# TiVo Mini Review Roundup



## Peter Redmer

Some reviews and press on the TiVo Mini:

Review: Engadget

Review: TechHive

Review: Zatz Not Funny!

"Meta" Review: Gadgetreview

Photos: Cnet


----------



## sbiller

I take issue with some of the conclusions drawn in the meta review. In particular,



> Its excessively evident that the TiVo Mini is targeted towards the existing TiVo owner. The cost is either $99 with a $6 a month fee or $249 with lifetime service. Keep in mind thats per box, so if you plan to scatter these around your home, youll be dropping some serious coin.


I expect a good percentage of existing Premiere 4/XL4 users to pick up one or two Mini thin clients but I also expect that this capability will attract new users who can now outfit every television in their home with a consistent TiVo user interface. Perhaps some of the new adopters might be former TiVo users who've left. TiVo is adding about 120,000 Premiere users per year so I expect that a decent percentage of those "new" boxes will be coupled with the TiVo Mini.

And this uninformed statement about WiFi and connectivity options,



> And dont forget that the lack of apps, along with connectivity options (really only HDMI and no WiFi) are further pitfalls that might be just enough to negate this box from your home.


----------



## atmuscarella

The TechHive review seems far and didn't get anything wrong. It did leave out some details about the sharing of tuners.

Cnet has also updated their review.


----------



## Davisadm

Another review:

TechnologyGuide


----------



## Loach

sbiller said:


> I expect a good percentage of existing Premiere 4/XL4 users to pick up one or two Mini thin clients but I also expect that this capability will attract new users who can now outfit every television in their home with a consistent TiVo user interface.


I am one of those new users. I decided I wanted a whole home DVR system in December. I bought a P4 in Jan. because I did my research and found out the Mini was coming. I probably would not have become a Tivo owner without the Mini. I'll probably order my first one today and will eventually own 1 or 2 more.


----------



## StupidFatHobbit

Loach said:


> I am one of those new users. I decided I wanted a whole home DVR system in December. I bought a P4 in Jan. because I did my research and found out the Mini was coming. I probably would not have become a Tivo owner without the Mini. I'll probably order my first one today and will eventually own 1 or 2 more.


And I am an old-time TiVo person returning to the fold solely because the mini made a 3 TV household a reasonable option. I jumped on the premiere4+stream bundle and 2 minis the night the mini went live.

That and I got sick of the constant need to babysit my HTPC with software upgrades, etc.


----------



## HenryFarpolo

I had two smaller HD TV's with DCT700 boxes from Verizon. The HD box is not an option because of the size. Having an HD TV without the ability to watch HD was an ongoing frustration. The Mini gives me HD with the small form of the DCT700.

I currently have one Mini and am on the fence on a second because I don't want to tie up a second tuner. After two days, I am very happy with the Mini.


----------



## atmuscarella

HenryFarpolo said:


> I had two smaller HD TV's with DCT700 boxes from Verizon. The HD box is not an option because of the size. Having an HD TV without the ability to watch HD was an ongoing frustration. The Mini gives me HD with the small form of the DCT700.
> 
> I currently have one Mini and am on the fence on a second because I don't want to tie up a second tuner. After two days, I am very happy with the Mini.


You do not have to tie up a second tuner 2 Minis can share one tuner, of course only one of the Minis at a time can watch live TV if you only use 1 tuner.


----------



## magnus

I still don't understand Tivo's requirement for a 4 tuner Premiere. It would seem that my 2 tuner Tivo is very capable of doing the same thing a 4 tuner can. I don't even want to use a tuner on the Mini. Anyway, I think that restriction is a bit much when you also add the higher than normal price for what amounts to a half a Roku.


----------



## compnurd

magnus said:


> I still don't understand Tivo's requirement for a 4 tuner Premiere. It would seem that my 2 tuner Tivo is very capable of doing the same thing a 4 tuner can. I don't even want to use a tuner on the Mini. Anyway, I think that restriction is a bit much when you also add the higher than normal price for what amounts to a half a Roku.


For the love of god people stop comparing it to Roku. It is not meant to compete with a Roku. When you go car shopping for the family do you start comparing a moped to a SUV.

The Roku competes with Apple TV and such. The Mini if you want to compare competition compares to the C31 Genie Client from Direct TV(which also costs 99). And whatever model Pace i had when i had whole home from my cable company

Lets hold off the 2 tuner and it not working until Dynamic tuner comes out.. if they still dont support it then... ***** on!


----------



## HenryFarpolo

atmuscarella said:


> You do not have to tie up a second tuner 2 Minis can share one tuner, of course only one of the Minis at a time can watch live TV if you only use 1 tuner.


The one at a time live TV is the rub.


----------



## magnus

compnurd said:


> For the love of god people stop comparing it to Roku. It is not meant to compete with a Roku. When you go car shopping for the family do you start comparing a moped to a SUV.
> 
> The Roku competes with Apple TV and such. The Mini if you want to compare competition compares to the C31 Genie Client from Direct TV(which also costs 99). And whatever model Pace i had when i had whole home from my cable company
> 
> Lets hold off the 2 tuner and it not working until Dynamic tuner comes out.. if they still dont support it then... ***** on!


Dude, seriously?!? It just is not what it should be. If you want to justify it then go ahead but I can't see it. It really needs more features to be worth the $250 price tag. To be worth it to some of us then there needs to be more IPTV channels. So, yes... you then have to compare it to a Roku. Get over it.

And not working with a 2 tuner... what's the reason for that? It's technically possible.


----------



## button1066

magnus said:


> Dude, seriously?!? It just is not what it should be. If you want to justify it then go ahead but I can't see it. It really needs more features to be worth the $250 price tag. To be worth it to some of us then there needs to be more IPTV channels. So, yes... you then have to compare it to a Roku. Get over it.
> 
> And not working with a 2 tuner... what's the reason for that? It's technically possible.


Elsewhere on this bulletin board someone said that the estimate is that there are only 50,000 four tuner TiVo units in operation. It's pretty funny that TiVo is only allowing these people to potentially buy a TiVo Mini. It's almost like they don't want anyone to buy it but are reluctantly releasing it albeit with a laughable price and (relatively) little compatibility with their existing customer base so that sales numbers will be nice and low and not too much trouble.


----------



## jano18

compnurd said:


> For the love of god people stop comparing it to Roku. It is not meant to compete with a Roku. When you go car shopping for the family do you start comparing a moped to a SUV.
> 
> The Roku competes with Apple TV and such. The Mini if you want to compare competition compares to the C31 Genie Client from Direct TV(which also costs 99). And whatever model Pace i had when i had whole home from my cable company
> 
> Lets hold off the 2 tuner and it not working until Dynamic tuner comes out.. if they still dont support it then... ***** on!


Thank you, I couldn't have said it better myself.


----------



## BriHiFi

At this point in time the TiVo Mini is only going to make cable users happy. The benefit of not having to pay rental fees. OTA users are going to feel left out. By the way, I am in the OTA group. There are a few things to consider if you are in the OTA group. Is the Mini a good option for the price? Probably not. The Mini cost $250 compared to the cost of an additional two tuner premiere of $550. The $300 difference does sound pretty steep. But, you are getting an additional two tuners, just in case your original premier takes a dump, you have a backup in its place and you double the amount of recordings you can watch. As far as live tv goes, it's easier to get around for the OTA users. Just split the coax and use the televisions tuner. It's more than likely better than Tivo's. And really, how hard is it to change the input on the television? It's not an option for the cable user wanting to watch premium channels. And as far as not comparing it to an AppleTV, It's hard not to. At least for the OTA users. They both move a file from somewhere else in the house to a box to play on the television. Not splitting any hairs here but they both do the same job in some form of another but one just happens to do it for $150 less. It's a little bit of a different story once the tuner's on the TiVo are available(again for the cable users). There's no doubt, that the TiVo Mini is going to touch a nerve on fellow Tivo users albeit negative or positive. I'm looking at it from both sides and the jury is still out. Just choose what works best for you and go with it. If TiVo was able to get wireless working on the Mini then it would definitely be a game changer for everybody. One can only dream. But I think we all can agree that we want to spend our money on something that works properly.


----------



## dianebrat

compnurd said:


> For the love of god people stop comparing it to Roku. It is not meant to compete with a Roku. When you go car shopping for the family do you start comparing a moped to a SUV.
> 
> The Roku competes with Apple TV and such. The Mini if you want to compare competition compares to the C31 Genie Client from Direct TV(which also costs 99). And whatever model Pace i had when i had whole home from my cable company
> 
> Lets hold off the 2 tuner and it not working until Dynamic tuner comes out.. if they still dont support it then... ***** on!





magnus said:


> Dude, seriously?!? It just is not what it should be. If you want to justify it then go ahead but I can't see it. It really needs more features to be worth the $250 price tag. To be worth it to some of us then there needs to be more IPTV channels. So, yes... you then have to compare it to a Roku. Get over it.


I'm with compnurd, the instance on comparing it to the various streaming cord cutting devices is insane, it's not one of those, and as someone mentioned in another thread, it's built for cord keepers, and I like that way of putting it. It's not an IP streamer, it's a DVR extender.


----------



## dcstager

The Tivo Preview that came from my cable company is different from the Mini and works like a charm. It has it's own tuner and cablecard so you don't lose a tuner, but otherwise does the same thing as the Mini. If you have that option available from your cable company, I'd recommend it without reservation. It can access every Tivo on the MoCA network and play anything on any Tivo on the same network. Picture is perfect and indistinguishable from playing it normally. I have mine in the spare bedroom and it's just great. Tivo should sell the Preview to everyone. Pretty sure it's only a cable company item now, but maybe that will change. The darn thing just works right and just the way you'd expect it to.


----------



## magnus

dianebrat said:


> I'm with compnurd, the instance on comparing it to the various streaming cord cutting devices is insane, it's not one of those, and as someone mentioned in another thread, it's built for cord keepers, and I like that way of putting it. It's not an IP streamer, it's a DVR extender.


And my point still is that the value proposition just really isn't there. It needs more in the way of features for the price tag. And it needs to support 2 tuner Premieres. Where is the reason why it won't work with a 2 tuner Premiere? I'd like to know how it's technically not possible when the Stream has no problem with my 2 tuner Premieres.


----------



## jfh3

dcstager said:


> The Tivo Preview that came from my cable company is different from the Mini and works like a charm. It has it's own tuner and cablecard so you don't lose a tuner, but otherwise does the same thing as the Mini. If you have that option available from your cable company, I'd recommend it without reservation. It can access every Tivo on the MoCA network and play anything on any Tivo on the same network. Picture is perfect and indistinguishable from playing it normally. I have mine in the spare bedroom and it's just great. Tivo should sell the Preview to everyone. Pretty sure it's only a cable company item now, but maybe that will change. The darn thing just works right and just the way you'd expect it to.


I would have preferred the Preview to the Mini, but I doubt we will ever see a retail Preview. The Mini will eventually support OTA; the Preview never will. Other than that, the two are too close to each other in function and to release both to retail would be too confusing.


----------



## compnurd

magnus said:


> And my point still is that the value proposition just really isn't there. It needs more in the way of features for the price tag. And it needs to support 2 tuner Premieres. Where is the reason why it won't work with a 2 tuner Premiere? I'd like to know how it's technically not possible when the Stream has no problem with my 2 tuner Premieres.


The price is the same as what Direct TV charges for Genie clients... and they sell like hotcakes


----------



## magnus

compnurd said:


> The price is the same as what Direct TV charges for Genie clients... and they sell like hotcakes


Good for Directv. It still does not mean that it has true value.


----------



## lessd

BriHiFi said:


> At this point in time the TiVo Mini is only going to make cable users happy. The benefit of not having to pay rental fees. OTA users are going to feel left out. By the way, I am in the OTA group. There are a few things to consider if you are in the OTA group. Is the Mini a good option for the price? Probably not. The Mini cost $250 compared to the cost of an additional two tuner premiere of $550. The $300 difference does sound pretty steep. But, you are getting an additional two tuners, just in case your original premier takes a dump, you have a backup in its place and you double the amount of recordings you can watch. As far as live tv goes, it's easier to get around for the OTA users. Just split the coax and use the televisions tuner. It's more than likely better than Tivo's. And really, how hard is it to change the input on the television? It's not an option for the cable user wanting to watch premium channels. And as far as not comparing it to an AppleTV, It's hard not to. At least for the OTA users. They both move a file from somewhere else in the house to a box to play on the television. Not splitting any hairs here but they both do the same job in some form of another but one just happens to do it for $150 less. It's a little bit of a different story once the tuner's on the TiVo are available(again for the cable users). There's no doubt, that the TiVo Mini is going to touch a nerve on fellow Tivo users albeit negative or positive. I'm looking at it from both sides and the jury is still out. Just choose what works best for you and go with it. If TiVo was able to get wireless working on the Mini then it would definitely be a game changer for everybody. One can only dream. But I think we all can agree that we want to spend our money on something that works properly.


And don't forget some people are paying $7 to $9 per month for each cable card, to add a Mini for $250 and save $7/month, the pay off is three years assuming the Mini has no value in three years and that most likely not true.


----------



## compnurd

magnus said:


> Good for Directv. It still does not mean that it has true value.


What does have true value? i dont think apple tv is worth 100 bucks. but who gives a flying ****

i dont think 87 octane is a good value either


----------



## DaveDFW

compnurd said:


> The price is the same as what Direct TV charges for Genie clients... and they sell like hotcakes


I don't think this is correct. DirecTV provides three Genie Minis with no upfront cost, $49 each for the fourth and beyond. Each Genie Mini requires a $6 per month recurring fee.

When Tivo gives me three Minis free to complement my XL4, I'll gladly pay $6 per month to use them.


----------



## compnurd

DaveDFW said:


> I don't think this is correct. DirecTV provides three Genie Minis with no upfront cost, $49 each for the fourth and beyond. Each Genie Mini requires a $6 per month recurring fee.
> 
> When Tivo gives me three Minis free to complement my XL4, I'll gladly pay $6 per month to use them.


That is as a new customer. The genie is 349 and clients are 99


----------



## DaveDFW

compnurd said:


> That is as a new customer. The genie is 349 and clients are 99


An existing DTV customer is eligible for the new-customer Genie Mini pricing with a two-year service agreement. $0 + ($6 * 24 months) = $144

Buying a Tivo Mini obligates a purchaser to pay for at least one year of service. $99 + ($6 * 12 months) = $171.

So Tivo's Mini is 20% more expensive for half the service duration.


----------



## compnurd

DaveDFW said:


> An existing DTV customer is eligible for the new-customer Genie Mini pricing with a two-year service agreement. $0 + ($6 * 24 months) = $144
> 
> Buying a Tivo Mini obligates a purchaser to pay for at least one year of service. $99 + ($6 * 12 months) = $171.
> 
> So Tivo's Mini is 20% more expensive for half the service duration.


Ehh still not sold there. I had family try to get it 2 weeks ago on 3 TVs and direct tv cut them no deal except free install


----------



## HarperVision

DaveDFW said:


> An existing DTV customer is eligible for the new-customer Genie Mini pricing with a two-year service agreement. $0 + ($6 * 24 months) = $144


That's simply not true for existing clients. I AM one and they extend your contract 2 years any time you add a new receiver AND charge you full pop for each unless you manage to swing a deal. Why do you think I'm here looking at TiVo again!  The only reason they gave me a deal on a genie and clients was because I called to cancel DTV to use my MCE with Xbox extenders and they threw in NFL ST and I caved, unfortunately.


----------



## atmuscarella

magnus said:


> And my point still is that the value proposition just really isn't there. It needs more in the way of features for the price tag. And it needs to support 2 tuner Premieres. Where is the reason why it won't work with a 2 tuner Premiere? I'd like to know how it's technically not possible when the Stream has no problem with my 2 tuner Premieres.


Value is in the eyes of the beholder, if a Mini isn't worth the $250 it costs to you, then you shouldn't buy one. I do agree it would be better if it worked with Dual Tuner Premieres and also tend to believe the reason it doesn't is more about marketing than a technical issue (but I have no way of knowing for sure). I also question if our Series 3 units really can not stream content or if that is also more about marketing.


----------



## compnurd

HarperVision said:


> That's simply not true for existing clients. I AM one and they extend your contract 2 years any time you add a new receiver AND charge you full pop for each unless you manage to swing a deal. Why do you think I'm here looking at TiVo again!  The only reason they gave me a deal on a genie and clients was because I called to cancel DTV to use my MCE with Xbox extenders and they threw in NFL ST and I caved, unfortunately.


Thanks While yes some people can wind up with some discounted hardware... most people pay full price


----------



## jmpage2

magnus said:


> Good for Directv. It still does not mean that it has true value.


I think the point being made is that you are comparing apples to oranges. The boxes that the Mini competes with don't have many of those Roku/ATV features either. Comparing the Mini directly to boxes like Roku doesn't make much sense since those boxes don't yet have any capability to consume live or recorded TV.

A lot of people simply want a "full tivo" type experience in other rooms of the house but don't want to runt a cable card and spend $500 on a Premiere with lifetime.

The mini more or less gets those users there for 1/2 the price, uses less power, and does not require a cable card rental or outlet fee.

Would it do better if it had Netflix? Absolutely, but I doubt it impacts the value proposition for most customers.


----------



## DaveDFW

HarperVision said:


> That's simply not true for existing clients.


Okay, fair enough. I'm not a DTV customer, so I only have access to the information they provide. If they don't honor their published terms then that's a problem.


----------



## magnus

jmpage2 said:


> I think the point being made is that you are comparing apples to oranges. The boxes that the Mini competes with don't have many of those Roku/ATV features either. Comparing the Mini directly to boxes like Roku doesn't make much sense since those boxes don't yet have any capability to consume live or recorded TV.
> 
> A lot of people simply want a "full tivo" type experience in other rooms of the house but don't want to runt a cable card and spend $500 on a Premiere with lifetime.
> 
> The mini more or less gets those users there for 1/2 the price, uses less power, and does not require a cable card rental or outlet fee.
> 
> Would it do better if it had Netflix? Absolutely, but I doubt it impacts the value proposition for most customers.


Those boxes are made by the cable and satellite companies. So, it's expected that they would not want to give you options that would directly compete with their core business. Tivo on the other hand needs to provide options to survive. This box should make folks want to pony up the asking price for device plus service but it doesn't. It is a far cry from what it needs to be.


----------



## compnurd

magnus said:


> Those boxes are made by the cable and satellite companies. So, it's expected that they would not want to give you options that would directly compete with their core business. Tivo on the other hand needs to provide options to survive. This box should make folks want to pony up the asking price for device plus service but it doesn't. It is a far cry from what it needs to be.


But we know there push is to Cable MSO's so you should expect that direction then


----------



## magnus

compnurd said:


> But we know there push is to Cable MSO's so you should expect that direction then


And yet for retail market..., they are not tied to cable or satellite... So why not create the best product that you can?

I could understand it if this box was really made for one of the big cable co's but it's not. It's made for retail and Tivo is not tied to a single cable operator. So, it makes no sense for them to not include these features.


----------



## compnurd

magnus said:


> And yet for retail market..., they are not tied to cable or satellite... So why not create the best product that you can?
> 
> I could understand it if this box was really made for one of the big cable co's but it's not. It's made for retail and Tivo is not tied to a single cable operator. So, it makes no sense for them to not include these features.


This originally was not made for Retail... Dont forget we never saw the Tivo Preview at Retail and Suddenlink got the Mini before Retail.

I truly believe this product was made for MSO's and adapted for Retail


----------



## magnus

compnurd said:


> This originally was not made for Retail... Dont forget we never saw the Tivo Preview at Retail and Suddenlink got the Mini before Retail.
> 
> I truly believe this product was made for MSO's and adapted for Retail


Either way, it is retail and they're not bound to what the cable co's want.


----------



## jmpage2

magnus said:


> Those boxes are made by the cable and satellite companies. So, it's expected that they would not want to give you options that would directly compete with their core business. Tivo on the other hand needs to provide options to survive. This box should make folks want to pony up the asking price for device plus service but it doesn't. It is a far cry from what it needs to be.


In another thread someone indicated that they had been told by a member of the TiVo executive team that they were "working on" Netflix... but no ETA.

Honestly I think that the Mini is always going to lag behind boxes like Roku for access to internet content, but obviously improvements in this area can only help TiVo with sales numbers.


----------



## compnurd

magnus said:


> Either way, it is retail and they're not bound to what the cable co's want.


but they are bound to not make two completely different products to not kill there expenses


----------



## magnus

compnurd said:


> but they are bound to not make two completely different products to not kill there expenses


Ok, fair enough. Then they should just have divergent firmwares. That would seem to be an easy enough solution. Flip a few lines of code for non MSO boxes. Problem solved.


----------



## compnurd

magnus said:


> Ok, fair enough. Then they should just have divergent firmwares. That would seem to be an easy enough solution. Flip a few lines of code for non MSO boxes. Problem solved.


