at least somewhat complacent.

It is a challenge though, as running a solo race makes it harder to keep yourself constantly in peak form. Having another individual you are running against is much more helpful.


----------



## jmpage2

They do have competitors. Roku and ATV are very viable future competition to TiVo and TiVo almost definitely knows this.


----------



## andrews777

jmpage2 said:


> They do have competitors. Roku and ATV are very viable future competition to TiVo and TiVo almost definitely knows this.


I would agree they are a threat, but I question whether Tivo takes it seriously enough since they have not done a lot to enhance their offerings in competitive areas. Netflix continues along, but where all all the new sources? What about something like Amazon Prime Video? Etc.

They do face serious challenges, but they don't have another DVR maker competing for the same market and they can rely on patents and such rather than innovation to keep that market for themselves so they do not have to innovate as much. The pressure is just not there in a directly visible fashion.


----------



## jmpage2

TiVo doesn't control availability of those apps, the providers do. Now that they have a powerful enough platform to handle HTML5 those apps will probably show up but it takes time.


----------



## andrews777

jmpage2 said:


> TiVo doesn't control availability of those apps, the providers do. Now that they have a powerful enough platform to handle HTML5 those apps will probably show up but it takes time.


That is not relevant. The Roku device has them, Tivo's devices do not.

I just upgrade to a Roamio and 3 Minis and I also got 2 Roku 2s to get coverage I could not get. I am not sure I would have jumped into the Tivo in the first place had I not already been using that and this is Tivo's principle challenge. On demand things are getting to be fairly comprehensive.


----------



## aristoBrat

andrews777 said:


> I would agree they are a threat, but I question whether Tivo takes it seriously enough since they have not done a lot to enhance their offerings in competitive areas. Netflix continues along, but where all all the new sources? What about something like Amazon Prime Video? Etc.


I think you stand way more of a chance seeing Amazon Prime on the Roamio than you do seeing Roku changing their business model and trying to tackle Live TV and DVR'ing.



> They do face serious challenges, but they don't have another DVR maker competing for the same market and they can rely on patents and such rather than innovation to keep that market for themselves so they do not have to innovate as much. The pressure is just not there in a directly visible fashion.


Huh? It seems to me that TiVo's #1 competition is cable TV company DVRs. And it's precisely because of TiVo's innovation that people would switch away from a cable company DVR.

Can you name one cable company with a DVR that lets your stream Netflix, Amazon, Hulu plus, MLB, etc?

Can you name one cable company with a DVR that lets you download shows to an phone or tablet?

Can you name one cable company with a DVR that lets you stream Live TV into another room on a device that doesn't require an infinite monthly charge?

Can you name one cable company with a DVR that has a built-in finder for when you lose the remote control?

TiVo's relying on patents and not innovating? Really?


----------



## jmpage2

Well, the real argument there is how long will "live" TV even be around. Some of the more optimistic tech pundits are arguing that we could see a major shift from live to direct content in as little as 3-5 years.

Live TV will in all likelihood be around for at least another decade, but that doesn't mean that it will remain the dominant delivery mechanism for that amount of time.

Comcast and others have already expressed a willingness to potentially offer a la carte programming, something they would have not even considered as being worth consideration just 2-3 yrs ago.


----------



## CrispyCritter

andrews777 said:


> I am not in management at Tivo, but they certainly should pay serious attention to how they will gain market share in the future. Customers can never be demanded on to keep a company afloat (unless you are the government of course, though it only goes so far even then).
> 
> Their lack of competition is probably the worst problem they face as it removes the need to truly innovate and can allow any any company to get at least somewhat complacent.
> 
> It is a challenge though, as running a solo race makes it harder to keep yourself constantly in peak form. Having another individual you are running against is much more helpful.


Sorry, you're not making any sense at all.

People like you are the reason TiVo has abandoned the standalone market as its future. I don't mean that at all pejoratively. The vast majority of DVR users out there have made the rational and understandable decision that they are not willing to pay enough money for TiVos in order for the company to make a reasonable profit in the standalone market. (I'm inferring that since you're already complaining about price, you would not buy TiVos if they cost 25% more).

Even with a monopoly position, TiVo can't make a profit from standalones. The convenience of DVR's supplied by the cable companies is too great. TiVo's innovation doesn't matter; they still will not achieve their goals no matter how much better than cable company DVR's they are. The cable company DVRs are "good enough" for most folks.