Yeh i dont think it is that easy. Plus tivo is not exactly flush with cash that they could do all of this. I think it is pretty evident they only have several teams working on certain things at a time


----------



## atmuscarella

compnurd said:


> Yeh i dont think it is that easy. Plus tivo is not exactly flush with cash that they could do all of this. I think it is pretty evident they only have several teams working on certain things at a time


TiVo is in a business that under spending on development can put them out of business as fast or faster than over spending on development.

I will buy they have done the math/market research and are only willing to spend development money on things they believe will provide an acceptable level of return on their investment.

I do not buy they are restricted because of cash shortages, they are fairly flush due to the law suite settlements.


----------



## compnurd

atmuscarella said:


> TiVo is in a business that under spending on development can put them out of business as fast or faster than over spending on development.
> 
> I will buy they have done the math/market research and are only willing to spend development money on things they believe will provide an acceptable level of return on their investment.
> 
> I do not buy they are restricted because of cash shortages, they are fairly flush due to the law suite settlements.


Last i saw they are still losing money every qtr


----------



## magnus

compnurd said:


> Last i saw they are still losing money every qtr


Yep, and there is a reason for it. They seriously put out products that aren't ready. The last several Tivo boxes are proof of that.


----------



## magnus

compnurd said:


> Yeh i dont think it is that easy. Plus tivo is not exactly flush with cash that they could do all of this. I think it is pretty evident they only have several teams working on certain things at a time


They must really have you fooled then. Easy enough to flip a few bits of code on what amounts to the same platform. And the apps can be pushed as they become available. If its the Cable co's that are keeping it from happening then its really shame on Tivo here cause these are retail boxes and not to be treated exactly the same as MSO boxes.


----------



## atmuscarella

compnurd said:


> Last i saw they are still losing money every qtr


Yes they were, but losing money and not having money are 2 different things. At the beginning their investors supplied lots of money and then took it on the chin and now they have gotten some fairly large settlements so they still have some cash to work with.


----------



## jrm01

$620 million at the end of January.


----------



## sbiller

jrm01 said:


> $620 million at the end of January.


FWIW, they will be cash flow positive this year including their extremely high litigation and R&D expense. Once they settle or litigate their latest infringers (TWC and Motorola/Google/Arris), they will be extremely cash flow positive.


----------



## sbiller

TiVo Goes Wandering, On the Road And at Home

He misses the fact that the Premiere 4/XL4 can act as a MoCA bridge which appears to add $115 to his cost numbers.


----------



## NSPhillips

sbiller said:


> TiVo Goes Wandering, On the Road And at Home
> 
> He misses the fact that the Premiere 4/XL4 can act as a MoCA bridge which appears to add $115 to his cost numbers.


Another small error -- he claims you need a Stream to use the iPhone app as a remote control.


----------



## bdraw

Comparing the price of the Mini to that of the Genie client doesn't work at all. DirecTV does not sell the client, the $99 is a lease fee. If you cancel you have to return them or have your credit card charged -- Google and feel the hurt with these people. 

The pricing and the four tuner requirement of the Mini are both an effort by TiVo to be profitable. Some on here might complain it isn't a good value, but others are just happy that TiVo is still in business and releasing new problems that enhance the experience. I wonder how long the Mini will stay at this price. I've always thought it made sense to offer a product at a higher price and then discount it later. Your customers will always welcome a lower price, the same can't be said for raising it.


----------



## aaronwt

How much could they lower it, $20? If lifetime is still going to be $150 a $20 decrease isn't much of an incentive to wait.


----------



## jmpage2

I've seen people wait months or even a year to save a few bucks on an electronics purchase. If you can wait that long you probably don't need it. The use I get out of a piece of gear almost always outweighs the slight "premium" for getting it soon after release.

I could have saved about $800 on my Plasma if I had waited until they blew them out at the end of the year when I bought it.... but $800 was more than a fair price to pay to enjoy 65" of TV goodness for that 6-8 months.... to me anyway.


----------



## sbiller

Cnets Josh Goldman (@superboxmonkey) does an excellent job of summing up the Mini at a high-level (First Look) in less than 2 minutes ->

http://cnettv.cnet.com/tivo-adds-mini-piece-its-whole-home-solution/9742-1_53-50142929.html

This [subscription fee] isnt entirely out-of-line with the cost of similar setups from other providers but still might be more than some TiVo users are willing to spend.


----------



## slowbiscuit

Except that it has no cost basis...


----------



## sbiller

slowbiscuit said:


> Except that it has no cost basis...


Hmmm... so TiVo has zero recurring cost post the sale of the Mini to the consumer?

That's a nonsensical statement. OTOH, a valid argument could be that the cost should have been built-into the price or that the price is too high.


----------



## atmuscarella

slowbiscuit said:


> Except that it has no cost basis...


The price of a Mini is $250 or $99 + $6/mo for as long as someone wants to use it. Why TiVo decided to charge that amount is irrelevant from a consumer point of view. All that matters is if the cost is acceptable or not. That determination is personal so if you think it costs to much then it does and you should not buy one. If someone else doesn't think it costs to much then they should buy one. Simple as that.


----------



## slowbiscuit

I get it, you don't have to keep beating this into the ground. I'll stop if you will - we agree that how it's priced doesn't matter, if you want it you'll buy it. Tivo can play games however it wants.


----------



## atmuscarella

slowbiscuit said:


> I get it, you don't have to keep beating this into the ground. I'll stop if you will - we agree that how it's priced doesn't matter, if you want it you'll buy it. Tivo can play games however it wants.


I am kind of locked out of the value discussion when it comes to TiVo's whole home Premiere 4, Mini, & Stream solution as I am OTA only and have an android tablet.

But please do not think I want to dismiss concerns about price.

While I do believe that in the end decisions about value are personal and really should not have much to do with what other people conclusions are, I actually believe posts about why a person thinks something is or isn't worth it's asking price are very valuable.

Regarding what I think about the Mini's price - I think it is over priced & if it did work with my setup I would likely not buy one and stick with multiple DVRs instead, however I see how a person could easily decide it has enough value to justify the price, so TiVo's pricing is likely justified - but only sales will ultimately determine that.


----------



## slowbiscuit

sbiller said:


> Hmmm... so TiVo has zero recurring cost post the sale of the Mini to the consumer?


Cost of doing business to support the product? Sure, that's called overhead, or amortized support cost, or whatever you want to call it. Last time I checked I didn't pay Microsoft every month to supply security and functionality improvements for Windows, nor do I pay GM to fix my car under warranty.

Look I get it, you think it's justified many do not, but we all agree that in the current market they can charge whatever they want and it's up to the consumer to decide. But it's not a competitive market right now.


----------



## jmpage2

Actually it is a very competitive market. The problem is that the crap-tastic boxes that the MSOs provide are winning.

Not enough consumers see the value in owning their own video recorders to pay the prices TiVo is asking. If not enough consumers are willing to pay then TiVo potentially goes out of business. However, it does not appear that this scenario will play out soon. Soon being relative of course.

At the end of the day, most customers (and most Americans for that matter) have horrible math skills. I know plenty of people paying $50-$75 a month for equipment rental from an MSO so that they can watch HD cable in 4-5 rooms of their home and record programming in a couple of rooms. Over the course of just a couple of years it would probably save them money to to go TiVo (ESPECIALLY now that the Mini is available), but most don't care enough or look at the up-front TiVo costs and balk.


----------



## atmuscarella

jmpage2 said:


> At the end of the day, most customers (and most Americans for that matter) have horrible math skills.


It maybe worse than just not having math skills.

Back in the early 80's we had a good hired man (family dairy farm he was the only non-family labor). I thought he was smart enough but when it came to money management he was hopeless. He wanted a stereo but claimed he couldn't save the money to buy one. Back then we had a small local retailer that would extend credit to buy TVs, stereos, appliances etc. and collected the money weekly with a hefty interest charge. Our hired man decided to get the stereo and pay weekly we told him he was way over paying and that he should save the money and pay cash, he said no way he could save up that much money, we told him to just put what he was going to pay weekly away until he had the money again he said he couldn't save the money but was sure he could make the payment. Bottom line he could not leave money in a bank account, he spent his paycheck every week no matter what, but he could make payments on stuff he bought. He had the same spending disease that many people have which is why so many people have to make payments on what ever they buy. Oh and he did buy the stereo and made the weekly payments without issue.


----------



## Loach

jmpage2 said:


> Actually it is a very competitive market. The problem is that the crap-tastic boxes that the MSOs provide are winning.
> 
> Not enough consumers see the value in owning their own video recorders to pay the prices TiVo is asking. If not enough consumers are willing to pay then TiVo potentially goes out of business. However, it does not appear that this scenario will play out soon. Soon being relative of course.
> 
> At the end of the day, most customers (and most Americans for that matter) have horrible math skills. I know plenty of people paying $50-$75 a month for equipment rental from an MSO so that they can watch HD cable in 4-5 rooms of their home and record programming in a couple of rooms. Over the course of just a couple of years it would probably save them money to to go TiVo (ESPECIALLY now that the Mini is available), but most don't care enough or look at the up-front TiVo costs and balk.


I would venture to say that most of the people in my market that are paying for whole-home DVR solutions from Cox don't even know that Tivo exists. They think their only alternatives are Dish and DirecTV (because they market the hell out of Hopper and Genie). Quite frankly, 4 months ago I didn't know whether Tivo still existed. My parents-in-law and my brother-in-law had each just gotten Cox's whole home DVR product. I decided I'd like to do that too, but didn't like what I saw for the monthly charges so I started looking for alternatives. Somebody on a message board about Cox's whole home product mentioned Tivo as an alternative and I vaguely remembered them from 10+ years ago. So I found them - their marketing never reached me.

I just went to lunch with my parents yesterday and they mentioned they were switching to DirecTV. When I told them I've switched to Tivo equipment, I pretty much got blank stares. Now, granted they are in their upper 60s, not very tech savvy, and probably would never implement something like Tivo unless I helped them with it, but I also got a similar blank stare from my brother-in-law, who is younger than me and is a much bigger gadget junkie than me. He buys the newest iPhones and iPads and pre-wired his house himself with Cat 5e when he built it back in the early 2000s. Yet he wasn't really familiar with Tivo and never considered it as an alternative to Cox Whole Home DVR.


----------



## Davisadm

jmpage2 said:


> Actually it is a very competitive market. The problem is that the crap-tastic boxes that the MSOs provide are winning.





Loach said:


> I would venture to say that most of the people in my market that are paying for whole-home DVR solutions from Cox don't even know that Tivo exists.


Plain and simple: TiVo has to step up advertising big time!


----------



## dhoward

To be honest if you don't frequent this forum I seriously doubt you will know very little about Tivo's DVR's and nothing about the Stream or Mini. They do not advertise. Even in Best Buy there is nothing to distinguish them.


----------



## sbiller

dhoward said:


> To be honest if you don't frequent this forum I seriously doubt you will know very little about Tivo's DVR's and nothing about the Stream or Mini. They do not advertise. Even in Best Buy there is nothing to distinguish them.


They just completed a National Advertising campaign with Tm Tebow. I watch a lot of CNBC live and saw the Tebow TiVo commercials quite a few times. They also run live cut-in ads on Morning Joe. Now that they have the Mini, I'm hoping they'll try a commercial that explains the whole-home offering and perhaps differentiates the cost in certain markets. In my market (Tampa), TiVo could advertise comparing costs and features against Bright House and Verizon FiOS. The challenge for them is they have a fairly limited budget for retail Sales and Marketing. With the new CFO in-place at the company, perhaps they'll figure out a way to tap their huge cash reserves ($600 million), to spur retail adoption. There is, of course, the challenge and friction associated with CableCARD but now its limited to one box.


----------



## dhoward

CNBC and Morning Joe are not exactly prime time shows/Networks. Also Tim Tebow is not exactly the spokesperson best suited for DVR's. They need a much bigger ad spread then that if they want to get the attention of most consumers. Most people I talk to about Tivo have no idea who or what they are. That is a common theme in many posts on this forum. Advertising gets more customers which generates more income for Tivo. I do not think I saw one Tebow commercial. It takes money to make money. I have been with Tivo since 2000 and just installed the Mini and have a Stream on order. But, my knowledge of these two boxes did not come from any advertisements other then what Tivo downloaded on to my DVR's. Those ads are the only reason I know about Tebow even existing. If you do not already own Tivo you did not get those ads. It is nice to DL to existing customers but a lot more is needed for new ones.


----------



## Loach

sbiller said:


> They just completed a National Advertising campaign with Tm Tebow. I watch a lot of CNBC live and saw the Tebow TiVo commercials quite a few times. They also run live cut-in ads on Morning Joe. Now that they have the Mini, I'm hoping they'll try a commercial that explains the whole-home offering and perhaps differentiates the cost in certain markets. In my market (Tampa), TiVo could advertise comparing costs and features against Bright House and Verizon FiOS. The challenge for them is they have a fairly limited budget for retail Sales and Marketing. With the new CFO in-place at the company, perhaps they'll figure out a way to tap their huge cash reserves ($600 million), to spur retail adoption. There is, of course, the challenge and friction associated with CableCARD but now its limited to one box.


I watch a lot of live football in the fall and I vaguely recall seeing the Tebow ads a handful of times - but I think I was more aware of them because of seeing Tebow on the Tivo website after I started my research and the ads were not very memorable. I understand Tivo maybe can't spend what DirecTV, Dish or Cox spend, but it seems like I see an ad for one of them during every commercial break during live sports viewing.

Out of curiosity, do you know the approximate dates that the Tebow campaign ran?


----------



## atmuscarella

The problem TiVo has is it takes more than a 30 sec add to tell people why they should consider a TiVo DVR instead of their cable providers DVR. Plus lets be honest for the first 2 years of the Premiere's life the product wasn't that good unless you where using the SDUI and they still have issues with over selling the Premieres IP/Internet streaming abilities. Honestly maybe they should hold off an major add campaign until they get some undated DVR hardware out the door with a full suite of IP/Streaming services that work well. Plus they really need to get the Mini a little more finished up and have the Stream support more than ios devices. 

But even if they do that I live in a Time Warner area and will not recommend a TiVo. Between the cable card, tuner adapter and Time Warner in general most people are going to have some issues getting things to work and I am not going to become free support for people. Even with OTA I am not certain someone isn't better off with a Used Series 3 unit instead of a Premiere.


----------



## jmpage2

Marketing companies get paid millions of dollars to find clever ways to inform people of a products advantages in a 30 second TV ad spot or a single page print ad.

It's TiVos fault if their marketing has fallen flat. Alternatively people see the benefit of TiVo but don't consider it cost effective, which, in some ways is also failed marketing. It's not hard to show someone how much they spend renting MSO gear vs buying a TiVo.

Part of the problem is that TiVo wants people to do monthly sub instead of lifetime, but the best value proposition for a TiVo is doing lifetime.


----------



## atmuscarella

jmpage2 said:


> Marketing companies get paid millions of dollars to find clever ways to inform people of a products advantages in a 30 second TV ad spot or a single page print ad.
> 
> It's TiVos fault if their marketing has fallen flat. Alternatively people see the benefit of TiVo but don't consider it cost effective, which, in some ways is also failed marketing. It's not hard to show someone how much they spend renting MSO gear vs buying a TiVo.
> 
> Part of the problem is that TiVo wants people to do monthly sub instead of lifetime, but the best value proposition for a TiVo is doing lifetime.


While I don't disagree with anything you have said, I think you have underestimated the negative impact of what I call the TiVo hassle factor. Joe six pack wants what the cable company is offering in that the cable company takes care of the DVR, makes sure everything works and in many cases even installs it for the customer. TiVo used to have install simplicity back in the days of analog cable - plug the cable in and go through a simple setup and you were good to go. If the FCC grew a pair and mandated a software solution it could almost be that simple again. Until then the hassle factor alone is likely to keep Tivo a niche product.


----------



## Davisadm

dhoward said:


> To be honest if you don't frequent this forum I seriously doubt you will know very little about Tivo's DVR's and nothing about the Stream or Mini. They do not advertise. Even in Best Buy there is nothing to distinguish them.





sbiller said:


> I watch a lot of CNBC live and saw the Tebow TiVo commercials quite a few times. They also run live cut-in ads on Morning Joe. ... There is, of course, the challenge and friction associated with CableCARD but now its limited to one box.


You are right. There is not enough exposure out there regarding TiVo. My point is just that: *TiVo has to step up advertising big time!*. They could be in the main stream if more people knew they still existed and how much better their products are. I hate the fact that I am bombarded by ads from DirecTV, Dish, AT&T Uverse, Time Warner, etc about their "great" DVRs and whole home solutions, and comparatively, rarely see TiVo ads. Yes, the Tim Tebow ads are out there and are not bad, but there are not nearly enough of them. Because of that, selling TiVo products is difficult, believe me I know. Best Buy's could have a simple TiVo display, placed in the right place (not by the digital TV adapters), which would easily draw attention to their products.

The advertising has to done on mainstream networks, (ABC, CBS, FOX, NBC, WB, major cable networks, etc.) not on cable news channels.

CableCARDS have friction because the cable companies don't want to offer them. They would rather push their DVRs and other products, because they know if someone requests a cableCARD, chances are the customer will not want other products.

It is an uphill battle. Can you tell I'm frustrated? I believe in TiVo products with a passion, think they are great, and love to sell and install them, but they make it sooooo hard.


----------



## Digital Man

jmpage2 said:


> It's not hard to show someone how much they spend renting MSO gear vs buying a TiVo.


Tivo is in kind of a sticky position. The MSOs are both their competitors and their customers. I suspect if Tivo came out with a huge marketing campain telling people how terrible the MSO DVR options are they would piss off the MSOs. They need to MSOs to buy Tivo products and to continue to allow Tivos on their network (with help from the FCC).

DM


----------



## Arcady

Run the ads on cable systems where TiVo is not an MSO-provided option.


----------



## jmpage2

They might be trying to get those very MSOs as customers.


----------



## aaronwt

jmpage2 said:


> Marketing companies get paid millions of dollars to find clever ways to inform people of a products advantages in a 30 second TV ad spot or a single page print ad.
> 
> It's TiVos fault if their marketing has fallen flat. Alternatively people see the benefit of TiVo but don't consider it cost effective, which, in some ways is also failed marketing. It's not hard to show someone how much they spend renting MSO gear vs buying a TiVo.
> 
> Part of the problem is that TiVo wants people to do monthly sub instead of lifetime, but the best value proposition for a TiVo is doing lifetime.


If they truly wanted people to do a monthly sub they would get rid of lifetime. Just like they did back in 2006. But then the lifetime option returned sometime later.


----------



## slowbiscuit

atmuscarella said:


> While I don't disagree with anything you have said, I think you have underestimated the negative impact of what I call the TiVo hassle factor. Joe six pack wants what the cable company is offering in that the cable company takes care of the DVR, makes sure everything works and in many cases even installs it for the customer. TiVo used to have install simplicity back in the days of analog cable - plug the cable in and go through a simple setup and you were good to go. If the FCC grew a pair and mandated a software solution it could almost be that simple again. Until then the hassle factor alone is likely to keep Tivo a niche product.


Well that and the fact that people don't want to pay a service fee for Tivos.

I know you're on AVS too and we see these folks all the time over there, saying they'll never get Tivos because they won't pay a fee. You can try and reason with them saying to look at the total cost vs. renting, think of it like a cellphone deal, resale value, etc. but they just won't listen - the service fee pisses them off. Having a dubious fee for something like the Mini just adds more fuel to the fire.


----------



## atmuscarella

slowbiscuit said:


> Well that and the fact that people don't want to pay a service fee for Tivos.
> 
> I know you're on AVS too and we see these folks all the time over there, saying they'll never get Tivos because they won't pay a fee. You can try and reason with them saying to look at the total cost vs. renting, think of it like a cellphone deal, resale value, etc. but they just won't listen - the service fee pisses them off. Having a dubious fee for something like the Mini just adds more fuel to the fire.


You are correct some people have a major issue with "service fees", what I cannot determine is if the issue is really with having "fees" or if they just don't like the price.

Based on watching what people have said over time I think some people just think TiVo DVRs cost to much. I attribute that to the satellite companies having used DVRs as loss leaders so much that people think they are a low cost item. There seems to be a group who want a $99 DVR/device and another that falls in at about $250. Not sure it is worth worrying about people who feel that way, TiVo certainly can not make a profitable DVR at those price points.

As I said in another post I think the Mini at $250 is over priced for me but I certainly understand why TiVo would price it there and why other people would find that price ok.


----------



## HenryFarpolo

The Mini packs a lot into a small box. The small form in and of itself is a big selling point. 

Until now for two of my smaller flat screen TV's I had limited options to take advantage of the hundreds of available channels including most importantly HD.
I have been using the Verizon provided DCT700's which provide the small form I need but lack HD. I know there are work arounds to get HD, but I don't want a work around. 

The MINI is a step forward in the whole home solution I have been wanting. I not only get HD, but I get recorded content. If Verizon gets moving with their Media Server they may provide a competitive option. Until then, TIVO should push their advertising to grab a share of the market while they can.


----------



## aaronwt

atmuscarella said:


> You are correct some people have a major issue with "service fees", what I cannot determine is if the issue is really with having "fees" or if they just don't like the price.
> 
> ..........


Unfortunately many of those same people have no problem paying $30, $40, or more per month to their cable company indefinitely. And when you look at what they have spent on their DVRs, over just three or four years, it boggles the mind. Especially since you keep paying the fee and never even own the box. That is why I don't mind paying for the TiVos. Since with Lifetime service I can sell the TiVo when I'm finished with it and recoup most of the initial cost. And the end cost is much, much less than me leasing the boxes from the cable company. And all this is before even touching on the better performing TiVos and a the TiVo UI.


----------



## jmpage2

The flip side is that while they never own the box they also never have to worry about out-of warranty repairs or flipping an outdated piece of gear.


----------



## wmhjr

And that some "packages" also include at least one DVR for free for the life of the contract (like FiOS does for many customers). I have one VZ DVR that does not cost me a penny - ever. I've had it since 2007. It doesn't have much capacity (20 hrs HD) and isn't great (moto box) but it's free, and it's been "whole house" for years, where low cost STBs see it.

The whole cost proposition is very fluid. It's not as easy as many would believe themselves, where the Tivo with lifetime always comes out on top. All it takes is one or two device failures outside of the warranty period (or sometimes within) when you have to pay for the hardware replacement and you end up with a tougher issue. Plus, you do lose on-demand (if you want it). BTW, not sure where the "$30-40" cost is coming from. If I wanted another DVR from VZ, it's $19.95 with no incentives. So, it takes years for the VZ DVR to become more expensive than the Tivo with our without lifetime - and that assumes that you then keep or resell the Tivo, and that you also then don't have a failure where the device requires yet more investment. 

Clearly I value the "premium" capability of the Tivo, but the up front cost, along with the hard facts hardly present an overwhelming cost advantage for Tivo. Add to this diminishing capability (ie, premiums required for mini, streaming, etc) and I think it's possible that the resale equation may also be getting more challenging. I will shortly have a capacity upgraded HD with lifetime for sale. It will nowhere near recoup that much cost to overcome some of these factors.


----------



## Dan203

wmhjr said:


> Plus, you do lose on-demand (if you want it).


Not always. In some Comcast areas they have access to VOD. And according to the press releases from SeaChange several other MSOs are in the process of adding similar abilities. Hopefully in a couple of years that will no longer be a limitation of choosing TiVo.


----------



## aaronwt

wmhjr said:


> And that some "packages" also include at least one DVR for free for the life of the contract (like FiOS does for many customers). I have one VZ DVR that does not cost me a penny - ever. I've had it since 2007. It doesn't have much capacity (20 hrs HD) and isn't great (moto box) but it's free, and it's been "whole house" for years, where low cost STBs see it.
> 
> The whole cost proposition is very fluid. It's not as easy as many would believe themselves, where the Tivo with lifetime always comes out on top. All it takes is one or two device failures outside of the warranty period (or sometimes within) when you have to pay for the hardware replacement and you end up with a tougher issue. Plus, you do lose on-demand (if you want it). BTW, not sure where the "$30-40" cost is coming from. If I wanted another DVR from VZ, it's $19.95 with no incentives. So, it takes years for the VZ DVR to become more expensive than the Tivo with our without lifetime - and that assumes that you then keep or resell the Tivo, and that you also then don't have a failure where the device requires yet more investment.
> 
> Clearly I value the "premium" capability of the Tivo, but the up front cost, along with the hard facts hardly present an overwhelming cost advantage for Tivo. Add to this diminishing capability (ie, premiums required for mini, streaming, etc) and I think it's possible that the resale equation may also be getting more challenging. I will shortly have a capacity upgraded HD with lifetime for sale. It will nowhere near recoup that much cost to overcome some of these factors.


$30 or $40 or more comes from having multiple boxes. Ive had FiOS for 5.5 years now I I would have paid much more during that time period if I had been using the FiOS DVRs instead of TiVos.

Sent from my HTC ReZound using Forum Runner


----------



## wmhjr

aaronwt said:


> $30 or $40 or more comes from having multiple boxes. Ive had FiOS for 5.5 years now I I would have paid much more during that time period if I had been using the FiOS DVRs instead of TiVos.
> 
> Sent from my HTC ReZound using Forum Runner


So you mean a TOTAL of $30-40. Not per DVR, right? I've had FiOS for just as long as you, and though I did not get lifetime, I've done the math.

When adding up my purchase prices for the Tivos, the monthly charges, the cablecard charges, the Tivos have clearly been more expensive. Had I bought lifetime service, I would right now be breaking even. Assuming I could sell any of my units, I would certainly be ahead. However, that is also considering that I'm still using my free FiOS DVR. If I add in the cost of replacing that unit, the the Tivo solution is still more expensive.

The math will always differ based on the users experience. If any of my Tivo units had failed after the warranty period, then the math would change yet again. I was "fortunate" that all of the failures I've had were while each of the units were still under warranty.

On top of that, the Tivo path causes people to have to pay up front to get the maximum benefit. Many people will not be willing to invest such a very large amount (such as an XL4 with lifetime) when they can opt in at such a little cost with a cable DVR.

There are pros and cons each way.


----------



## moyekj

A lot of the math I see in these forums figure in that units with lifetime retain good value and can be sold on Ebay, Craigslist, etc. I don't feel comfortable selling anything via such avenues personally but I do hate monthly fees so I still get lifetime anyway. If you hold onto unit long enough (3+ years) you save money vs cable company, but saving money is not my primary motivation for going with TiVo, so I don't recommend TiVo to anyone looking to cut costs.


----------



## aaronwt

wmhjr said:


> So you mean a TOTAL of $30-40. Not per DVR, right? I've had FiOS for just as long as you, and though I did not get lifetime, I've done the math.
> 
> When adding up my purchase prices for the Tivos, the monthly charges, the cablecard charges, the Tivos have clearly been more expensive. Had I bought lifetime service, I would right now be breaking even. Assuming I could sell any of my units, I would certainly be ahead. However, that is also considering that I'm still using my free FiOS DVR. If I add in the cost of replacing that unit, the the Tivo solution is still more expensive.
> 
> The math will always differ based on the users experience. If any of my Tivo units had failed after the warranty period, then the math would change yet again. I was "fortunate" that all of the failures I've had were while each of the units were still under warranty.
> 
> On top of that, the Tivo path causes people to have to pay up front to get the maximum benefit. Many people will not be willing to invest such a very large amount (such as an XL4 with lifetime) when they can opt in at such a little cost with a cable DVR.
> 
> There are pros and cons each way.


I've sold a bunch of my units and upgraded to the Premieres and then the Elites. Each time selling my old lifetime boxes which covered 80% to 100% of the cost of the new boxes with lifetime service. In my use I would have spent alot more with FiOS.

Plus the cost is only part of it. The usability of the box is another issue. The interface of the TiVo has been so much better over the years than the FiOS dVR. Plus the TiVo has been more reliable. Several of my Neighbors have complained for years about missed recordings from their FiOS and Comcast DVRs. They typically miss more recordings in a few months than I have missed in over eleven years of using TiVos.


----------



## Dan203

moyekj said:


> A lot of the math I see in these forums figure in that units with lifetime retain good value and can be sold on Ebay, Craigslist, etc. I don't feel comfortable selling anything via such avenues personally but I do hate monthly fees so I still get lifetime anyway. If you hold onto unit long enough (3+ years) you save money vs cable company, but saving money is not my primary motivation for going with TiVo, so I don't recommend TiVo to anyone looking to cut costs.


I'm with you. Resale value is a bonus, but not a requirement for me. Most of the time I end up giving my old equipment away to family rather then selling it. However for people looking to upgrade who are cost conscience it's a nice bonus to get nearly 100% of the lifetime service fee back if you do decide to sell.


----------



## sbiller

http://usat.ly/15Yo3Bi


----------



## aaronwt

sbiller said:


> http://usat.ly/15Yo3Bi


There they go talking about a MoCA adapter again. Which is not needed. If you already have a four tuner Premiere connected to Ethernet, you only need to turn on MoCA on the P4 and connect the coax cable to the Mini and set it up for MoCA. The writer mentioned how he was on FiOS and didn't need an adapter because of that. They don't seem to understand that a MoCA adapter is not needed for the use of a Mini. Since you need a P4 to use the Mini and the P4 and Mini both have MoCA.


----------



## Dan203

Depends on how everything is connected though. He maid it sound like he may have previously been using wifi for his TiVo, so he may not have had Ethernet run to the 4 tuner box. Although since that leg of the network is only used for the internet connection he probably could have just used the wifi adapter anyway. Although there was no need since the FIOS routers have MoCa built in. 

Explaining this kind of networking to a layman is difficult. Unless they want to understand how it works, which most don't, they'll hook it up however they're told until it does work and then just assume that's the best/only way.


----------



## magnus

sbiller said:


> http://usat.ly/15Yo3Bi


For me, it had the opposite effect.


----------



## sbiller

Ed Baig's half-page review in today's USA Today, Page 2B.


----------



## Loach

aaronwt said:


> There they go talking about a MoCA adapter again. Which is not needed. If you already have a four tuner Premiere connected to Ethernet, you only need to turn on MoCA on the P4 and connect the coax cable to the Mini and set it up for MoCA. The writer mentioned how he was on FiOS and didn't need an adapter because of that. They don't seem to understand that a MoCA adapter is not needed for the use of a Mini. Since you need a P4 to use the Mini and the P4 and Mini both have MoCA.


The MoCA adapter may be needed if you don't have your P4 near an Ethernet jack and you're not using FiOS. I think that is probably the case for most cable subscribers. One MoCA adapter was needed in my setup.

And this writer says "you'll likely have to purchase a MoCA adapter" and doesn't state that you'll need 2 of them like some other articles.


----------



## wmhjr

moyekj said:


> A lot of the math I see in these forums figure in that units with lifetime retain good value and can be sold on Ebay, Craigslist, etc. I don't feel comfortable selling anything via such avenues personally but I do hate monthly fees so I still get lifetime anyway. If you hold onto unit long enough (3+ years) you save money vs cable company, but saving money is not my primary motivation for going with TiVo, so I don't recommend TiVo to anyone looking to cut costs.


Actually, you need to insert "likely based on historical data" in that sentence. There are two variables that can totally change that equation.

1) If the unit fails and requires repair/replacement.

2) If current trends reduce the resale value proposition of existing Tivos. For example, if the mini is truly a gamechanger for Tivo, then HD values just went down because it makes them less attractive. You can't stream from them, can't use a mini with them, etc. I'm not saying this is definite, or even likely. I'm also not saying it's impossible, or unlikely. Rental property in my area used to be hot until back in the '80s when depreciation rules were changed. Nothing is promised just because it has been that way for a while.

And the other thing which is a big deal for so many people is the capital investment up front. Whether we want to admit it or not, shelling out possibly $1300 up front for two boxes with lifetime, plus monthly cablecard costs, is a big deal to most families when they can get them both (1 free, one for $19.95, no cablecard fees) and no worries about box maintenance, etc.

Two other things. Just now, VZ has a new upgraded DVR enroute to me to replace my 2007 vintage moto VZ box - at not a penny of cost to me. That's to make me compatible with changes to their network. Tivo will never do that.

And I also agree that cost is NOT the reason to use Tivo. I certainly use it for some of the features and capabilities, IN SPITE of the cost. Not because of the cost. There is nothing wrong with that.


----------



## wmhjr

Seems like mixed reviews....

http://techcrunch.com/2013/03/11/fo...ni-will-pull-recordings-from-a-tivo-premiere/

Not everybody is in love with the cost at least.


----------



## DaveDFW

wmhjr said:


> Seems like mixed reviews....
> 
> http://techcrunch.com/2013/03/11/fo...ni-will-pull-recordings-from-a-tivo-premiere/
> 
> Not everybody is in love with the cost at least.


I agreed with this reviewer's opinions, especially the last line: "TiVo better, as they say, stop nickel and diming its remaining subscribers before they jump off the overpriced TiVo bandwagon."

I'll be interested to see what happens with Mini sales over time. There's a core group of hardcore Tivo fans who will happily pay whatever price Tivo asks for their hardware and, as we have seen at TCF, are chomping at the bit to purchase on the first day of availability.

But what will happen once those fans have completed their purchases? I expect to see an sales initial spike followed by a flat line hovering near zero.


----------



## slowbiscuit

And you can see an underlying theme in the reviews - no one thinks the fee is justified but are willing to concede that the lifetime $250 price is competitive in the marketplace. Problem is, there are a lot of people that won't buy Tivo because of fees and the Mini makes them look even worse regardless of whether the total price is fair. Just look at the comments in the Cnet review.


----------



## HarperVision

I just confirmed without doubt that the minis get their guide data from the host TiVo, not on their own. I found out because my P4 was missing guide data for all channels between 1008 and 1600 (Mostly HD digital package type channels). I called my cable co. many times in the last few days thinking the cards weren't paired right because when I went to the cablecard settings screen and tried to preview channels it said I couldn't because I had no digital channels available, even though I could tune and watch them normally. The kicker was that if I went to the tuning adapter menu instead, I could preview the channels there. 

After installing the minis, I noticed they exhibited the same behavior, no guide info for the same channels. Well yesterday I remembered when I initially setup the P4 that I skipped the cablecard activation portion (it said you could) when doing the GS and activated the card later on. So I decided to do GS again and this time when it asked my provider I said "I wasn't sure" so it asked me about a certain channel number which I confirmed and off it went calling in and downloading info, etc.

Once it was done I checked the guide and voila', there was the guide data for all my channels, but the point being and confirming is that I never once did a thing on any of the minis but when I went back to them, they each played the little TiVo cartoon again like they were just setup or something and now their guide data is correct as well.

These TiVo minis are just parasites sucking life out of and living off of their host!  So remind me, what's that extra $5.99/ month or $149 lifetime for again??? 

....but I actually do like them, a lot :/ (just not the added costs)
Dave

P.S. - Maybe everyone knew this already, but I was under the assumption that the way they justified their monthly fee was because it was autonomous in that regard.


----------



## Arcady

The mini gets the program guide from the host TiVo, because that is the box it uses to tune live TV. Whatever that box has for a channel list is what you will see on the Mini. The Mini has no need for its own guide data, because it can't record anything on its own.

What's next? A monthly fee for the TiVo remote control?


----------



## HarperVision

Thanks. I knew "technically" how it works, I just thought since it has it's own ethernet and connection to the internet that it dialed out to TiVo headend itself and collected the info it needed.

Hey, the cable co's used to, and some may still do, charge for remote control rentals


----------



## Arcady

It may get the info from TiVo's servers when it dials in, but the info is still coming from the host TiVo. I don't think anyone knows for sure. It does get software updates and graphics files from TiVo. But I still don't see how a monthly fee is justified. Anyway, the topic of the fees has been beat to death.

I'm keeping my $6.95/month Premiere for now.


----------



## HarperVision

Agreed!


----------



## bradleys

The "fee" has really nothing to do with services provided. The "fee" has to do with TiVo wanting to get a specific dollar amount for the Mini. In this case $250. 

The problem with a $250 price point on the Mini is that it is more expensive then the base price on a 2 tuner TiVo @ $149.

By adding the service fee they can advertise the Mini @ $99, $50 less then a TiVo. Also, they can advertise it with a lower service fee than a full TiVo $5.99 vs. $14.99 ($150 vs $399 with MSO)

At the end of the day, they want $250 for the Mini. However you slice it, what ever argument you want to make - that is the price they placed on it. They just gave you different meathods to get there.

Lets compare the true advertised prices:

Mini----------- $250
Premiere------- $600 ($500 MSO)
Premiere 4----- $750 ($650 MSO)
Premiere 4XL -- $900 ($800 MSO)

Looking at it this way, you can see that the Mini is a significant discount over even the least expensive Premier DVR. And a great option for adding anoter access node - especially in a minumal use room, like a bedroom.


----------



## Arcady

I don't understand how someone can make 849 posts on a TiVo forum, and not know how to spell the word PREMIERE.

Yes, a Mini costs half as much as a Premiere. But a Premiere has two tuners, does OTA, and has a crappy Netflix app. So there's that. TiVo is pretty much stuck because of their monthly/lifetime service fees. Too late to go back to $999 DVRs with no fees at this point...

Edited to add: The Premiere is twice as much, but that doesn't help if you don't already have a 4-tuner box. Then you would have to spend a whole lot more to even use a Mini. People are going to see the prices and run away.

This is from someone who paid $1000 for a Premiere Elite with Lifetime the week it came out.


----------



## jmpage2

Sounds like someone is bitter. The nagging about "premiere" vs "premier" is like watching amateur hour or open mic night. News flash, no one (other than you apparently) cares if someone spells it one way or the other.


----------



## donnoh

I just ordered a mini to replace a 2 tuner Premiere in my bedroom. I use the bedroom TV to fall asleep. 10-20 minutes and I'm done, so the Tivo mini fits my needs perfectly. Yeah, it cost me $250 but it should last indefinitely and I'll sell the never used Premiere for more than the mini costs.


----------



## Arcady

jmpage2 said:


> Sounds like someone is bitter. The nagging about "premiere" vs "premier" is like watching amateur hour or open mic night. News flash, no one (other than you apparently) cares if someone spells it one way or the other.


So, are we alllllowwweeed to just maaakeee up new speeeelings for wooooooooords now?

Or can we use the actual words that things are actually called? The box says "Premiere" on it. It does not say "Premier" anywhere.

The two words mean different things. A premier is a head of state. A premiere is a newly released film. Which do you think TiVo had in mind when they named the thing?


----------



## aaronwt

It could have been a misprint and they stuck with it afterwards. 

Anyway I've been pleased with my tow Minis the last week. I put lifetime service on them on Tuesday and Wednesday(It would only let me do one a day online), so now I'm covered. If a new Mini comes out in a few years I'll sell these for the new ones. And I still have my $6.95 a month Premiere which is OTA only now. Of course I should have put lifetime on it, but that was the only launch Premiere out of the eight I ordered that didn't have lifetime.


----------



## lessd

Arcady said:


> So, are we alllllowwweeed to just maaakeee up new speeeelings for wooooooooords now?
> 
> Or can we use the actual words that things are actually called? The box says "Premiere" on it. It does not say "Premier" anywhere.
> 
> The two words mean different things. A premier is a head of state. A premiere is a newly released film. Which do you think TiVo had in mind when they named the thing?


You are correct and if this was a different form you analyses would greatly appreciate, but this form is to give TiVo users information, and on this forum I don't think anybody would think spelling of the TP would be confusing enough to think we a getting a head of state as opposed to a DVR. (get the guest bedroom ready honey, we are getting company from Best Buy when I return with the premier)


----------



## Arcady

Okay, one more and then I promise I'll stop.

This is a FORUM, not a FORM.


----------



## bradleys

All that passion because I dropped an e? Sorry if I ruined your day!

I think my point was clear, and I promise to be more careful not to offend you in the future.

I purchased the S3 the first Christmas it came out... Full price - $800 before lifetime service! I don't have a P4 either and will wait until the PremierE line has an upgraded chipset before buying it. 

My point is and was - the Mini is half the price of a two tuner PremierE and frankly has half the functionality. If it makes more sense for you to purchase a full unit, then by all means do it. Both options will give you the "whole home experience" TiVo is advertising.

Both options are expensive, but I do understand the pricing model.


----------



## slowbiscuit

But a lot of other people don't understand the model for the Mini. Bottom line.


----------



## bradleys

slowbiscuit said:


> But a lot of other people don't understand the model for the Mini. Bottom line.


I realize that the service fee is confusing. I suspect, from TiVo's perspective they felt offering a tiered payment option that allows them to offer a lower base price then a 2 tuner Premiere was less confusing.

It would be hard to describe why a full 2 tuner premiere is $150 and a dumb extender is $250!

I do not own a Mini and I am not going to buy one until the chipset in the Premiere DVR's are upgraded - but I do understand the pricing model.

At that point, I will seriously consider dropping say $1000 on a 6 tuner DVR and bundle in two $250 Mini's.


----------



## magnus

bradleys said:


> Both options will give you the "whole home experience" TiVo is advertising.


Not really. Whole home is not achieved with 2 Premiere boxes. They can use cooperative scheduling or an integrated now playing list. You have to know which box has the recording and you have to manage scheduling of shows and conflicts between boxes.


----------



## bradleys

magnus said:


> Not really. Whole home is not achieved with 2 Premiere boxes. They can use cooperative scheduling or an integrated now playing list. You have to know which box has the recording and you have to manage scheduling of shows and conflicts between boxes.


If cooperative scheduling is an important part of your definition of "whole home experience" then of course you are correct.

If having tuners available at each node, being able to start watching one show in one room and finish watching in another, or the ability to watch copy protected content freely throughout the home is your definition - then any Premiere box meets the need.

I started a thread a while back criticizing TiVo for advertising a whole home solution without the extender on the market. I meant it in a rather light hearted way - my point was that they kind of jumped the gun with the marketing.

But during that conversation, several TCF members made very good arguments that any Premiere line TiVo can accomplish the "whole home" experience if you are willing to pay the premium.