TiVo's hope for long-term survival rests on getting enough cable company TiVos out there to be able to start to make substantial money in their audience measurement and targeted advertising ventures. That's the vehicles that will see them through the next couple of decades of massive change in how entertainment is delivered.


----------



## Dan203

andrews777 said:


> That is not relevant. The Roku device has them, Tivo's devices do not.
> 
> I just upgrade to a Roamio and 3 Minis and I also got 2 Roku 2s to get coverage I could not get. I am not sure I would have jumped into the Tivo in the first place had I not already been using that and this is Tivo's principle challenge. On demand things are getting to be fairly comprehensive.


Just because there is some minor overlap in functionality does not mean the TiVo Mini and the Roku are competing with one another. The Roku is a standalone device intended to stream internet based services to a single TV. It's business model is based around selling the hardware cheap and making money via profit sharing with the services it offers on the device. It's in their best interest to offer as many services as possible. A TiVo Mini is intended to extend your TiVo experience into another room. It will not even function as a standalone device. You have to own a TiVo to even set it up. The only apps it supports are the apps that are also available on the main TiVo. And those apps are chosen by TiVo to improve the TV watching experience. They may have similar profit sharing deals, or they may not, but it's not their main motivation for adding apps.


----------



## Scooby Doo

Dan203 said:


> Just because there is some minor overlap in functionality does not mean the TiVo Mini and the Roku are competing with one another.


Of course they are competing. Most people don't want a bunch of devices connected to their TV: they want one device that provides seamless access to all of their content. Tivo has the best device currently available, but it won't be perfect until it makes all content available. I know the business issues are hard, but surely that has to be the goal, no?


----------



## b_scott

Scooby Doo said:


> Of course they are competing. Most people don't want a bunch of devices connected to their TV: they want one device that provides seamless access to all of their content. Tivo has the best device currently available, but it won't be perfect until it makes all content available. I know the business issues are hard, but surely that has to be the goal, no?


the Tivo Mini is an extender. it's not a standalone device like the Roku, so they're not competing.


----------



## Dan203

b_scott said:


> the Tivo Mini is an extender. it's not a standalone device like the Roku, so they're not competing.


Exactly! It's intended to extend the TiVo experience to other rooms. The only reason it even has Netflix, Hulu, etc... is because those apps are on the TiVo. And the only reason they're on the TiVo is to offset the lack of access to VOD. TiVo's actual competition is cable DVRs. Because of poor regulations TiVo is left with a deficit in the VOD arena compared to cable DVRs. They attempt to make up for that with OTT apps instead.

That being said they are likely to add more apps going forward. With their new HTML5 platform, and upcoming Opera store, I'm sure they will become a more viable alternative to a Roku. But Roku has never been their primary competition no matter how similar the hardware in the Mini is to a Roku or how many apps they add.


----------



## TC25D

Dan203 and b_scott - You've accurately made your points. Scooby and andrew refuse to let facts get in the way of their opinions. Afterall, the Tivo Mini, Roku and even the AppleTV all look alike physically, so they all must do the same thing, serve the same purpose and have the same business model. It's all so simple, really.


----------



## Scooby Doo

Let me give a hypothetical that might help you understand where I am coming from. Suppose a Roku allowed you to watch on demand any network show (NBC, CBS, ABC etc.) for up to a week after original broadcast. Who you then consider it a Tivo competitor?


----------



## TC25D

Scooby Doo said:


> Let me give a hypothetical that might help you understand where I am coming from. Suppose a Roku allowed you to watch on demand any network show (NBC, CBS, ABC etc.) for up to a week after original broadcast. Who you then consider it a Tivo competitor?


No - TiVo's primary purposes are; (1) DVR and (2) Live broadcasts.

Roku, and similar devices, are not DVRs and while I have not researched them extensively, I do not believe they offer live broadcasts, other than through a network specific app that provides it.

As Dan203 has mentioned, just because there's overlap, doesn't mean they are competitors. IMO, they appeal to two different audiences.

*CordCutters and people moving towards cordcutting* - Roku, AppleTV, etc.

*People looking to improve their cable company DVR experience* - TiVo.


----------



## Scooby Doo

TC25D said:


> IMO, they appeal to two different audiences.
> 
> *CordCutters and people moving towards cordcutting* - Roku, AppleTV, etc.
> 
> *People looking to improve their cable company DVR experience* - TiVo.