Since my now teenage children watch and record completely different shows then I do, a consolidated NPL isn't something that really interests me at the moment. However, I have long said that a huge differentiator for TiVo would be pooled dynamic tuners.

But I am not sure (for me) that the definition of a "whole home" solution fails, because it does not exist. Practical? That is a different conversation.


----------



## wmhjr

Arcady said:


> The two words mean different things. A premier is a head of state. A premiere is a newly released film. Which do you think TiVo had in mind when they named the thing?


Maybe they meant that the premier(e) is the head of all of their technology. The leader in their stack....

Who cares? There are SO MANY other spelling and grammatical errors on this site that dropping a final e is no more terrible than calling a unit a THD, etc.


----------



## Arcady

wmhjr said:


> Who cares?


apparentlee noebodie kayrz. aisle just maik up meye oawn werdz tue.


----------



## HarperVision

bradleys said:


> ...However, I have long said that a huge differentiator for TiVo would be pooled dynamic tuners...


Yeah it would be pretty cool if they came out with something similar to the HDHomerun Prime and then you just deployed something like the minis at each TV to access those tuners dynamically! :up:


----------



## wmhjr

Yes, I'm just discovering the lack of dynamic tuner allocation on the mini. It effectively means the permanent loss of a tuner on the XL4/P4 if you ever want live TV via the mini. Actually, the loss of 1 tuner per mini. This is not really disclosed by Tivo in their marketing, and frankly sales people and tech people at Tivo are incorrectly describing it (I have ticket numbers as proof). I honestly think that this tuner loss is a serious constraint, and will prevent the mini from truly allowing a whole home solution that Tivo so desperately wants and needs to remain competitive.


----------



## jmpage2

Arcady said:


> apparentlee noebodie kayrz. aisle just maik up meye oawn werdz tue.


Now you are being pedantic. Look that word up. The guy put an "e" where it didn't belong and you've almost had a stroke over it. People use shorthand for products all the time. Pretty small potatoes to everyone but yourself.


----------



## Arcady

You keep ignoring statements from people here that dynamic tuner allocation is planned and will get rid of that restriction.

Also, every document/setup page/info page I ever looked at on the TiVo site about the Mini said it uses a tuner permanently.


----------



## jmpage2

Arcady said:


> You keep ignoring statements from people here that dynamic tuner allocation is planned and will get rid of that restriction.
> 
> Also, every document/setup page/info page I ever looked at on the TiVo site about the Mini said it uses a tuner permanently.


TiVo plans lots of things and then fails to deliver. No one should buy a TiVo product based on promised future functionality that may or may not ever materialize.


----------



## Arcady

jmpage2 said:


> TiVo plans lots of things and then fails to deliver. No one should buy a TiVo product based on promised future functionality that may or may not ever materialize.


That's true. They are getting so beat up in the press over the Mini already, if they fail to deliver dynamic tuners, this product will probably fail.


----------



## Dan203

In this case they will follow through because their competition has dynamic tuner allocation and their MSO partners need it.

One good thing about the current DVR market is that the other options have finally pulled ahead of TiVo and it's putting pressure on them to catch up. They were without competition for a while and they let the product stagnate. Now that the MSO DVR offerings have leapfrogged them in key areas they're actually investing in R&D again.


----------



## aaronwt

wmhjr said:


> Yes, I'm just discovering the lack of dynamic tuner allocation on the mini. It effectively means the permanent loss of a tuner on the XL4/P4 if you ever want live TV via the mini. Actually, the loss of 1 tuner per mini. This is not really disclosed by Tivo in their marketing, and frankly sales people and tech people at Tivo are incorrectly describing it (I have ticket numbers as proof). I honestly think that this tuner loss is a serious constraint, and will prevent the mini from truly allowing a whole home solution that Tivo so desperately wants and needs to remain competitive.


You only lose a tuner for each Mini if you plan on having both Minis need access to live TV at the same time. If that is never the case then you can share one tuner between the Minis.


----------



## bradleys

Dan203 said:


> In this case they will follow through because their competition has dynamic tuner allocation and their MSO partners need it.
> 
> One good thing about the current DVR market is that the other options have finally pulled ahead of TiVo and it's putting pressure on them to catch up. They were without competition for a while and they let the product stagnate. Now that the MSO DVR offerings have leapfrogged them in key areas they're actually investing in R&D again.


I think you hit the nail on the head.

As late as the introduction of the Series 3 platform TiVo pushed the market forward, but then something happened. Maybe it was a focus on defending their intellectual property, maybe it was a lack of resources or a combination of both. But the MSO's have definitely caught up and in some instances surpassed what TiVo provides.

The argument has changed from "you simply cannot get this functionality anywhere else at any price" to "the price of the product is actually very similar to what the cable companies offer over the long run."

On the bright side, it seems like we may be entering in new growth phase for Tivo. It has been good to see the TiVo Stream, TiVo Mini, MRS, and the P4 product line over the last 18 months&#8230; But none of these are ground breaking achievements, they are just products that keep them competitive.

Do not misunderstand; I do still think TiVo is very competitive. But the entire industry is moving forward very quickly. Keep up or get left behind.


----------



## Dan203

bradleys said:


> the entire industry is moving forward very quickly. Keep up or get left behind.


Exactly. TiVo finally has competition so they have to innovate or die. I'm really hoping that the next gen Premiere units will finally allow them to fulfill the "one box" promise they made 3 years ago. With a faster CPU that can actually support modern apps for services like Netflix, HBOGo, VUDU, etc... and a complete HDUI I could see this finally happening. Throw in 6 tuners, built in Stream capabilities, user profiles and dynamic tuner allocation for the Mini and they could once again be on top with the most comprehensive whole home solution on the market.


----------



## sbiller

Dan203 said:


> Exactly. TiVo finally has competition so they have to innovate or die. I'm really hoping that the next gen Premiere units will finally allow them to fulfill the "one box" promise they made 3 years ago. With a faster CPU that can actually support modern apps for services like Netflix, HBOGo, VUDU, etc... and a complete HDUI I could see this finally happening. Throw in 6 tuners, built in Stream capabilities, user profiles and dynamic tuner allocation for the Mini and they could once again be on top with the most comprehensive whole home solution on the market.


There are really very few alternatives to TiVo other than Windows Media Center from a retail perspective that's portable across cable operators. I completely agree with you that the OTT app situation is abysmal and will hopefully be addressed with the improved processing platform. The challenge for TiVo is convincing the content providers (e.g., HBO Go, Amazon, Netflix, etc.) to invest the engineering resources to update their apps to support a relatively small TiVO subscriber base. If TiVo starts demonstrating retail and cable operator growth again in the US, this situation could quickly change. I would like to see TiVo incentivize their app partners to support the platform.


----------



## sbiller

Speaking of reviews... at least two posters in this thread have published their own thoughts on the Mini via Amazon's review platform. 

http://www.amazon.com/TiVo-RA9200-Mini-DVR-Companion/dp/B00BUCLVZU/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top


----------



## bradleys

The competition of course isn't on the retail side; it is from the MSO offerings.

I have a sneaking suspicion the reason we do not have Amazon Live streaming service is that Amazon is not happy with the performance of streaming apps on the current platform. No evidence, but after using the new AOL service  I am more and more convinced!

TiVo will have to address the performance of their OTT apps before content owners are going to take them seriously.


----------



## Dan203

sbiller said:


> The challenge for TiVo is convincing the content providers (e.g., HBO Go, Amazon, Netflix, etc.) to invest the engineering resources to update their apps to support a relatively small TiVO subscriber base.


Most of these providers already have Adobe Air based apps for the Samsung Smart TV market, so the development resources required to port them should be minimal. Although TiVo's developer TOS are pretty sh*tty so that could be scaring some of these services away. There could also be business issues stalling their deployment that have nothing to do with technological limitations.

I really hope that the next gen TiVo platform has a beefier CPU that can deal with these apps properly so that we can get more of these OTT apps. If TiVo had Netflix, HBOGo and VUDU, and could run them at acceptable speeds, I'd never even need to change the input on my TV.


----------



## sbiller

Dan203 said:


> Most of these providers already have Adobe Air based apps for the Samsung Smart TV market, so the development resources required to port them should be minimal. Although TiVo's developer TOS are pretty sh*tty so that could be scaring some of these services away. There could also be business issues stalling their deployment that have nothing to do with technological limitations.
> 
> I really hope that the next gen TiVo platform has a beefier CPU that can deal with these apps properly so that we can get more of these OTT apps. If TiVo had Netflix, HBOGo and VUDU, and could run them at acceptable speeds, I'd never even need to change the input on my TV.


Excellent point on Samsung using the same development platform. I would love to see TiVo form some sort of app alliance with them.

I suspect that the developers ToS are different for their major partners.

I would say with near certainty that the new platforms will have processors that meet or exceed what we see in the Mini.


----------



## wmhjr

Arcady said:


> You keep ignoring statements from people here that dynamic tuner allocation is planned and will get rid of that restriction.
> 
> Also, every document/setup page/info page I ever looked at on the TiVo site about the Mini said it uses a tuner permanently.


Really? As others have said, "planned" is meaningless. No value whatsoever. "Released" means something. Or, "planned - and if we don't deliver it we give you your money back - even if it's 6 months later". Otherwise, it's just a stab in the dark as to what, when, how and with what requirements they will deliver.

As for being clear, the ONLY statements I'm aware of are "The TiVo Mini requires the use of a dedicated tuner on your 4-tuner DVR to stream live TV. Mini does not work with TiVo Premiere or Premiere XL.". What exactly does that mean? Especially in light of the absolute fact that (again, I have ticket/reference numbers as proof) Tivo sales and tech people themselves are confused about what it means.

They are, IMHO being deliberately deceptive in order to minimize the public transparency that what they delivered is getting close to, but still inferior to, what others (including MSOs) offer in terms of whole home solutions.


----------



## Dan203

wmhjr said:


> "The TiVo Mini requires the use of a dedicated tuner on your 4-tuner DVR to stream live TV. Mini does not work with TiVo Premiere or Premiere XL.". What exactly does that mean? Especially in light of the absolute fact that (again, I have ticket/reference numbers as proof) Tivo sales and tech people themselves are confused about what it means.


If the TiVo sales people had been properly trained then it wouldn't have been an issue. Once you see how it works, and that there is an option on the 4 tuner TiVo to dedicate 0, 1 or 2 tuners to network live TV, it makes perfect sense.

I think this whole Mini launch was a bit botched. The delay, the accidental early release by BestBuy, the improper training, missing accessories, etc... Hopefully it will all come together and future customers will get better information when they call to order or ask questions.


----------



## wmhjr

Dan203 said:


> If the TiVo sales people had been properly trained then it wouldn't have been an issue. Once you see how it works, and that there is an option on the 4 tuner TiVo to dedicate 0, 1 or 2 tuners to network live TV, it makes perfect sense.
> 
> I think this whole Mini launch was a bit botched. The delay, the accidental early release by BestBuy, the improper training, missing accessories, etc... Hopefully it will all come together and future customers will get better information when they call to order or ask questions.


From an "understanding" point of view, I think you're very right. However, I truly do at this point believe Tivo is deliberately misleading people. I know many will not agree, but that's my current opinion.

The one thing it doesn't change is that the loss of a tuner for recording is still a big deal - no way to get around it.

Totally agree that Tivo horribly screwed up this product release.


----------



## Dan203

wmhjr said:


> The one thing it doesn't change is that the loss of a tuner for recording is still a big deal - no way to get around it.


I agree. And I honestly didn't think that TiVo was even going to release the Mini at retail until that was fixed. But obviously they felt there was enough of a market for it, even in it's current state, to take the chance. And judging by the fact that most users on this forum who have actually bought one are happy with the purchase I think they were right.

It may not do everything we'd hoped but it's a first step in the right direction. This time last year your only option was to buy a second TiVo which would have cost 2x as much and drawn 3x as much power. (not to mention size, heat, noise, etc...) It's not perfect, but we're getting there.


----------



## Loach

wmhjr said:


> From an "understanding" point of view, I think you're very right. However, I truly do at this point believe Tivo is deliberately misleading people. I know many will not agree, but that's my current opinion.
> 
> The one thing it doesn't change is that the loss of a tuner for recording is still a big deal - no way to get around it.
> 
> Totally agree that Tivo horribly screwed up this product release.


They clearly state in RED on their Mini page the following:

"The TiVo Mini requires the use of a dedicated tuner on your 4-tuner DVR to stream live TV."

http://www.tivo.com/products/tivo-mini/index.html?WT.ac=tivohome_mantle_mini


----------



## jmpage2

Rather than chiding the consumer for not properly interpreting that information (while it says "dedicated' some might simply believe this means it is using the tuner when the Mini is watching live TV) maybe you should chide TiVo support for not even understanding this very important limitation of their own product.


----------



## wmhjr

Dan, I think the point is that it might be a neat addition for some people here, but it's hardly fulfilling either the promise - or the gap - that Tivo needs to deal with. Frankly, I'm very torn about the product. I'm really impressed with the speed of the unit. I mean really impressed. It's the fastest Tivo product I've ever used - bar none. The THD an the premier are dogs in terms of performance. This thing is really fast for most things so far. However, balancing that out is the loss of a tuner. That is a killer. It's like there is no in between. It's both really good, and really bad. 

And to add to that, Tivo themselves has been absolutely horrible, terrible, totally unacceptable in their internal knowledge, etc of the mini. I have never in my 51 years seen a product so terribly described, inaccurately marketed and sold, and incompetently sold and supported. I mean that very literally. I'm a very senior technology leader, working with a myriad of technology in very very large enterprises. And this is, considering both corporate and consumer technology, the very worst supported and described release I've ever ever seen.

Frankly, I think Tivo is in turmoil. I don't think revenues are there sufficiently to support the kind of investment required for real innovation delivered with quality. And the market cap is in question given the rapidly changing environment where core Tivo functionality is being replaced by other mediums. I hate to see that, because when it works and in the right situations, this is great technology. But if Tivo can't get this right, it's not looking good. 

JMHO


----------



## wmhjr

jmpage2 said:


> Rather than chiding the consumer for not properly interpreting that information (while it says "dedicated' some might simply believe this means it is using the tuner when the Mini is watching live TV) maybe you should chide TiVo support for not even understanding this very important limitation of their own product.


That is exactly correct. Especially when the consumer wants to confirm the definition and calls Tivo to ask, and gets conflicting and inaccurate information.

Or, we could simply blame the people who spend their money on gaps created by poor documentation, extremely poor support, untrained staff, and inaccurate responses from the company who designs, manufactures, distributes, sells, and (supposedly) supports the product.


----------



## HarperVision

wmhjr said:


> ...I have never in my 51 years seen a product so terribly described, inaccurately marketed and sold, and incompetently sold and supported...
> JMHO


I see you've never encountered the wonderful Ceton Echo then I presume?


----------



## wmhjr

HarperVision said:


> I see you've never encountered the wonderful Ceton Echo then I presume?


No, fortunately I have not.


----------



## Loach

jmpage2 said:


> Rather than chiding the consumer for not properly interpreting that information (while it says "dedicated' some might simply believe this means it is using the tuner when the Mini is watching live TV) maybe you should chide TiVo support for not even understanding this very important limitation of their own product.


I don't mean to absolve Tivo support at all for their incorrect answers. I guess I'm just more comfortable always doing my own homework using the published product descriptions and specifications when researching a potential purchase. At least published information has (generally) been reviewed by somebody who knows the product. I've rarely had any luck getting accurate information from sales people in general, much less call center employees. So I no longer bother.


----------



## wmhjr

Loach said:


> I don't mean to absolve Tivo support at all for their incorrect answers. I guess I'm just more comfortable always doing my own homework using the published product descriptions and specifications when researching a potential purchase. At least published information has (generally) been reviewed by somebody who knows the product. I've rarely had any luck getting accurate information from sales people in general, much less call center employees. So I no longer bother.


I would agree about doing your own research, except I did review all of the product descriptions and specifications. They are woefully inadequate. And with such a very very narrow focused quantity of products, if the sales staff does not understand the equipment and services they are talking about they should not be employed. Period.


----------



## swarto112

i just finished reading another string of arguments about sales staff from wmhjr. Same crap about sales staff. Shut up and buy dude or dont. Most of us are smart enuf togather info and decide to buy but its taken with a grain of salt. remember the world is a grey area, not stiff rights and wrong that you agitate on these forums



wmhjr said:


> I would agree about doing your own research, except I did review all of the product descriptions and specifications. They are woefully inadequate. And with such a very very narrow focused quantity of products, if the sales staff does not understand the equipment and services they are talking about they should not be employed. Period.


----------



## wmhjr

swarto112 said:


> i just finished reading another string of arguments about sales staff from wmhjr. Same crap about sales staff. Shut up and buy dude or dont. Most of us are smart enuf togather info and decide to buy but its taken with a grain of salt. remember the world is a grey area, not stiff rights and wrong that you agitate on these forums


thanks. I really appreciate your key insights about how the world works, and how apparently companies should be given a free pass when they fail. BTW, you might want to take a class on English as a first language. Not entirely sure what that run-on sentence really meant. But, it's nice to see that different opinions are valued from you. Especially since you've contributed so much over the course of the past few months that you've been here. Maybe you also missed where I thanked some other contributors for the civil discussion - something that some people are clearly incapable of having.


----------



## slowbiscuit

Dan203 said:


> Exactly. TiVo finally has competition so they have to innovate or die.


At retail? Where?

IMO, the MSO competition is a totally separate market.


----------



## wmhjr

slowbiscuit said:


> At retail? Where?
> 
> IMO, the MSO competition is a totally separate market.


Why do you think the MSO competition is a separate market? I don't quite understand that. My comparisons are always Tivo vs MSO offering. In discussions with friends and guests at my home, the conversations are always MSO vs Tivo.

It's all about what "service" and at what "price" the consumer gets, correct? Not about whether it's a retail vs MSO.


----------



## Davisadm

wmhjr said:


> Why do you think the MSO competition is a separate market? I don't quite understand that. My comparisons are always Tivo vs MSO offering. In discussions with friends and guests at my home, the conversations are always MSO vs Tivo.
> 
> It's all about what "service" and at what "price" the consumer gets, correct? Not about whether it's a retail vs MSO.


You are right, MSOs are not a separate market.

TiVo is in direct competition with the MSOs. TiVos replace the MSO boxes. This is exactly what the MSOs do not want, because it cuts into their monthly revenue. And, unfortunately, the MSOs have a huge budget for advertising and successful in pushing their product. As I have stated before, TiVo has to increase their advertising, big time.


----------



## wmhjr

Davisadm said:


> You are right, MSOs are not a separate market.
> 
> And, unfortunately, the MSOs have a huge budget for advertising and successful in pushing their product. As I have stated before, TiVo has to increase their advertising, big time.


Now on that part, I totally disagree. Tivos problem has nothing whatsoever to do with advertising. It has everything to do with value proposition, cost to entry (up front cost), long term cost, feature/function, quality, service, simplicity, etc.

Tivo is either a "Premium" service, in which case Tivo needs to deliver significantly increased value, quality and features than the MSO offering, or they are a "Value" service, in which case they need to deliver equal or better features and quality at a direct competitive price point. The price point for the general public needs to be able to avoid large up front costs for it to be a large scale value business.

The problem is that years ago, Tivo was clearly a premium offering. Tivo offered features and functions simply not available to the consumer otherwise. Today, we can all argue (and agree) that the Tivo UI is far better than most of the MSO offerings. However, what we can NOT agree on is that the MSOs can't compete on feature/function. In fact, they've been doing "whole house" far longer than Tivo, at a lower cost, and with more simplicity.

So the question here is not whatsoever about advertisement. It's about figuring out what they want to be and focusing on that segment. Right now, they're in between both IMHO, and not leading either. Let's all be honest - it's way harder today to describe exactly why Tivo is better than what Comcast offered than it was in 2005. I'm (still) a Tivo subscriber, so I personally value some of what Tivo delivers. But this board is hardly representative of the general public, as evidenced by the market results compared to what we see here. Beyond that, the advent of Hulu+, Roku, built in streaming capability into PS3, Xbox, Blueray and smart TVs have all in addition intruded into the value proposition of Tivo. And the more IP based content there starts to be, the argument gets more difficult. It's a tough market to play in right now - certainly not easy for Tivo. That's exactly why if you're looking for "direct retail competitors" it's hard to define one. Tivos competition are the MSOs, Roku, etc.


----------



## eagle63

@wmhjr
I couldn't agree more with your entire post. I think the premium market is where they belong, but you're absolutely correct - they really need to add more services to justify the higher cost. I actually left Tivo about 2 1/2 years ago because I wanted a whole-house solution. I ended up going with windows media center (which was light years ahead in many respects) and am still happily using it now. However, it's effectively an end-of-life product so I try to keep an ear to the wind to see what my next step might be once I'm done with WMC. It's great to see Tivo trying to do the whole-house thing but it's just amazing how slowly they move. Hopefully the evolve the Mini rapidly.