Weill I don't think Tivo agrees with you: if they aren't at least in part going after cord cutters then why put an OTA tuner in the base Roamio? And these forums are full of cord cutters who have bought Roamios. So I think you are sort of proving my point.


----------



## TC25D

No, I'm not proving your point. But if that makes you feel better, so be it. To be clear, I said *primary *purpose(s) and audiences for each device type. Saying TiVo's primary audience are people looking to improve their cable company DVR experience does not preclude TiVo from offering access to similar services as Roku, et. al., particularly since Roku and the others cannot offer DVR and cable company access. The OTA tuner was included for a simple reason, it was easy to do.


----------



## aristoBrat

Scooby Doo said:


> Weill I don't think Tivo agrees with you: if they aren't at least in part going after cord cutters then why put an OTA tuner in the base Roamio? And these forums are full of cord cutters who have bought Roamios. So I think you are sort of proving my point.


IMO, cord cutters are looking for the least expensive solution, so the fact that they're going out and dropping $600+ for an OTA TiVo/Lifetime Service seems to prove the point that these $99 Roku and Apple TV boxes are leaving a void that these people want filled.

I think its as TC25D said ... TiVo's main purposes are (1) DVR and (2) Live broadcasts.

As creative and determined as some of the cord cutters have shown to be, if there was a way to get a $99 streaming box to fill in for DVR and Live Broadcasts, I don't think there'd be much demand at all for an OTA TiVo.


----------



## TC25D

One correction - the OTA-capable TiVo is only $200.


----------



## aristoBrat

TC25D said:


> One correction - the OTA-capable TiVo is only $200.


Sorry, I was meaning hardware + Lifetime Service.


----------



## TC25D

aristoBrat said:


> Sorry, I was meaning hardware + Lifetime Service.


OK.


----------



## b_scott

Scooby Doo said:


> Weill I don't think Tivo agrees with you: if they aren't at least in part going after cord cutters then why put an OTA tuner in the base Roamio? And these forums are full of cord cutters who have bought Roamios. So I think you are sort of proving my point.


they're going the opposite way. They're taking out OTA tuners from their newer higher models. Actually, not "taking out" so much as "these 6 tuner models won't do OTA"


----------



## Scooby Doo

b_scott said:


> they're going the opposite way. They're taking out OTA tuners from their newer higher models. Actually, not "taking out" so much as "these 6 tuner models won't do OTA"


I suspect that has more to do with wanting to have MOCA in those boxes; there are issues supporting MOCA and OTA in the same box. There are quite a few people, myself included, who are sort of "potential future cord cutters" and would have preferred the Plus and the Pro to support OTA.


----------



## Scooby Doo

aristoBrat said:


> IMO, cord cutters are looking for the least expensive solution, so the fact that they're going out and dropping $600+ for an OTA TiVo/Lifetime Service seems to prove the point that these $99 Roku and Apple TV boxes are leaving a void that these people want filled.


I certainly agree cord cutters are looking for the least expensive way to get the content they want. And at the moment they will pay a premium for a Tivo because of the content available on it. But go look at what Roku is doing with live content, with on demand, even with broadcast channels via Aereo in a growing number of markets. The content gap is shrinking; it will probably always be there, but it's shrinking.


----------



## Dan203

Just because TiVo adds features that appeal to cord cutters doesn't mean they are the primary target of the device. The argument here is that TiVo is too expensive when compared to the "competition" (i.e. Roku & AppleTV) we're simply rebutting that TiVo does not actually view those devices as competition and as such their pricing and business models have no effect on TiVo's pricing and business model. TiVo views their competition as cable DVRs. They add these OTT apps specifically to compete with their lack of access to VOD. Some people may see the lack of access to VOD as no big deal if they have access to enough OTT apps which provide the same content.


----------



## jmpage2

We aren't TiVo executives so none of us knows who they consider competition. If they are smart they do view market disrupters like Roku and ATV as competition even if its on their periphery. 

The company I work for makes telephone and network switching equipment and applications. Microsoft was viewed as an upcoming competitor years before they acquired Skype or had LINC communicator to integrate with phone switches.

By way of comparison, MSFT did not take market disruptor Apple seriously as competition in the smartphone space with introduction of the iPhone, with their CEO notoriously mocking the idea of people spending $600 on a "cell phone".... and we know how that one turned out.