----------



## atmuscarella

wmhjr said:


> Now on that part, I totally disagree. Tivos problem has nothing whatsoever to do with advertising. It has everything to do with value proposition, cost to entry (up front cost), long term cost, feature/function, quality, service, simplicity, etc.
> 
> Tivo is either a "Premium" service, in which case Tivo needs to deliver significantly increased value, quality and features than the MSO offering, or they are a "Value" service, in which case they need to deliver equal or better features and quality at a direct competitive price point. The price point for the general public needs to be able to avoid large up front costs for it to be a large scale value business.
> 
> The problem is that years ago, Tivo was clearly a premium offering. Tivo offered features and functions simply not available to the consumer otherwise. Today, we can all argue (and agree) that the Tivo UI is far better than most of the MSO offerings. However, what we can NOT agree on is that the MSOs can't compete on feature/function. In fact, they've been doing "whole house" far longer than Tivo, at a lower cost, and with more simplicity.
> 
> So the question here is not whatsoever about advertisement. It's about figuring out what they want to be and focusing on that segment. Right now, they're in between both IMHO, and not leading either. Let's all be honest - it's way harder today to describe exactly why Tivo is better than what Comcast offered than it was in 2005. I'm (still) a Tivo subscriber, so I personally value some of what Tivo delivers. But this board is hardly representative of the general public, as evidenced by the market results compared to what we see here. Beyond that, the advent of Hulu+, Roku, built in streaming capability into PS3, Xbox, Blueray and smart TVs have all in addition intruded into the value proposition of Tivo. And the more IP based content there starts to be, the argument gets more difficult. It's a tough market to play in right now - certainly not easy for Tivo. That's exactly why if you're looking for "direct retail competitors" it's hard to define one. Tivos competition are the MSOs, Roku, etc.


Unless you can point to a superior cable whole home system being provided by the MSOs then TiVo is still a Premium solution. Also unless you think the data about cost posted in a thread a few inches away from this is incorrect then TiVo is cost completive and in many cases a value leader in providing a whole home DVR solution. So we have a Premium product that is either cost completive or cheaper than the MSOs inferior alternatives that isn't selling and you don't think marketing is a problem? Really?

I live in a TWC area and have priced out their so called whole home system for friends and TiVo is flat out cheaper unless you are thick headed enough to think you are only going to watch TV for less than 2 years and TiVo's DVRs are light years ahead of what TWC is offering.

I do agree that TiVo needs to significantly improve their IP/Internet streaming options but what does the TWC or any other MSO's whole home solution offer? Answer Nothing.

Where TiVo does fail is in the simplicity area. Until the FCC grows a pair and mandates a simple software solution having to use cable cards and possibly tuning adapters is going to increase complexity and certainly turn off many potential buyers. Tivo is also never going to be able to actually rent you a DVR that includes installation and maintenance, so stand alone TiVos will never be a solution for people that want that. Both of the above are reasons why it is so important for TiVo to partner with MSOs and get them to rent their customers TiVo DVRs.


----------



## wmhjr

atmuscarella said:


> Unless you can point to a superior cable whole home system being provided by the MSOs then TiVo is still a Premium solution. Also unless you think the data about cost posted in a thread a few inches away from this is incorrect then TiVo is cost completive and in many cases a value leader in providing a whole home DVR solution. So we have a Premium product that is either cost completive or cheaper than the MSOs inferior alternatives that isn't selling and you don't think marketing is a problem? Really?
> 
> I live in a TWC area and have priced out their so called whole home system for friends and TiVo is flat out cheaper unless you are thick headed enough to think you are only going to watch TV for less than 2 years and TiVo's DVRs are light years ahead of what TWC is offering.
> 
> I do agree that TiVo needs to significantly improve their IP/Internet streaming options but what does the TWC or any other MSO's whole home solution offer? Answer Nothing.
> 
> Where TiVo does fail is in the simplicity area. Until the FCC grows a pair and mandates a simple software solution having to use cable cards and possibly tuning adapters is going to increase complexity and certainly turn off many potential buyers. Tivo is also never going to be able to actually rent you a DVR that includes installation and maintenance, so stand alone TiVos will never be a solution for people that want that. Both of the above are reasons why it is so important for TiVo to partner with MSOs and get them to rent their customers TiVo DVRs.


Sorry, but I strongly disagree with you on a number of fronts.

First of all, you're making the assumption that people are willing to spend their money up front (more than $1000) in order to make those numbers works where Tivo is even remotely competitive from a price perspective. If you don't do lifetime and you don't get decent resale, then the Tivo math just plain does not work. Both of those are big ifs. Most people are simply unwilling to give Tivo the money up front in that quantity, knowing that if the unit fails, you then have to spend yet more money to replace/fix hardware. Additionally, with the changing dynamics of the market, continued resale value is hardly promised. At least any more than it was in the housing bubble. Remember that?

As for the technology, from a whole home solution, Tivo solutions are frankly inferior at the moment. The mini makes it "better", but not equal. The fact that the mini degrades your four tuner box to a 3 tuner (or 2 tuner) is incredibly telling. I'm not blaming Tivo. But those are the facts. Tivo is finally delivering to an extent what the MSOs have been delivering now for years.

I understand your perspective, but simply disagree with it. If I take a step back and don't look at things through my "TiVo centric" glasses, then it is extremely clear that no matter how you calculate it, Tivo has lost the edge, and certainly has lost the financial advantage. My FiOS bill is living proof.

People here are very quick to accept shelling out $1200-$2000 up front to get a user experience (whole house) that cable will provide with no up front investment. Do NOT underestimate that. Do NOT underestimate the fact that their solution does NOT decrease available recording tuners. Do NOT overlook the fact that repairs and warranty are essentially meaningless for them, since the product is actually owned by the Cableco. Again, my 2007 Verizon FiOS HD DVR is being exchanged - this week - at no cost - for their very newest version. Show me exactly where Tivo has ever done that. It means something to consumers. We may have different objectives and criteria, however the general public is very VERY different than the average person on this site. And, if Tivo expects to be financially successful simply based on the members of this site, then we're in serious trouble all around.


----------



## lessd

wmhjr said:


> Sorry, but I strongly disagree with you on a number of fronts.
> 
> First of all, you're making the assumption that people are willing to spend their money up front (more than $1000) in order to make those numbers works where Tivo is even remotely competitive from a price perspective. If you don't do lifetime and you don't get decent resale, then the Tivo math just plain does not work. Both of those are big ifs. Most people are simply unwilling to give Tivo the money up front in that quantity, knowing that if the unit fails, you then have to spend yet more money to replace/fix hardware. Additionally, with the changing dynamics of the market, continued resale value is hardly promised. At least any more than it was in the housing bubble. Remember that?
> 
> As for the technology, from a whole home solution, Tivo solutions are frankly inferior at the moment. The mini makes it "better", but not equal. The fact that the mini degrades your four tuner box to a 3 tuner (or 2 tuner) is incredibly telling. I'm not blaming Tivo. But those are the facts. Tivo is finally delivering to an extent what the MSOs have been delivering now for years.
> 
> I understand your perspective, but simply disagree with it. If I take a step back and don't look at things through my "TiVo centric" glasses, then it is extremely clear that no matter how you calculate it, Tivo has lost the edge, and certainly has lost the financial advantage. My FiOS bill is living proof.
> 
> People here are very quick to accept shelling out $1200-$2000 up front to get a user experience (whole house) that cable will provide with no up front investment. Do NOT underestimate that. Do NOT underestimate the fact that their solution does NOT decrease available recording tuners. Do NOT overlook the fact that repairs and warranty are essentially meaningless for them, since the product is actually owned by the Cableco. Again, my 2007 Verizon FiOS HD DVR is being exchanged - this week - at no cost - for their very newest version. Show me exactly where Tivo has ever done that. It means something to consumers. We may have different objectives and criteria, however the general public is very VERY different than the average person on this site. And, if Tivo expects to be financially successful simply based on the members of this site, then we're in serious trouble all around.


+1


----------



## jmpage2

+2

The biggest TiVo has is cost, which to a lay person always appears to be higher than that of MSO offerings. Add to that the perceived complexity of the install with cable cards and TiVo clearly has problems.


----------



## HarperVision

wmhjr said:


> ...Again, my 2007 Verizon FiOS HD DVR is being exchanged - this week - at no cost - for their very newest version. Show me exactly where Tivo has ever done that....


While I completely agree with your stance as well, you also have to realize that based on the quote above, since 2007 if you've been using their wondeful equipment and paying the "DVR, extra outlet, mirroring Fees, yada yada yada" which are in the $20-50 or more per month range, then you've more than paid for a TiVo or two, or that upgrade they're supposedly giving you for "free", no?


----------



## aaronwt

wmhjr said:


> Sorry, but I strongly disagree with you on a number of fronts.
> 
> First of all, you're making the assumption that people are willing to spend their money up front (more than $1000) in order to make those numbers works where Tivo is even remotely competitive from a price perspective. If you don't do lifetime and you don't get decent resale, then the Tivo math just plain does not work. Both of those are big ifs. Most people are simply unwilling to give Tivo the money up front in that quantity, knowing that if the unit fails, you then have to spend yet more money to replace/fix hardware. Additionally, with the changing dynamics of the market, continued resale value is hardly promised. At least any more than it was in the housing bubble. Remember that?
> 
> As for the technology, from a whole home solution, Tivo solutions are frankly inferior at the moment. The mini makes it "better", but not equal. The fact that the mini degrades your four tuner box to a 3 tuner (or 2 tuner) is incredibly telling. I'm not blaming Tivo. But those are the facts. Tivo is finally delivering to an extent what the MSOs have been delivering now for years.
> 
> I understand your perspective, but simply disagree with it. If I take a step back and don't look at things through my "TiVo centric" glasses, then it is extremely clear that no matter how you calculate it, Tivo has lost the edge, and certainly has lost the financial advantage. My FiOS bill is living proof.
> 
> People here are very quick to accept shelling out $1200-$2000 up front to get a user experience (whole house) that cable will provide with no up front investment. Do NOT underestimate that. Do NOT underestimate the fact that their solution does NOT decrease available recording tuners. Do NOT overlook the fact that repairs and warranty are essentially meaningless for them, since the product is actually owned by the Cableco. Again, my 2007 Verizon FiOS HD DVR is being exchanged - this week - at no cost - for their very newest version. Show me exactly where Tivo has ever done that. It means something to consumers. We may have different objectives and criteria, however the general public is very VERY different than the average person on this site. And, if Tivo expects to be financially successful simply based on the members of this site, then we're in serious trouble all around.


But my neighbors with FiOS and Comcast DVRs are always complaining about missed recordings. I don't care if it is free. If it doesn't record what I want then it is worthless. My neighbors typically miss more recordings every few months than I have in over ten years of using TiVos.


----------



## magnus

wmhjr said:


> Sorry, but I strongly disagree with you on a number of fronts.
> 
> First of all, you're making the assumption that people are willing to spend their money up front (more than $1000) in order to make those numbers works where Tivo is even remotely competitive from a price perspective. If you don't do lifetime and you don't get decent resale, then the Tivo math just plain does not work. Both of those are big ifs. Most people are simply unwilling to give Tivo the money up front in that quantity, knowing that if the unit fails, you then have to spend yet more money to replace/fix hardware. Additionally, with the changing dynamics of the market, continued resale value is hardly promised. At least any more than it was in the housing bubble. Remember that?
> 
> As for the technology, from a whole home solution, Tivo solutions are frankly inferior at the moment. The mini makes it "better", but not equal. The fact that the mini degrades your four tuner box to a 3 tuner (or 2 tuner) is incredibly telling. I'm not blaming Tivo. But those are the facts. Tivo is finally delivering to an extent what the MSOs have been delivering now for years.
> 
> I understand your perspective, but simply disagree with it. If I take a step back and don't look at things through my "TiVo centric" glasses, then it is extremely clear that no matter how you calculate it, Tivo has lost the edge, and certainly has lost the financial advantage. My FiOS bill is living proof.
> 
> People here are very quick to accept shelling out $1200-$2000 up front to get a user experience (whole house) that cable will provide with no up front investment. Do NOT underestimate that. Do NOT underestimate the fact that their solution does NOT decrease available recording tuners. Do NOT overlook the fact that repairs and warranty are essentially meaningless for them, since the product is actually owned by the Cableco. Again, my 2007 Verizon FiOS HD DVR is being exchanged - this week - at no cost - for their very newest version. Show me exactly where Tivo has ever done that. It means something to consumers. We may have different objectives and criteria, however the general public is very VERY different than the average person on this site. And, if Tivo expects to be financially successful simply based on the members of this site, then we're in serious trouble all around.


+3


----------



## magnus

aaronwt said:


> But my neighbors with FiOS and Comcast DVRs are always complaining about missed recordings. I don't care if it is free. If it doesn't record what I want then it is worthless. My neighbors typically miss more recordings every few months than I have in over ten years of using TiVos.


And yet they put up with it... what's the reason for that? Obviously the upfront cost or some other factor is keeping them from buying a Tivo.


----------



## compnurd

aaronwt said:


> But my neighbors with FiOS and Comcast DVRs are always complaining about missed recordings. I don't care if it is free. If it doesn't record what I want then it is worthless. My neighbors typically miss more recordings every few months than I have in over ten years of using TiVos.


And the Genie Client and the Joey Lower the amount of Tuners of there respective products also.

And for the 2007 Fios thing.. Even at 10 bucks a month you have paid 600 dollars for that DVR So yeh be happy they are upgrading you


----------



## atmuscarella

wmhjr said:


> Sorry, but I strongly disagree with you on a number of fronts.
> 
> First of all, you're making the assumption that people are willing to spend their money up front (more than $1000) in order to make those numbers works where Tivo is even remotely competitive from a price perspective. If you don't do lifetime and you don't get decent resale, then the Tivo math just plain does not work. Both of those are big ifs. Most people are simply unwilling to give Tivo the money up front in that quantity, knowing that if the unit fails, you then have to spend yet more money to replace/fix hardware. Additionally, with the changing dynamics of the market, continued resale value is hardly promised. At least any more than it was in the housing bubble. Remember that?


Did you bother to read my post? Where did I say anything about resale? What did I say in my last paragraph?



wmhjr said:


> As for the technology, from a whole home solution, Tivo solutions are frankly inferior at the moment. The mini makes it "better", but not equal. The fact that the mini degrades your four tuner box to a 3 tuner (or 2 tuner) is incredibly telling. I'm not blaming Tivo. But those are the facts. Tivo is finally delivering to an extent what the MSOs have been delivering now for years.


I have only seen what TWC is offering hands on and I can tell you your statement is 100% wrong about TWC's offering.



wmhjr said:


> I understand your perspective, but simply disagree with it. If I take a step back and don't look at things through my "TiVo centric" glasses, then it is extremely clear that no matter how you calculate it, Tivo has lost the edge, and certainly has lost the financial advantage. My FiOS bill is living proof.


My prospective is the only people who have done the math and posted the numbers say TiVo's whole home solution is price competitive. You say it is not and offer no supporting data. Remember while value is 100% opinion, cost competitiveness is actually based on real data, facts, and math.



wmhjr said:


> People here are very quick to accept shelling out $1200-$2000 up front to get a user experience (whole house) that cable will provide with no up front investment. Do NOT underestimate that. Do NOT underestimate the fact that their solution does NOT decrease available recording tuners. Do NOT overlook the fact that repairs and warranty are essentially meaningless for them, since the product is actually owned by the Cableco.


No disagreement on all of the above (just for the record TWC whole home DVR only has 2 tuners so the tuner thing is irrelevant in my cable area). But other than the tuner issue, they are value decisions and are also services that a third party hardware provider can not provide. So if those things are of high value to someone then they only have one option and that is to rent whatever their pay TV provider offers. Which is what I said in my post.



wmhjr said:


> Again, my 2007 Verizon FiOS HD DVR is being exchanged - this week - at no cost - for their very newest version. Show me exactly where Tivo has ever done that. It means something to consumers.


At no cost? Really? You have either been paying a monthly fee directly for that service or had the fee built into your pay TV service costs. So what was your Fee? I can tell you what I paid for a TiVo HD over about the same 5 years $500 for the unit with lifetime + less than $100 for a 2TB hard drive upgrade, and if I had been with TWC 60 months of cable card would have cost $90 for a Total of $690 or less than $12/mo. for 60 months.



wmhjr said:


> We may have different objectives and criteria, however the general public is very VERY different than the average person on this site. And, if Tivo expects to be financially successful simply based on the members of this site, then we're in serious trouble all around.


I have no objective in participating in this forum other than to post my opinion or provide people with help and/or facts if I have them. My opinion is that TiVo stand alone DVRs are a niche product and that the most likely way for TiVo to become successful is through cableco partnerships, which will hopefully allow them to continue to provide stand alone DVRs for their niche market.


----------



## sbiller

wmhjr said:


> First of all, you're making the assumption that people are willing to spend their money up front (more than $1000) in order to make those numbers works where Tivo is even remotely competitive from a price perspective. If you don't do lifetime and you don't get decent resale, then the Tivo math just plain does not work. Both of those are big ifs. Most people are simply unwilling to give Tivo the money up front in that quantity, knowing that if the unit fails, you then have to spend yet more money to replace/fix hardware. Additionally, with the changing dynamics of the market, continued resale value is hardly promised. At least any more than it was in the housing bubble. Remember that?


The price of entry for a Premiere 4 + Mini is $400. I suspect TiVo will soon offer bundling deals that lowers this cost to below $350. That's less than $30/mo for a year to light-up two televisions. With that said, the cost of entry for the majority of cable operators is zero up-front so I agree that its something that's difficult for TiVo to overcome. Its the prime reason that TiVo has teamed up with a large number of Tier 2/3 operators to offer the TiVo solution as their primary whole-home offering. TiVo receives a very low fee (~$1.50/mo average) in exchange for direct access to their customers, minimal technical support, etc.) For this use-case, TiVo's growth is accelerating. I posted a spreadsheet in this thread -- Comparing Whole-Home DVR Pricing. Its pretty clear from the numbers and Josh Goldman's pricing comparison on Cnet that the TiVo solution is competitive with the cable and satellite operators.



wmhjr said:


> As for the technology, from a whole home solution, Tivo solutions are frankly inferior at the moment. The mini makes it "better", but not equal. The fact that the mini degrades your four tuner box to a 3 tuner (or 2 tuner) is incredibly telling. I'm not blaming Tivo. But those are the facts. Tivo is finally delivering to an extent what the MSOs have been delivering now for years.


I completely disagree with this assessment. Have you experienced the whole home solution being provided currently on most of the cable systems? First of all, the primary DVR/gateway on Verizon, Time Warner Cable, and Bright House networks has only 2-tuners and a small drive. You are not able to pause or rewind live television on the satellite box. What most of these operators have provided is a method to essentially stream (MRS) recorded programs to a satellite box which TiVo has had for many years. The experience, in general, is inferior to TiVo's solution with the Premiere+Preview or Premiere 4/XL4+Mini.

With that said, the latest generation of boxes from DIRECTV and Dish offer competitive alternatives and in some-way superior solutions to the current TiVo software. I've used the last generation DIRECTV solution (prior to Genie) and my comments regarding the other cable operators solution apply to that inferior solution as well. Once TiVo implements DTA and releases faster gateway boxes, their solution will be on par or superior to everything on the market.



wmhjr said:


> I understand your perspective, but simply disagree with it. If I take a step back and don't look at things through my "TiVo centric" glasses, then it is extremely clear that no matter how you calculate it, Tivo has lost the edge, and certainly has lost the financial advantage. My FiOS bill is living proof.
> 
> People here are very quick to accept shelling out $1200-$2000 up front to get a user experience (whole house) that cable will provide with no up front investment. Do NOT underestimate that. Do NOT underestimate the fact that their solution does NOT decrease available recording tuners. Do NOT overlook the fact that repairs and warranty are essentially meaningless for them, since the product is actually owned by the Cableco. Again, my 2007 Verizon FiOS HD DVR is being exchanged - this week - at no cost - for their very newest version. Show me exactly where Tivo has ever done that. It means something to consumers. We may have different objectives and criteria, however the general public is very VERY different than the average person on this site. And, if Tivo expects to be financially successful simply based on the members of this site, then we're in serious trouble all around.


Once again, I'll refer you back to my comparison spreadsheet and/or the Cnet pricing comparison. I've personally used the *2-tuner* Verizon FiOS whole-home solution and TiVo is superior. A lifetime Premiere 4+Mini is $30.66 over three years versus $31.99 for Verizon. The cost to equip 4 televisions is $44.43 for TiVo versus $51.99/mo for Verizon. I could add in extended warranties and it would have minimal impact on this analysis. The Mini has zero moving parts so a failure after the initial period is unlikely but its clearly a consideration.

The bottom-line is that TiVo is a premium solution that takes a conscious effort from a consumer who wants a superior television viewing experience. In my view, TiVo is like Apple in this regard. There is an up-front and continuing cost to a TiVo choice but in-return the experience is superior to the crappy offerings of most cable operators.