----------



## Loach

jmpage2 said:


> We aren't TiVo executives so none of us knows who they consider competition. If they are smart they do view market disrupters like Roku and ATV as competition even if its on their periphery.
> 
> The company I work for makes telephone and network switching equipment and applications. Microsoft was viewed as an upcoming competitor years before they acquired Skype or had LINC communicator to integrate with phone switches.
> 
> By way of comparison, MSFT did not take market disruptor Apple seriously as competition in the smartphone space with introduction of the iPhone, with their CEO notoriously mocking the idea of people spending $600 on a "cell phone".... and we know how that one turned out.


Actually we do know, because they write about it in the Business section of their annual report on Form 10-K. And you are right -they consider Roku, et al. as competition on their periphery. See the following excerpt from their most recent 10-K:



> *Competition*
> 
> We believe that the principal competitive factors in the advanced television market, which includes DVRs and other broadband enabled consumer electronic devices, are brand recognition and awareness, functionality, ease of use, content availability, and pricing. We currently see two primary categories of competitors for the TiVo-Owned channel: DVRs offered by satellite, cable, and telecommunications operators and advanced television products and DVRs offered by consumer electronics and software companies.
> 
> *Competition in the TiVo-Owned Subscription Business. *Our retail products compete in the United States against services sold directly by cable, telecommunications, and satellite operators. These products typically combine pay television reception with DVR functionality; most of these products include multiple tuners, high definition recording, and in some cases multi-room viewing capability. Some of these products are offered at lower prices but in many cases are bundled with other services provided by the operator and the price for the DVR and DVR service may not be apparent to the consumer. In addition, these products are usually professionally installed and may appeal to consumers who do not pro-actively select a DVR service. Additionally, many U.S. cable operators are currently deploying Video on Demand technology, which over time could serve as a substitute to our retail products. We are aware of at least one U.S. cable operator, Cablevision, Inc., which is deploying remote storage-based DVR products. To the extent that cable operators offer regular television programming as part of their server-based VOD offerings and DVR technology, consumers may prefer not to acquire an independent set-top based DVR through retail channels.
> 
> Our retail products also compete against products with on-demand internet-enabled services offered by consumer electronics companies including:
> 
> Personal computers: Microsoft based PCs and Apple products (among others) enable a variety of entertainment features and services which offer alternatives to traditional DVR services, primarily via internet delivery of content.
> Broadband capable devices and game consoles: We are seeing a proliferation of broadband enabled devices, such as connected televisions, smartphones, single purpose broadband set-top boxes, tablets, and gaming consoles that offer broadband delivered content. Though these devices do not offer the breadth of the TiVo service, they do offer alternative ways to access internet-delivered video content through devices that many consumers may seek to acquire for other purposes. For example, many consumer electronics companies have television or DVD products that are internet enabled and others have built dedicated devices for accessing video over the internet such as AppleTV, Roku, and GoogleTV. Similarly, companies such as Sony and Microsoft have now enabled the digital delivery of video programming over the internet to their game consoles.


Link to the business section of the 10-K.


----------



## jmpage2

Good to know. I think it proves the point though that they do view those products as competition... just not "primary" competition.


----------



## b_scott

jmpage2 said:


> We aren't TiVo executives so none of us knows who they consider competition. If they are smart they do view market disrupters like Roku and ATV as competition even if its on their periphery.
> 
> The company I work for makes telephone and network switching equipment and applications. Microsoft was viewed as an upcoming competitor years before they acquired Skype or had LINC communicator to integrate with phone switches.
> 
> By way of comparison, MSFT did not take market disruptor Apple seriously as competition in the smartphone space with introduction of the iPhone, with their CEO notoriously mocking the idea of people spending $600 on a "cell phone".... and we know how that one turned out.


The iPhone is a phone. Does everything a windows phone would do. It's a direct competitor regardless of price. And it already had the mp3 market share tied up, so they were already big in the game.

Plus phones get subsidized.


----------



## jmpage2

b_scott said:


> The iPhone is a phone. Does everything a windows phone would do. It's a direct competitor regardless of price. And it already had the mp3 market share tied up, so they were already big in the game.
> 
> Plus phones get subsidized.


It doesn't matter whether the device IS a direct competitor, it matters whether or not the incumbent company (in our example MSFT, but also TiVo in this case) views the competitor product as viable competition.

In the case of MSFT they completely under-estimated the effect of the iPhone and MSFTs dismal position in the mobile space today underscores that fact.


----------



## Loach

jmpage2 said:


> Good to know. I think it proves the point though that they do view those products as competition... just not "primary" competition.


Agreed.


----------