----------



## sbiller

magnus said:


> +3


I'm really very surprised that there is this opinion. Have you'll really used the crappy offerings of most cable operators? Verizon is probably the 3rd best whole-home solution on the market today and its inferior to TiVo in so many ways - 2-tuners, small disc drive, crappy remote, inability to pause or rewind live TV, ... TiVo is releasing a higher-end media gateway sometime later this year that will have more tuners, etc. so I will need to re-evaluate this statement after that solution is available. FiOS charges $20/mo for their DVR and $10 - $12/mo for their HD boxes.


----------



## compnurd

sbiller said:


> I'm really very surprised that there is this opinion. Have you'll really used the crappy offerings of most cable operators? Verizon is probably the 3rd best whole-home solution on the market today and its inferior to TiVo in so many ways - 2-tuners, small disc drive, crappy remote, inability to pause or rewind live TV, ... TiVo is releasing a higher-end media gateway sometime later this year that will have more tuners, etc. so I will need to re-evaluate this statement after that solution is available. FiOS charges $20/mo for their DVR and $10 - $12/mo for their HD boxes.


He wont be happy until it is called the TiVo Mini Roku


----------



## magnus

compnurd said:


> He wont be happy until it is called the TiVo Mini Roku


And you won't be happy until everyone drinks the Tivo Kool-Aid!


----------



## jmpage2

Sam,

What resonates with people is that the MSO offerings are "good enough" for most consumers who see any upfront cost for equipment to be a negative. Even when TiVo was at their peak from a competitiveness standpoint it was a "premium" upgrade for DirecTV and the overwhelming majority of consumers would not bite.

It's worth pointing out also that repair/support/upgrades are included for no additional fee or a "nominal fee" with MSO equipment. Something your spreadsheet fails to account for but which is a big deal to consumers. 

The other big problem that TiVo has is the reliance on cable operators setting up their solution with cable cards. Which based on threads here, remarkably still happens over five years since cable cards were introduced. 

As long as MSOs view TiVo integration as competition and "a burden" it will be hard for TiVo to get traction.


----------



## magnus

sbiller said:


> I'm really very surprised that there is this opinion. Have you'll really used the crappy offerings of most cable operators? Verizon is probably the 3rd best whole-home solution on the market today and its inferior to TiVo in so many ways - 2-tuners, small disc drive, crappy remote, inability to pause or rewind live TV, ... TiVo is releasing a higher-end media gateway sometime later this year that will have more tuners, etc. so I will need to re-evaluate this statement after that solution is available. FiOS charges $20/mo for their DVR and $10 - $12/mo for their HD boxes.


Crappy or not, the perception is that you're getting a box for free or very little and it usually works with their system... because it is their system. Like it or not... Tivo has a lot of ground to make up on the MSO front before it will be seen as a viable option.


----------



## sbiller

jmpage2 said:


> Sam,
> 
> What resonates with people is that the MSO offerings are "good enough" for most consumers who see any upfront cost for equipment to be a negative. Even when TiVo was at their peak from a competitiveness standpoint it was a "premium" upgrade for DirecTV and the overwhelming majority of consumers would not bite.
> 
> It's worth pointing out also that repair/support/upgrades are included for no additional fee or a "nominal fee" with MSO equipment. Something your spreadsheet fails to account for but which is a big deal to consumers.
> 
> The other big problem that TiVo has is the reliance on cable operators setting up their solution with cable cards. Which based on threads here, remarkably still happens over five years since cable cards were introduced.
> 
> As long as MSOs view TiVo integration as competition and "a burden" it will be hard for TiVo to get traction.


Jason,

I agree with one exception. I would say that upgrades of equipment are hit or miss with many of the providers. For example, in order to upgrade on DIRECTV a consumer might have to pay a significant up-front leased equipment cost plus extend his/her contract term and/or threaten to quit the service. With Verizon FiOS an upgrade is dependent on equipment availability at a local office and/or a shipping cost might have to be paid.

TiVo has managed to add on average 25,000 to 35,000 boxes per quarter while legacy Series 2/3 boxes drop off at a faster rate. The churn rate on Premiere boxes is lower than the add rate resulting in net additions of Series 4 subscribers. I think its possible that we may start to see a slight improvement in these numbers as word spreads of TiVo's solution via word-of-mouth and mainstream press (e.g., USA Today, NY Times, ...). We also know that TiVo adds in Comcast areas that support Xfinity is higher than in other areas. Support from the various cable operators is not consistent across the country but Comcast is pretty good and offers free in-home installation of a TiVo solution.

I will concede however that TiVo will have a difficult time adding a significant number of users to its retail base with the current market environment and the current solution. I do think there is the possibility of slow growth in the US retail market which nicely augments the significant growth they are experiencing with their domestic and international partners.


----------



## sbiller

magnus said:


> Crappy or not, the perception is that you're getting a box for free or very little and it usually works with their system... because it is their system. Like it or not... Tivo has a lot of ground to make up on the MSO front before it will be seen as a viable option.


Hmm... I've witnessed more and more of my friends starting to look at their cable bill and realizing their paying $40/mo or more on equipment rental charges...


----------



## aaronwt

magnus said:


> And yet they put up with it... what's the reason for that? Obviously the upfront cost or some other factor is keeping them from buying a Tivo.


They put up with it because of the low upfront cost. But in the long run the TiVo is cheaper. When I brought it up to one of my neighbors who pays for two DVRs from FiOS(over $30 a month), they had never thought about how much they had spent. They were surprised at all the money they spent over the years. But in the end they still didn't get a TiVo. Even though it would be less expensive in the long run.


----------



## jmpage2

Comcast does not install TiVo gear for free, at least in my market. You have to pay for a "truck roll" so that a surly tech can struggle to get your cc activated, all the while griping and moaning about what a PITA TiVo boxes are to them.


----------



## magnus

aaronwt said:


> They put up with it because of the low upfront cost. But in the long run the TiVo is cheaper. When I brought it up to one of my neighbors who pays for two DVRs from FiOS(over $30 a month), they had never thought about how much they had spent. They were surprised at all the money they spent over the years. But in the end they still didn't get a TiVo. Even though it would be less expensive in the long run.


Yep, I know a lot of folks like that. They don't want to change even if it would save them money. For some reason, they don't want to hassle with it.


----------



## jmpage2

aaronwt said:


> They put up with it because of the low upfront cost. But in the long run the TiVo is cheaper. When I brought it up to one of my neighbors who pays for two DVRs from FiOS(over $30 a month), they had never thought about how much they had spent. They were surprised at all the money they spent over the years. But in the end they still didn't get a TiVo. Even though it would be less expensive in the long run.


TiVo is only cheaper if you don't have equipment failures outside of warranty. With MSO offerings you are also often able to "upgrade" to newer equipment at a lower cost than with TiVo.


----------



## sbiller

jmpage2 said:


> Comcast does not install TiVo gear for free, at least in my market. You have to pay for a "truck roll" so that a surly tech can struggle to get your cc activated, all the while griping and moaning about what a PITA TiVo boxes are to them.


It looks like the free truck-roll might be related to a user who switches to Comcast. I know TiVo has mentioned the agreement with Comcast for free installation a number of times and Comcast's TiVo page also says,



> SWITCHING IS AS EASY AS 1, 2, 3
> 
> 1. Visit www.tivo.com/xfinity to purchase a TiVo Premiere DVR
> 
> 2. Call 1-800-XFINITY and switch to XFINITY TV
> 
> 3. Ask how *we can help set up your TiVo Premiere at no additional cost*
> 
> Limited to new residential customers.


----------



## jmpage2

If you buy the TiVo from Comcast I do not doubt they install it for free. I bought my last one at Best Buy and Comcast did not offer to install it free.


----------



## sbiller

jmpage2 said:


> If you buy the TiVo from Comcast I do not doubt they install it for free. I bought my last one at Best Buy and Comcast did not offer to install it free.


Jason,

Comcast doesn't sell TiVo boxes.

You can buy from tivo.com or any retailer and if you are a "new customer" switching to Comcast, they will come out to your house and install for free. The key is a "new residential customer". This is one area where TiVo could work with Best Buy to gain new customers. Almost every time I'm in Best Buy, I have a DIRECTV representative trying to get me to switch. TiVo could do the same if they had knowledgeable TiVo representatives at key Best Buys within the Xfinity footprint.


----------



## aaronwt

jmpage2 said:


> TiVo is only cheaper if you don't have equipment failures outside of warranty. With MSO offerings you are also often able to "upgrade" to newer equipment at a lower cost than with TiVo.


How often do they actually fail? From my experience with TiVos, it is very rare. But from the people I know that have been using Comcast and FiOS DVRs during the last five or six years, they seem to have a high failure/problem rate. Most people I know with those boxes have had one or two boxes exchanged for one reason or another. And in the process lost any recordings they had. It certainly pissed them off, but it still wasn't enough to get them to get a TiVo.


----------



## sbiller

aaronwt said:


> How often do they actually fail? From my experience with TiVos, it is very rare. But from the people I know that have been using Comcast and FiOS DVRs during the last five or six years, they seem to have a high failure/problem rate. Most people I know with those boxes have had one or two boxes exchanged for one reason or another. And in the process lost any recordings they had. It certainly pissed them off, but it still wasn't enough to get them to get a TiVo.


I think TiVo could further differentiate their offering by offering a Cloud backup of a subscribers programs and/or offering a high-end unit with some redundancy on disc drives. Essentially Carbonite for the DVR.


----------



## jmpage2

sbiller said:


> Jason,
> 
> Comcast doesn't sell TiVo boxes.
> 
> You can buy from tivo.com or any retailer and if you are a "new customer" switching to Comcast, they will come out to your house and install for free. The key is a "new residential customer". This is one area where TiVo could work with Best Buy to gain new customers. Almost every time I'm in Best Buy, I have a DIRECTV representative trying to get me to switch. TiVo could do the same if they had knowledgeable TiVo representatives at key Best Buys within the Xfinity footprint.


I doubt that TiVo has the marketing budget to do that but it's a good idea for them especially in Xfinity markets where it is an easier sell. Comcast might even be willing to split the costs since it would help them against Dish and directv.


----------



## magnus

sbiller said:


> I think TiVo could further differentiate their offering by offering a Cloud backup of a subscribers programs and/or offering a high-end unit with some redundancy on disc drives. Essentially Carbonite for the DVR.


That's what Boxee is trying with Boxee TV but it does not seem to playback well.


----------



## sbiller

magnus said:


> That's what Boxee is trying with Boxee TV but it does not seem to playback well.


True however Boxee is trying to Stream TV from the Cloud. I was thinking of it as only an online backup service. Of course, the cost of providing every TiVo user 0.5 - 2 TB of online storage might be cost prohibitive for TiVo. I suppose they could charge a service fee for that as well.


----------



## aaronwt

magnus said:


> That's what Boxee is trying with Boxee TV but it does not seem to playback well.


It plays back very well after one or two firmware updates ago.


----------



## magnus

aaronwt said:


> It plays back very well after one or two firmware updates ago.


Not really. Not for me.


----------



## aaronwt

magnus said:


> Not really. Not for me.


For me, after that firmware update it made a huge difference. Playing back from the box and online. Playback has been solid since then for me.


----------



## wmhjr

HarperVision said:


> While I completely agree with your stance as well, you also have to realize that based on the quote above, since 2007 if you've been using their wondeful equipment and paying the "DVR, extra outlet, mirroring Fees, yada yada yada" which are in the $20-50 or more per month range, then you've more than paid for a TiVo or two, or that upgrade they're supposedly giving you for "free", no?


Umm, actually, you're making my point for me. The answer is No. I pay nothing, nada, zero for that DVR. It's free for life as part of my package, and before you say that well, the package is more expensive as a result -

No. If I did not have the DVR my monthly fees would not go down a single penny.


----------



## wmhjr

aaronwt said:


> But my neighbors with FiOS and Comcast DVRs are always complaining about missed recordings. I don't care if it is free. If it doesn't record what I want then it is worthless. My neighbors typically miss more recordings every few months than I have in over ten years of using TiVos.


I sort of agree with that. Missed recordings on Comcast SA8300HD boxes are what drove me to Tivo, to be honest. I totally agree that if it not recording reliably, it's a brick. There are two problems with that situation now, however....

First, I switched to FiOS at the same time I moved to Tivo. I got that VZ DVR for free. The UI kind of stinks, but while other Tivo boxes have died and been repaired/replaced, the VZ box has never had a single issue. It has not missed recordings. Now I'll admit, I only use it in one room and it is not used often, but it works. It's basic, but it works, it's free, if it breaks or there is a compatibility issue they replace it for free. The whole home experience is far superior to what Tivo has offered up until now, and they've been doing it for years.

Second, believe me - my Tivos have missed recordings. Having both Tivo and VZ boxes in my house, it's so easy to see where the Tivo guide is incorrect far more than the VZ guide for some reason. I cannot explain why, since they both get content from a 3rd party service. While the VZ moto quality has IMHO improved, TiVo quality has degraded. Just my experience, not necessarily fact.

But the most important thing somebody else already said. By virtue of the fact that we are having this discussion on this forum, we're already not representative of the general public who will make TiVo either a success or a failure. Most people just think of it as TV. They're not going to pay out the cost of a used car to get what they can try - and return at no cost - directly from an MSO.


----------



## wmhjr

compnurd said:


> And the Genie Client and the Joey Lower the amount of Tuners of there respective products also.
> 
> And for the 2007 Fios thing.. Even at 10 bucks a month you have paid 600 dollars for that DVR So yeh be happy they are upgrading you


You speak too quickly Tonto. See my later post. I have paid not a single penny for that device. Not in outlet fees, rental, etc. Nothing.


----------



## compnurd

wmhjr said:


> You speak too quickly Tonto. See my later post. I have paid not a single penny for that device. Not in outlet fees, rental, etc. Nothing.


You may have been given a free box and had to continually re-do your contract to get that. Most people dont get those deals

So Tonto that


----------



## wmhjr

Look, it's very easy to see the sides here. The problem is that here is how the two sides in this discussion are coming out.

One side is made up of Tivo users who also are willing to openly consider the effects of:

a) The up front capital investment required to see the benefits of Tivo, because clearly and in virtually every instance, paying monthly subs for Tivo service is more expensive.

b) The fact that Tivos DO die, just like any other device. Tivo does not manufacture their own drives, etc. Those are commercially available components which mean they have the opportunity for defects. I've had several fail within the first year. I've got the receipts and reference numbers to prove it. And all were stationary, and plugged into UPSs for their entire live. Others may have had better experience. But claiming that a better experience is the "norm" is the same as being the one guy who bought a Audi in the 80s that did NOT have a brake issue, and claiming that because you didn't, the problem does not exist. 

The other side of the argument wants to disregard those points in particular and call them meaningless or inaccurate. 

For the record, I have not paid a single , solitary, fraction of a cent, for my VZ DVR. I also have a VZ set top box in one room. That I am paying for, however there is no Tivo model today that is as cheap as that STB/DVR combination. I have been experiencing the VZ "whole home solution" for several years. It works. It has worked - for far longer than Tivo. It's not pretty, it's not fancy, but it works. And it's reliable. 

Here is what is hard for some to swallow. Let me be perfectly clear. 

1) Tivo can ONLY be less expensive IF the customer purchases lifetime service at the time of equipment purchase. That is the ONLY way I could ever come up with the number to make it work. In addition, the following MUST also take place.

2) The equipment must NEVER fail outside of warranty, or if it's in the extended 3 yr period with lifetime, you MUST be able to negotiate the elimination of the $99 fee.

3) You must never ever change your mind. Meaning, that as opposed to with an MSO offering, where if you choose you could turn your DVR in today and stop getting charged tomorrow, with Tivo you're all in.

4) There must NEVER be any MSO related changes that might eliminate feature/function of your devices. And you need to be happy about the idea that the MSO may release new functionality/content that you simply cannot use. Examples? SDV. Or, perhaps the "upgrade" VZ is doing right now that will likely make some content unavailable (permanently) on series 3 devices.

All of us are on this site because we like Tivo capabilities and are willing to pay a premium for them. Some of us also would like them to be more competitive and realize that it doesn't matter worth a darn if everybody here is happy. What matters is whether the general public is happy, and this place is NOT representative of the general public.

To say that it's reasonable to expect users to shell out way more than $1000 up front, knowing that they can't return after 30 days, is a whole heck of a lot to ask.


----------



## wmhjr

compnurd said:


> You may have been given a free box and had to continually re-do your contract to get that. Most people dont get those deals
> 
> So Tonto that


Sorry but not true. I do nothing but pay my bill, contact support when there's an issue, etc.

I will agree that not everyone had the opportunity to get a free box. It varies. But I did, and so did thousands of others. I also can't speak for TWC or other providers. It's always going to vary. However I don't want people misrepresenting the facts at least about they relate in this case.

Point is, the numbers will always vary. But one thing won't. That is, you need to shell out all that money up front with Tivo to try and make it competitive. Also, the cost model MOST people use includes resale value of Tivo with lifetime as part of how it makes the most sense. That's all I'm saying.


----------



## wmhjr

sbiller said:


> True however Boxee is trying to Stream TV from the Cloud. I was thinking of it as only an online backup service. Of course, the cost of providing every TiVo user 0.5 - 2 TB of online storage might be cost prohibitive for TiVo. I suppose they could charge a service fee for that as well.


That is really a good idea. Don't know about others, but I would be willing to pay a premium to "protect" data on at least one of my DVRs. Matter of fact, that is one service fee that, so long as it's reasonable, I would be more than willing to pay. Cost should not be terribly prohibitive, so long as the terms of service were reasonable. For example, restoration may take a couple days due to bandwidth management, etc. But it would be worth it!


----------



## moyekj

Cloud backup that includes recorded shows probably would violate copyright protections for content providers and probably also CableLabs regulations, (especially any recordings with non-zero CCI byte) so I doubt TiVo would even consider going there.


----------



## wmhjr

moyekj said:


> Cloud backup that includes recorded shows probably would violate copyright protections for content providers and probably also CableLabs regulations, (especially any recordings with non-zero CCI byte) so I doubt TiVo would even consider going there.


That's a contractual issue. Rights management issues such as this for use as nothing but non-interactive backup can be worked out from a legal perspective. Data providers as well as business entities such as Sunguard, IBM, etc, have been making millions and millions of dollars annually.

The key is making sure that the content is truly backed up in a protected, and "non-usable" format so that it cannot be used unless restored back to a target device. That's the legal issue, which can be overcome.

The technical challenge is bigger, since encryption today is tied essentially to a hardware unit specific label - effectively hashing the MAC or ESN of the device into the encryption key for the content. That's always been a frowned upon solution for enterprise solutions, since key management becomes a nightmare.


----------



## mr_smits

jmpage2 said:


> TiVo is only cheaper if you don't have equipment failures outside of warranty. With MSO offerings you are also often able to "upgrade" to newer equipment at a lower cost than with TiVo.


I'm glad you put upgrade in quotes. Upgrading from garbage to next generation garbage is not really an upgrade.


----------



## mr_smits

sbiller said:


> I think TiVo could further differentiate their offering by offering a Cloud backup of a subscribers programs and/or offering a high-end unit with some redundancy on disc drives. Essentially Carbonite for the DVR.


I think the market for this is extremely tiny. It's like having a generator for when your refrigerator fails. For most people, if a Tivo fails they will pick up a new one and do without for the few days it takes to have it replaced.

The only * to this is if Tivo finds a way to use the cloud for off-site viewing of recorded content. Instead of offering Sling-box type connection to view anywhere off the actual box, Tivo could have view anywhere from the cloud. The legal implications are probably too big to overcome.


----------



## aaronwt

wmhjr said:


> ........................3) You must never ever change your mind. Meaning, that as opposed to with an MSO offering, where if you choose you could turn your DVR in today and stop getting charged tomorrow, with Tivo you're all in.
> 
> ............


Of course you can change your mind. if you got lifetime you just sell your boxes for close to what you paid with minimal loss.
I sold Premieres a year or two after I received them and still received close to what I originally paid for them. Considering I had been using them during that time period, that was excellent.


----------



## wmhjr

aaronwt said:


> Of course you can change your mind. if you got lifetime you just sell your boxes for close to what you paid with minimal loss.
> I sold Premieres a year or two after I received them and still received close to what I originally paid for them. Considering I had been using them during that time period, that was excellent.


And now we're back to the argument where the equipment HAS to hold it's value, etc.

Look, I'm not trying to bash that approach. But your argument is fundamentally flawed. You can NOT just change your mind and log into a site to return your equipment, and never get charged the next month for it. You have to FIRST spend a great deal of money to get a "different" solution. Then, package up your existing stuff. Then try and sell it. Then hope that the market remains as kind as it did for you in the past.

I can think of thousands and thousands of people who lost their entire life savings because they had the same attitude. "Well, it always held it's value in the past, why would it not in the future"? Talking about the real estate bubble.

Let me be even more clear. With the MSO solution, you can order and receive a couple DVRs within days. You can try them for 3 days, 3 months, or whatever. You can then return them, and the only thing you paid is for what you actually "used". That is a certainty. Your solution in "changing your mind" simply is not the same. Nobody knows how much you will recoup. And, it's all the hassle of selling, etc. As opposed to sticking it in a box and dropping it off at a nearby UPS store.

And the fundamental issue here is that the market has proven, time and time again, that people are simply not happy about the idea of forking over $1000 or more up front just to get a TWO room experience (4 tuner plus lifetime plus mini plus lifetime) - or far more. You can try to say that "chances are" they either will come out less expensive in the long run, or that it's way better. But the fact that people live off of credit cards, etc is pure proof that it is month to month expense without long term cost implications that drive the general consumer market. That sir, is a fact. In every single case, sales prove this out. It is why the MSOs solution is so more prevalent to start with, and probably what allowed them to continue to provide increased capabilities while Tivo did not for a while.


----------



## wmhjr

mr_smits said:


> I think the market for this is extremely tiny. It's like having a generator for when your refrigerator fails. For most people, if a Tivo fails they will pick up a new one and do without for the few days it takes to have it replaced.
> 
> The only * to this is if Tivo finds a way to use the cloud for off-site viewing of recorded content. Instead of offering Sling-box type connection to view anywhere off the actual box, Tivo could have view anywhere from the cloud. The legal implications are probably too big to overcome.


That's an interesting perspective. I think it's very different. When that refrigerator fails, you can remove all those items and stick them in a cooler. And what perishes, for the most part you can very easily replace. When a Tivo fails, you're dead. You can't save anything to a "cooler". You're done. You can "hope" that you get some or most of it back by searching for it, but in that case, it's not through Tivo - it's probably through Roku or elsewhere.

Especially in the event that you have multiple Tivos, this isn't at all about device availability. As a matter of fact, were Tivo to provide a service where your content could be moved from one device to another without loss of quality, it would be different. But it's about "content". And yes, I know about TTG, etc. Don't care. The general public does not want to have to jump through hoops for this. It is the entire reason for "cloud backup" services that are becoming more and more common for other data devices. People want this stuff to "just happen". Manual backups are fraught with failure, bad process, etc. It's a very fragile process.

I have no interest in being able to view the content remotely - to me this is about insuring that what you recorded, you can view (even if it's delayed a bit) in the event that the hardware device fails.


----------



## HarperVision

wmhjr said:


> Umm, actually, you're making my point for me. The answer is No. I pay nothing, nada, zero for that DVR. It's free for life as part of my package, and before you say that well, the package is more expensive as a result -
> 
> No. If I did not have the DVR my monthly fees would not go down a single penny.


Nope, actually wasn't going to say that. I didn't realize or remember you get it free. That doesn't mean it's not true in other's cases though. Which actually makes my feelings with regard to it true, that the decision should be "personally made" on a case by case basis, period. No one is, or has to be right, on either side of this ongoing argument.


----------



## aaronwt

wmhjr said:


> And now we're back to the argument where the equipment HAS to hold it's value, etc.
> 
> Look, I'm not trying to bash that approach. But your argument is fundamentally flawed. You can NOT just change your mind and log into a site to return your equipment, and never get charged the next month for it. You have to FIRST spend a great deal of money to get a "different" solution. Then, package up your existing stuff. Then try and sell it. Then hope that the market remains as kind as it did for you in the past.
> 
> I can think of thousands and thousands of people who lost their entire life savings because they had the same attitude. "Well, it always held it's value in the past, why would it not in the future"? Talking about the real estate bubble.
> 
> Let me be even more clear. With the MSO solution, you can order and receive a couple DVRs within days. You can try them for 3 days, 3 months, or whatever. You can then return them, and the only thing you paid is for what you actually "used". That is a certainty. Your solution in "changing your mind" simply is not the same. Nobody knows how much you will recoup. And, it's all the hassle of selling, etc. As opposed to sticking it in a box and dropping it off at a nearby UPS store.
> 
> And the fundamental issue here is that the market has proven, time and time again, that people are simply not happy about the idea of forking over $1000 or more up front just to get a TWO room experience (4 tuner plus lifetime plus mini plus lifetime) - or far more. You can try to say that "chances are" they either will come out less expensive in the long run, or that it's way better. But the fact that people live off of credit cards, etc is pure proof that it is month to month expense without long term cost implications that drive the general consumer market. That sir, is a fact. In every single case, sales prove this out. It is why the MSOs solution is so more prevalent to start with, and probably what allowed them to continue to provide increased capabilities while Tivo did not for a while.


it's no different with other electronic devices. Even twenty years ago I would get electronics, like a receiver, CD player VCR etc. I'd try it out a few months and if I decided I wanted something else or a better version came out, I would sell it for most if not all that it cost me. I don't see a TiVo DVR as being any different.


----------



## wmhjr

HarperVision said:


> Nope, actually wasn't going to say that. I didn't realize or remember you get it free. That doesn't mean it's not true in other's cases though. Which actually makes my feelings with regard to it true, that the decision should be "personally made" on a case by case basis, period. No one is, or has to be right, on either side of this ongoing argument.


Dave, I absolutely agree that it's a personal -and situation specific - issue. One of the problems here is that we're talking about what each of us has experienced, what we currently "know" and what we really "value". The point I've been making very frequently is that all of that is pointless in this discussion

The issue here is about "generalities" because that is what will drive Tivo to either gain market penetration or lose market share. So, we all need to take our "Tivo centric" glasses off in that case and look at the situation through a technology agnostic lens. There is no doubt in my mind that there are, and have been, situations where Tivo solutions have in the long term been less expensive than MSO solutions. None at all. There is equally no doubt in my mind that the opposite has been true in some cases.

The point is that in each and every case, one thing holds true. That is, that in order to gain those savings from Tivo or to even attempt to gain them, the consumer must pay 100% up front. Buy the box, and buy lifetime service (for that box). And that if there are both in, or out of warranty failures, you also pay that.

It doesn't matter if you "might" be able to recoup your money down the road. You might now. Or, if you have or have not had equipment failures. You certainly could. And you could end up paying for them.

It matters that all of that is not debatable, and those are key issues for the general market. When Tivo had true "lifetime service" - meaning for the subscriber and not the box - it was a very VERY different story. I have no issues paying the extra money and/or taking the risk as well as the huge cost up front in order to have Tivo. But I don't make the mistake of believing that just because I do, any of my neighbors will. Because they don't, and they won't - in large part. And, if I'm going to pay that premium, I'd darn sure better get premium service, and that includes premium pre-sales product support and technical support - AS WELL AS better than just "parity" of important functions that the MSOs have provided for years.


----------



## wmhjr

aaronwt said:


> it's no different with other electronic devices. Even twenty years ago I would get electronics, like a receiver, CD player VCR etc. I'd try it out a few months and if I decided I wanted something else or a better version came out, I would sell it for most if not all that it cost me. I don't see a TiVo DVR as being any different.


Sorry - totally disagree 100%. As a matter of fact, I could not possibly disagree more. You are only presenting one side of the discussion in order to try and defend that position. It is fundamentally flawed.

If, during that same time period, different "distributors" would allow you to "lease" those products, with no up front cost, never have to worry about repairs, never have a long term obligation, and if in some cases those products were superior in feature sets to the "high end audiophile" products, AND if those products also stored content that could not be moved to another product, then we can start to have that discussion.

Imagine this. Let's say consumers have two options.

First, they can spend $75K for a high performance, high economy car up front. They can "believe" that resale value of that car will hold strong. AND - that car requires a specific fuel (let's call it "Tivoline" for kicks) in order for most of its stuff to work.

OR, they can spend a small amount in monthly lease payments on a different car. It's not as nice looking, it's slower, doesn't handle quite as good and is not as quiet inside. But, there are some things it can actually do that the $75k car cannot. And you could care less about who made it, because if the company that produces it goes out of business, you just get a new one at no cost. At any time they can return the car and never pay another penny. If the car ever breaks, it gets fixed or replaced at zero cost. For as long as you have it. If the road systems require changes to the car, you get a new car for free.

Let's say that over 8 years or so, the $75k car turns out to be less expensive.

Which do you think will be more popular? That's a far better analogy.


----------



## aaronwt

I don't know, if you lose your kids when you trade in the cheaper car because they were still inside, I guees it wouldn't be very popular.
Of course the kids would be more important than TV shows though.

Of course if the car keeps breaking down like the cable company DVrs, even getting it replaced for free would be a PITA.


----------



## HarperVision

wmhjr said:


> Dave, I absolutely agree that it's a personal -and situation specific - issue. One of the problems here is that we're talking about what each of us has experienced, what we currently "know" and what we really "value". The point I've been making very frequently is that all of that is pointless in this discussion
> 
> The issue here is about "generalities" because that is what will drive Tivo to either gain market penetration or lose market share. So, we all need to take our "Tivo centric" glasses off in that case and look at the situation through a technology agnostic lens. There is no doubt in my mind that there are, and have been, situations where Tivo solutions have in the long term been less expensive than MSO solutions. None at all. There is equally no doubt in my mind that the opposite has been true in some cases.
> 
> The point is that in each and every case, one thing holds true. That is, that in order to gain those savings from Tivo or to even attempt to gain them, the consumer must pay 100% up front. Buy the box, and buy lifetime service (for that box). And that if there are both in, or out of warranty failures, you also pay that.
> 
> It doesn't matter if you "might" be able to recoup your money down the road. You might now. Or, if you have or have not had equipment failures. You certainly could. And you could end up paying for them.
> 
> It matters that all of that is not debatable, and those are key issues for the general market. When Tivo had true "lifetime service" - meaning for the subscriber and not the box - it was a very VERY different story. I have no issues paying the extra money and/or taking the risk as well as the huge cost up front in order to have Tivo. But I don't make the mistake of believing that just because I do, any of my neighbors will. Because they don't, and they won't - in large part. And, if I'm going to pay that premium, I'd darn sure better get premium service, and that includes premium pre-sales product support and technical support - AS WELL AS better than just "parity" of important functions that the MSOs have provided for years.


I'm with you Jr.!:up: It's really about whatever the person decides to do, they're going to justify (mostly in their own mind) that decision. I'll be the first to admit my guilt of doing that exact thing, and I am doing that right now as we speak while I have 3 different systems in my home, (DirecTV Genie w/ Clients, TiVo w/ Minis, Windows Media Center/HDHomerun Primes/Ceton Echos) evaluating which one has the best quality, value, service, etc. so I can make an informed decision. Each time I try to decide one or the other, I catch myself _justifying_ to myself and my wife why I think this one's better than that one, even so far as to overlook glaring faults and weaknesses (read: Ceton Echo!)


----------



## HarperVision

aaronwt said:


> I don't know, if you lose your kids when you trade in the cheaper car because they were still inside, I guees it wouldn't be very popular.


:rotfl:


----------



## mr_smits

wmhjr said:


> Let's say that over 8 years or so, the $75k car turns out to be less expensive.
> 
> Which do you think will be more popular? That's a far better analogy.


Let's keep your analogy going. In year 9, you can sell the $75k car for $18k because it still works and has low mileage or you can keep using it and pocket the savings. You can always sell it next year or the next if it is still working.

In year 9 of the 'free' car, you are still paying monthly for a box you don't own. Sure, maybe a slightly newer box was released with new features, but the features are still ho hum. Plus your monthly price has increased every year since year 2! It's now clear the easy, cheaper choice originally is an expensive, worthless anchor.

I understand people have different risk tolerance, and there are people that can't or won't do basic math. The problem with Tivo is that they are competing against MSOs with 'free' DVRs, and consumers aren't aware that they have a retail option.


----------



## wmhjr

mr_smits said:


> Let's keep your analogy going. In year 9, you can sell the $75k car for $18k because it still works and has low mileage or you can keep using it and pocket the savings. You can always sell it next year or the next if it is still working.
> 
> In year 9 of the 'free' car, you are still paying monthly for a box you don't own. Sure, maybe a slightly newer box was released with new features, but the features are still ho hum. Plus your monthly price has increased every year since year 2! It's now clear the easy, cheaper choice originally is an expensive, worthless anchor.
> 
> I understand people have different risk tolerance, and there are people that can't or won't do basic math. The problem with Tivo is that they are competing against MSOs with 'free' DVRs, and consumers aren't aware that they have a retail option.


Sorry, but I think your answers are wrong. Because you again fail to include the total cost of ownership. In year 9 of the $75k car, the engine and tranny just blew. You're done. In year 9, the $75k car is 9 years old. In year 9, the "lease" car is brand new.

Your math simply does not work. It is neither realistic nor accurate. Total cost of ownership includes risk and likely mechanical failure, which WILL occur on some percentage of devices over some segment of time. That is a fact. You can play Russian roulette and hope it isn't you, but there is not a darned thing you can do to really avoid it.

There is no possible scenario where you can INSURE that Tivo is ALWAYS no more expensive. And there is no scenario period in which you can avoid up front expense on a major basis. And there is no scenario period in which the deployment and management is as seamless as the MSOs. This does not mean that Tivo is without value. It has great value. But that is not in a direct price point competition with MSOs. Customers have gone to leased DVRs because they're cheap, require no up front investment, have little (or no) risk, and incur no maintenance/ repair obligation. Customers use Tivo because the UI is superior, and because at some point they had the most comprehensive feature set. Tivo dropped the ball and lost the lead in innovation some time ago (whole house, streaming) and is struggling to catch up.


----------



## wmhjr

HarperVision said:


> I'm with you Jr.!:up: It's really about whatever the person decides to do, they're going to justify (mostly in their own mind) that decision. I'll be the first to admit my guilt of doing that exact thing, and I am doing that right now as we speak while I have 3 different systems in my home, (DirecTV Genie w/ Clients, TiVo w/ Minis, Windows Media Center/HDHomerun Primes/Ceton Echos) evaluating which one has the best quality, value, service, etc. so I can make an informed decision. Each time I try to decide one or the other, I catch myself _justifying_ to myself and my wife why I think this one's better than that one, even so far as to overlook glaring faults and weaknesses (read: Ceton Echo!)


You're taking the exact approach I did, and typically do. I have redundant RG6 feeds to each room, so when I moved from Dish to Comcast, I had both running at the same time for a period to compare. Did the same thing on Comcast to VZ, and the same thing with VZ DVR to Tivo. I still maintain my free (yes, absolutely free for life, no strings or hooks) DVR in addition to my Tivos.

That way, you and I can observe actual FACTUAL and DATA DRIVEN characteristics rather than talking about how much we love/hate Tivo and how our "neighbors" hate their DVRs. I realize not everyone can or will do that, but it sure takes the bias out of the conversation.


----------



## mr_smits

wmhjr said:


> Your math simply does not work. It is neither realistic nor accurate. Total cost of ownership includes risk and likely mechanical failure, which WILL occur on some percentage of devices over some segment of time. That is a fact. You can play Russian roulette and hope it isn't you, but there is not a darned thing you can do to really avoid it.


The math works whether you want to admit it or not. It's pretty simple to compute total cost of ownership using some basic assumptions, and the payback period is a lot less than the 8 years in your analogy. Of course, like a vehicle or any product you buy vs renting and paying forever, there is risk. Risk is the only factor that comes into play with buying a Tivo vs taking the 'free' DVR from a cable company.

Just like a vehicle, all mechanical systems will fail or require repair at some point. Some people want a new car every 3 years, so they sign a lease every 3 years. These people will pay a fortune over their lifetime to rent a car instead of buying a car. Sure they don't have to worry about repairs or extensive maintenance, but they are paying a steep premium for this. This is the same for people renting DVRs from their cable company. No worries about repair or paying repair bills, but you pay a much higher total cost - forever.


----------



## atmuscarella

wmhjr said:


> Customers have gone to leased DVRs because they're cheap, require no up front investment, have little (or no) risk, and incur no maintenance/ repair obligation.


For some reason you seem to equate making monthly payments with cheap - I do not consider paying $22.00/mo (cost of a inferior standard TWC DVR - the dual tuner whole home DVR is $29/mo) forever cheap.

You are correct in that total cost of ownership for a TiVo can not be known for certain until after you are no longer using it so if it is cheaper than an individual's cable option or not is unknown until you have owned it for several years.

However as I posted in another thread my TiVo HD's per month cost is now below $10/mo and going lower and my Premiere's cost is already below $15/mo. and heading down (note no cable cards as I am OTA only add $1.50/mo for them in the past and $2.50/mo going forward as TWC has raised the price) and those cost include hard drive upgrades for both units.


----------



## jmpage2

mr_smits said:


> The math works whether you want to admit it or not. It's pretty simple to compute total cost of ownership using some basic assumptions, and the payback period is a lot less than the 8 years in your analogy. Of course, like a vehicle or any product you buy vs renting and paying forever, there is risk. Risk is the only factor that comes into play with buying a Tivo vs taking the 'free' DVR from a cable company.
> 
> Just like a vehicle, all mechanical systems will fail or require repair at some point. Some people want a new car every 3 years, so they sign a lease every 3 years. These people will pay a fortune over their lifetime to rent a car instead of buying a car. Sure they don't have to worry about repairs or extensive maintenance, but they are paying a steep premium for this. This is the same for people renting DVRs from their cable company. No worries about repair or paying repair bills, but you pay a much higher total cost - forever.


Certainly for most MSO customers, if they are fortunate enough not to need an out of warranty repair, and they don't mind using an "older" hardware version, the TiVo will end up saving them money in the long run.

The picture used to get more clouded when multi-room was involved because prior to the Mini, TiVo did not have anything compelling for multi-room and in many cases, the rental charges on multiple TiVo boxes would actually end up costing someone more than an MSO whole home solution.

With the Mini TiVo is ALMOST at parity with the MSOs.... again, assuming that someone does not have warranty issues and does not mind potentially using older gear when newer gear becomes available (flipping the TiVo gear is always an option but in many cases there is a multi hundred dollar hit associated with doing this).


----------



## Loach

To duplicate my current 3 TV whole home setup with Cox WHDVR would cost as follows (monthly):

Whole home DVR service - $15.00
WHDVR receivers $8.50 x 3 = $25.50
Subtotal - $40.50 
Less - $1.99 for Cablecard
Net incremental cost - $38.51
Tax @ 7% - 2.70
Total with tax - 41.21

Here's what I paid for my Tivo setup:
Premiere 4 with lifetime - $625
2 minis with lifetime - $500
MoCA adapter & POE filter - $66
Total - $1,191

$1,191 / $41.21 = 29 months to breakeven. If I keep my setup 4 years, I will save at least $783 using Tivo during that period. 5 years would equal $1,277. Those numbers assume no cable co. price increases on WHDVR service (yeah, right). 

Some people wouldn't even need the MoCA adapter (I did because my P4 is not near an ethernet jack so I had to enable MoCA elsewhere). Even if my P4 completely failed to the point of being irreparable (unlikely), I could replace it with the monthly cost savings and still be ahead. And my analysis also gives no consideration to any market value of the P4 and Minis at the end of the usage period.


----------



## jmpage2

Loach,

You are right, TiVo is more cost effective. So ask yourself the question of why more of those Cox customers aren't making the switch? Is it because they can't do math? Is it because of the up-front out-lay of nearly $1200? Is it because with the Cox solution everything just "works" and if it doesn't (or if newer gear comes out) Cox will just take care of it for "free" as part of the service?

I suspect it's a combination of all of those things, we'll have to see what kind of whole home bundle deals TiVo tries to do with the Mini later this year.

This is what I think TiVo needs to do in order to be more competitive;

1. Drop the price of the current Premiere 4 to $500 with lifetime for new subscribers.
2. Drop the price of the Mini, if purchased with the Premiere 4 to $199 for new subs.
3. Fix the tuner allocation issues.
4. Add market critical services to the Mini such as Netflix, etc.
5. In MSO markets in which TiVo knows the MSOs don't want them around, play up the long term cost savings of switching to TiVo with a new print and radio campaign.

That's the minimum I think they need to do to grow the subscriber base. Next level efforts need to include a redesigned Premiere-4 with faster silicone and integrated "stream" functionality for both Android and iOS.... as well as continued pressure on MSOs for on-demand functionality and a move away from Cable Cards towards an IP based (equipment agnostic) delivery mechanism.


----------



## Loach

jmpage2 said:


> Loach,
> 
> You are right, TiVo is more cost effective. So ask yourself the question of why more of those Cox customers aren't making the switch? Is it because they can't do math? Is it because of the up-front out-lay of nearly $1200? Is it because with the Cox solution everything just "works" and if it doesn't (or if newer gear comes out) Cox will just take care of it for "free" as part of the service?
> 
> I suspect it's a combination of all of those things, we'll have to see what kind of whole home bundle deals TiVo tries to do with the Mini later this year.


I think it's some combination of all of those things PLUS the fact that most Cox customers in my market aren't even aware of Tivo as an alternative. As I mentioned elsewhere, my parents just switched to DirecTV and when I told them I went with Tivo, I got a blank stare...


----------



## moyekj

I think for a lot of people it's just short term thinking. As long as on a monthly basis things appear to be cheaper in the short term that's all that matters. Sort of like people continuously re-financing home mortgages with the objective of lowering monthly payments without any consideration about long term prospects of all the fees + interest paid and never paying down principal much so that one day they would own the property out right. I personally like to avoid monthly payments and any kind of debt as much as possible but certainly looks like I'm in the minority. Trying to explain how TiVo can be a cheaper solution in the long run is not an easy argument to make so I usually don't bother and tell people if their main objective is to save money then TiVo is not the solution for them. i.e. Choose TiVo because of the feature set, not the price.


----------



## wmhjr

mr_smits said:


> The math works whether you want to admit it or not. It's pretty simple to compute total cost of ownership using some basic assumptions, and the payback period is a lot less than the 8 years in your analogy. Of course, like a vehicle or any product you buy vs renting and paying forever, there is risk. Risk is the only factor that comes into play with buying a Tivo vs taking the 'free' DVR from a cable company.
> 
> Just like a vehicle, all mechanical systems will fail or require repair at some point. Some people want a new car every 3 years, so they sign a lease every 3 years. These people will pay a fortune over their lifetime to rent a car instead of buying a car. Sure they don't have to worry about repairs or extensive maintenance, but they are paying a steep premium for this. This is the same for people renting DVRs from their cable company. No worries about repair or paying repair bills, but you pay a much higher total cost - forever.


I'm sorry, but you are frankly either being stubborn or just do not understand. There is quite a bit more than risk that comes into play. You make blanket statements such as "you pay a much higher total cost - forever" but then you say the only issue is risk. Really, then if it's always cheaper with Tivo, where's the risk?

You also completely disregard that the "free" Tivo I'm talking about (the first one) is FREE. For many people VZ as an example provides a free - TOTALLY free, DVR. You will not save a penny by refusing it. Nothing. And it can serve as the basis for whole home. It does not even have a cablecard fee.

My advice before taking such a strong position (which is frankly impossible to defend) that Tivo is always cheaper in the long term is that you maybe ought to get out another excel worksheet and think about it.

Tivo is a premium service. They never, ever marketed themselves as being cheaper. Only on this site to I find people who insist that "Tivo is always cheaper" - as well as totally disregarding the massive up front cost to buy into the sale "number of devices" that they can get from the MSOs. Is Tivo worth it? I think so - for me. But I'm not going to be stubborn enough to refuse looking at reality (and my checking account) and say it's cheaper than the MSO.


----------



## wmhjr

Loach said:


> To duplicate my current 3 TV whole home setup with Cox WHDVR would cost as follows (monthly):
> 
> Whole home DVR service - $15.00
> WHDVR receivers $8.50 x 3 = $25.50
> Subtotal - $40.50
> Less - $1.99 for Cablecard
> Net incremental cost - $38.51
> Tax @ 7% - 2.70
> Total with tax - 41.21
> 
> Here's what I paid for my Tivo setup:
> Premiere 4 with lifetime - $625
> 2 minis with lifetime - $500
> MoCA adapter & POE filter - $66
> Total - $1,191
> 
> $1,191 / $41.21 = 29 months to breakeven. If I keep my setup 4 years, I will save at least $783 using Tivo during that period. 5 years would equal $1,277. Those numbers assume no cable co. price increases on WHDVR service (yeah, right).
> 
> Some people wouldn't even need the MoCA adapter (I did because my P4 is not near an ethernet jack so I had to enable MoCA elsewhere). Even if my P4 completely failed to the point of being irreparable (unlikely), I could replace it with the monthly cost savings and still be ahead. And my analysis also gives no consideration to any market value of the P4 and Minis at the end of the usage period.


And actually, among other things, consider this.

You have less tuners than with Cox. You have only two recording tuners. One P4, two minis, either they can't watch live TV whatsoever (then you keep 4 recording tuners) only one can watch live TV (then you have 3 recording tuners) or both can independently watch live TV (then you have 2 recording tuners.

You also had to pay 100% up front.


----------



## wmhjr

atmuscarella said:


> For some reason you seem to equate making monthly payments with cheap - I do not consider paying $22.00/mo (cost of a inferior standard TWC DVR - the dual tuner whole home DVR is $29/mo) forever cheap.
> 
> You are correct in that total cost of ownership for a TiVo can not be known for certain until after you are no longer using it so if it is cheaper than an individual's cable option or not is unknown until you have owned it for several years.
> 
> However as I posted in another thread my TiVo HD's per month cost is now below $10/mo and going lower and my Premiere's cost is already below $15/mo. and heading down (note no cable cards as I am OTA only add $1.50/mo for them in the past and $2.50/mo going forward as TWC has raised the price) and those cost include hard drive upgrades for both units.


I equate "cheap" meaning relatively small payment in terms of monthly payments. I equate "affordable" because many families don't have a couple thousand dollars to spend at once, IN ADDITION to their cable bill.

I get the HD cost coming down. Too bad it is (for whole house) now an antique and can't function in that space. No streaming capability whatsoever. So a unit purchased just a few years ago (when MSOs had whole house HD streaming, BTW) never could, and never will, be able to do that. Nor will it integrate with the "mini" (which decreases the number of tuners you can use to record)

I am totally willing to agree that under the right circumstances, Tivos can be more cost effective. I already did - I believe in this thread. However, there are some requirements to get that lower cost. The two most critical IMHO are the requirement to pay up front (which nobody here wants to talk about) a very very large amount of cash for whole house, AND the fact that you are locked in and must stay with Tivo for years without mechanical failure requiring maintenance/ repair. The other pieces I've mentioned also. The willingness to either accept that you won't get new technology or may be subject to MSO changes that obsolete your equipment in some way, and/or a willingness to believe that Tivo w/lifetime resale value will never ever suffer - and a willingness to go through the resale process while at the same time plunking down a butt load of more cash.


----------



## atmuscarella

wmhjr said:


> I equate "cheap" meaning relatively small payment in terms of monthly payments. I equate "affordable" because many families don't have a couple thousand dollars to spend at once, IN ADDITION to their cable bill.


If I had finance my TiVo HD with a 20% charge card it would still have been cheaper than renting a TWC DVR over the last 5years and the TiVo HD is still superior to what TWC is offering now.



wmhjr said:


> I get the HD cost coming down. Too bad it is (for whole house) now an antique and can't function in that space. No streaming capability whatsoever. So a unit purchased just a few years ago (when MSOs had whole house HD streaming, BTW) never could, and never will, be able to do that. Nor will it integrate with the "mini" (which decreases the number of tuners you can use to record)


And if I destroy my TiVo HD now it will have cost me less than 1/2 the cost of renting one over the same period that was a bad deal how?

So lets price starting from scratch now say a 3 TV system. From TWC it would cost $47/mo for a dual tuner DVR and 2 more STBs. For a Premiere 4 and 2 Minis with lifetime & 3 yr warranties it would cost $1270. Even if I finance 100% of it at 20% for three years the payments would only be $48/mo.

The TiVo system is still superior to the TWC system and yes with the TiVo system you will have to upgrade someday and might have to do repairs after the 3 yr warranty, but there is a 100% grantee that I have to keep paying TWC monthly forever.



wmhjr said:


> I am totally willing to agree that under the right circumstances, Tivos can be more cost effective. I already did - I believe in this thread. However, there are some requirements to get that lower cost. The two most critical IMHO are the requirement to pay up front (which nobody here wants to talk about) a very very large amount of cash for whole house, AND the fact that you are locked in and must stay with Tivo for years without mechanical failure requiring maintenance/ repair. The other pieces I've mentioned also. The willingness to either accept that you won't get new technology or may be subject to MSO changes that obsolete your equipment in some way, and/or a willingness to believe that Tivo w/lifetime resale value will never ever suffer - and a willingness to go through the resale process while at the same time plunking down a butt load of more cash.


I agree many people need or like monthly payments. I don't like monthly payments and believe in saving first purchasing second. While I don't really believe financing a DVR purchase is a good thing it is easy enough to do and in the end if you can afford renting a whole home DVR system it is very likely you can afford to finance one just as easily. So if someone really prefers to pay monthly it is easy enough to do with a purchase and therefor really shouldn't have much to do with someones renting versus owning decision.


----------



## Loach

wmhjr said:


> And actually, among other things, consider this.
> 
> You have less tuners than with Cox. You have only two recording tuners. One P4, two minis, either they can't watch live TV whatsoever (then you keep 4 recording tuners) only one can watch live TV (then you have 3 recording tuners) or both can independently watch live TV (then you have 2 recording tuners.
> 
> You also had to pay 100% up front.


I have as many tuners as I need. I've only allocated 1 tuner for live viewing on minis, because I'm the only one in our house that uses the minis for viewing live TV. I can't very well watch TVs in 2 different rooms at the same time. And 3 tuners is plenty for our household's recording needs. I'm not willing to pay Cox for more tuners that I don't really need.

Paying 100% upfront is absolutely irrelevant to me. I manage my money well, so if I identify a product that I find value in and fits with my budget, I simply buy it.


----------



## aaronwt

wmhjr said:


> I'm sorry, but you are frankly either being stubborn or just do not understand. There is quite a bit more than risk that comes into play. You make blanket statements such as "you pay a much higher total cost - forever" but then you say the only issue is risk. Really, then if it's always cheaper with Tivo, where's the risk?
> 
> You also completely disregard that the "free" Tivo I'm talking about (the first one) is FREE. For many people VZ as an example provides a free - TOTALLY free, DVR. You will not save a penny by refusing it. Nothing. And it can serve as the basis for whole home. It does not even have a cablecard fee.
> 
> My advice before taking such a strong position (which is frankly impossible to defend) that Tivo is always cheaper in the long term is that you maybe ought to get out another excel worksheet and think about it.
> 
> Tivo is a premium service. They never, ever marketed themselves as being cheaper. Only on this site to I find people who insist that "Tivo is always cheaper" - as well as totally disregarding the massive up front cost to buy into the sale "number of devices" that they can get from the MSOs. Is Tivo worth it? I think so - for me. But I'm not going to be stubborn enough to refuse looking at reality (and my checking account) and say it's cheaper than the MSO.


Where is my free DVR on FiOS? I've been with them since Summer 2007. I've asked more than once and the result is the same. When I ask about a DVR they said it will cost me $17 a month. That I could not get a free one. If I could get a free one I would have picked one up a long time ago just to have it for VOD. But the cheapest I could get it was $10 and that was just for a STB without DVR features. Which does work the same for VOD but is still not free. And whether a DVR or a regular STB, they are not worth me getting one unless it costs me nothing.

EDIT: I just looked online again at FiOS. Not only is it still not free but the STB is now $12 a month. The DVR is still $17. But nowhere near free.


----------



## bradleys

I do not have a free FIOS DVR either. I was paying a monthly fee for a pretty nasty STB just to keep on-demand, but I ended up turning that back in as well. The button refresh rates were so bad you had to memorize the menu hierarchy and just click and walk away &#8211; seriously&#8230; I am sure it has gotten better by now, at least I hope it has.

I do realize that some new customer packages have a DVR included as an incentive, but that is far from a universal option. I also do not believe that once you want to upgrade that "free" DVR in the future that it will be free.

On the other hand - it is a generous loss leader from Verizon if you are a new customer.


----------



## wmhjr

I'm a FiOS customer, since 2007, and have a free DVR. I am waiting delivery of my "upgrade" DVR (also at no cost). I received via email the tracking number of that DVR upgrade today. I realize not everyone "can" or "did" get that. I cannot explain who does, and who does not. But the fact that some people can (and do) must be weighed just as heavily as the fact that some of us have reported great resale value of our existing Tivo equipment with lifetime. Or that some of us have never reported a device failure. Or that some of us have had multiple device failures.

Again, saying this for clarity: I do no, will not, and have have, said that there are not situations where IF YOU SPEND OUT OF POCKET MONEY UP FRONT you can end up with a lower pro-rated cost per month with Tivo. That certainly can, and does happen. However, what many of you are apparently unwilling to admit in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, is that it is just as possible to see scenarios where Tivo IS more expensive EVEN if you spend the up front money. 

I also think that people here are being extremely arrogant by diminishing the impact of having to pay that cash up front. Just because you, and I, are in a position where we find that to be acceptable and have the means, that is most certainly NOT the case for many many many people. 

I'll say it again. Obviously paying up front is not terribly relevant to ANYONE here. Otherwise, there would be nobody on this site because that's what Tivo requires. I could care less if it's relevant to somebody in this thread or not. What it IS relevant to is the general public, and let me assure you, the general public is what drives the market, and what drives whether Tivo remains viable or not. If you think the fanatics on this site could financially support Tivo, you are most sadly mistaken.


----------



## wmhjr

Loach said:


> I have as many tuners as I need. I've only allocated 1 tuner for live viewing on minis, because I'm the only one in our house that uses the minis for viewing live TV. I can't very well watch TVs in 2 different rooms at the same time. And 3 tuners is plenty for our household's recording needs. I'm not willing to pay Cox for more tuners that I don't really need.
> 
> Paying 100% upfront is absolutely irrelevant to me. I manage my money well, so if I identify a product that I find value in and fits with my budget, I simply buy it.


I'm very happy that you have as many tuners as you need, but that is meaningless. The facts in the comparison are that there are significant differences in the two systems that you are comparing. It means nothing to anyone else that you don't personally need those tuners that you lost. Others aren't making decisions based on your personal requirements. They're doing it based on theirs. That additionally goes for the paying up front part. As I've mentioned elsewhere, if we eliminated everyone on this site who could not "pay up front" the site would be absolutely empty. It is not our own personal capabilities we're discussing. It's the market.

And the facts of the market, as it exists today, proves emphatically that the requirement to pay up front is a constraint and that people in general simply do not appreciate or endorse it. There is no argument on this planet that gets around that fundamental truth.


----------



## Loach

wmhjr said:


> I'm very happy that you have as many tuners as you need, but that is meaningless. The facts in the comparison are that there are significant differences in the two systems that you are comparing. It means nothing to anyone else that you don't personally need those tuners that you lost. Others aren't making decisions based on your personal requirements. They're doing it based on theirs. That additionally goes for the paying up front part. As I've mentioned elsewhere, if we eliminated everyone on this site who could not "pay up front" the site would be absolutely empty. It is not our own personal capabilities we're discussing. It's the market.
> 
> And the facts of the market, as it exists today, proves emphatically that the requirement to pay up front is a constraint and that people in general simply do not appreciate or endorse it. There is no argument on this planet that gets around that fundamental truth.


There are inherent differences in any comparison of two products that are not commodities. You're extrapolating your own opinions to the entire market. Your opinion apparently is that everybody needs 6 tuners. That's just objectively false.

I've simply provided a data point based on my individual circumstances. Although it's possible to get up to 6 tuners with Cox's WHDVR system, many customers are not doing so, because they don't want to manage 3 DVRs and don't need 6 tuners. The Cox WHDVR users that I know have two 2-tuner "master" DVRs and 1 or 2 extenders - so they have the same 4 tuners that I have. And by the way, if I wanted 6 tuners, I could have added a 2-tuner Premiere instead of one of my Minis for an additional $300 with lifetime. That would increase my breakeven period from 29 months to 36 months. Whoop-dee-doo.


----------



## lessd

wmhjr said:


> I'm a FiOS customer, since 2007, and have a free DVR. I am waiting delivery of my "upgrade" DVR (also at no cost). I received via email the tracking number of that DVR upgrade today. I realize not everyone "can" or "did" get that. I cannot explain who does, and who does not. But the fact that some people can (and do) must be weighed just as heavily as the fact that some of us have reported great resale value of our existing Tivo equipment with lifetime. Or that some of us have never reported a device failure. Or that some of us have had multiple device failures.
> 
> Again, saying this for clarity: I do no, will not, and have have, said that there are not situations where IF YOU SPEND OUT OF POCKET MONEY UP FRONT you can end up with a lower pro-rated cost per month with Tivo. That certainly can, and does happen. However, what many of you are apparently unwilling to admit in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, is that it is just as possible to see scenarios where Tivo IS more expensive EVEN if you spend the up front money.
> 
> I also think that people here are being extremely arrogant by diminishing the impact of having to pay that cash up front. Just because you, and I, are in a position where we find that to be acceptable and have the means, that is most certainly NOT the case for many many many people.
> 
> I'll say it again. Obviously paying up front is not terribly relevant to ANYONE here. Otherwise, there would be nobody on this site because that's what Tivo requires. I could care less if it's relevant to somebody in this thread or not. What it IS relevant to is the general public, and let me assure you, the general public is what drives the market, and what drives whether Tivo remains viable or not. If you think the fanatics on this site could financially support Tivo, you are most sadly mistaken.


The biggest reason friends of mine don't use TiVo are as follows:
Hassle factor with Cable Cards *VS* cable co. DVR no Cable Card hassle 
Unit stops working for any reason, must call TiVo or me *VS* just call Cable co and it will get fixed at no extra cost.
Upgrades with TiVo requires selling on E-Bay, or having me sell it for them on E-Bay *VS* just call the cable co and get a free upgrade.
Price is not any issue for my friends, at least in terms of TiVos cost to that of the cable co DVR, my friends (who do use TiVo) and myself use TiVo because we like the product, and the record time can be upgraded (by me again).
We all use Lifetime service and use the TiVo for 3 to 7 years, then sell them on E-Bay to fund a large part of the purchase price of newer TiVo models.
Because of the cable card hassle I don't talk up TiVo anymore to my friends as I don't want to take on any more TiVo responsible for others, I now have five of my friends using TiVo that all I want.
IMHO I don't think price is the biggest factor in TiVo not selling more units, except for some on this form nobody can figure out the cost of a cable co DVR as some are free, some have special deals, some people pay $ 7 to $9 per month for each extra cable card and A/O cost, I pay $1.15/month per card, (no A/O cost) don't know why but friends have the same cable system and pay $6.95 per card per month (after the first if no cable box) so cost is so different for everybody I don't think anybody can do a accurate costing between TiVo and a cable co DVR setup that would apply to most people.
Another factor is power usage, the TP uses about 25 watts, the Mini used about 5 watts, and some cable co DVRs use 45 or more watts, each watt cost about 10 cents per month (at 15 cents per KWH), so in my case at one time I had 7 Series 2s in my home at 45 watts each = 315 watts, now I have 3 Q4s and a Mini (still have 7 tuners) and I am using 80 watts, that a savings of about $23 to $24 per month in power for me.
YMMV


----------



## cherry ghost

wmhjr said:


> And actually, among other things, consider this.
> 
> You have less tuners than with Cox. You have only two recording tuners. One P4, two minis, either they can't watch live TV whatsoever (then you keep 4 recording tuners) only one can watch live TV (then you have 3 recording tuners) or both can independently watch live TV (then you have 2 recording tuners.
> 
> You also had to pay 100% up front.


I didn't think Cox had a 4 tuner host, only 2. Maybe it's new.


----------



## moyekj

cherry ghost said:


> I didn't think Cox had a 4 tuner host, only 2. Maybe it's new.


 Last I checked their "Whole Home" DVR was only 2 tuner as well (and only 500GB). The only reason it gets "Whole Home" distinction is because of MoCA connection to client set top boxes. But last I checked you could not even have 2 "Whole Home" DVRs talking to each other which is just stupid. On top of all that they charged for a truck roll installation of "Whole Home" DVR to make sure your coax + splitters, etc. can properly support MoCA and it wasn't cheap either.


----------



## todd_j_derr

FWIW, when I signed up for FiOS in 2011 they had several "deals" for new customers w/2 year commitment. One was "free DVR for life". The one I took was "crappy SD box for life" plus a $545 prepaid VISA card. So, at least in that case I can put an upfront cost to their DVR.


----------



## Loach

cherry ghost said:


> I didn't think Cox had a 4 tuner host, only 2. Maybe it's new.


They don't. You can have up to three 2-tuner DVRs which is the only way you'd get to 6 tuners with them.


----------



## moyekj

Loach said:


> They don't. You can have up to three 2-tuner DVRs which is the only way you'd get to 6 tuners with them.


 Which also means paying about $18/month for each and they don't even talk to each other.


----------



## Loach

moyekj said:


> Which also means paying about $18/month for each and they don't even talk to each other.


You're right. I think the $15 Whole Home DVR fee applies separately to each DVR (otherwise the cost of a client box would be the same as the cost of another DVR at $8.50 per month, which makes no sense). So each Cox DVR costs $23.50 per month ($15 DVR service fee + $8.50 equipment rental) and each Cox client is $8.50 (equipment rental only). My previous analysis was essentially comparing a 2-tuner Cox WHDVR system to my 4-tuner Tivo setup.

So the revised Cox WHDVR cost per month in my analysis to get 4 DVR tuners goes even higher:

Whole home DVR service - $15.00 x 2 - $30
WHDVR receivers $8.50 x 3 = $25.50 
Subtotal - $55.50
Less - $1.99 for Cablecard
Net incremental cost - $53.51
Tax @ 7% - 3.75
Total with tax - $57.26

And with my Tivo cost of $1,191, my breakeven period is now ($1,191 / 57.26) = only 21 months!


----------



## wmhjr

Wow, I'm not sure how you're making that math. My current setup with Tivo is well over $2000 including lifetime.

BTW, if anyone is saying those HDs with lifetime are worth $300, I've had one on eBay. No takers at either a $250 starting bid or $300 buy it now. Auction ends tomorrow. Seems as though maybe the resale value is in fact dropping. Who knows.


----------



## aaronwt

It cost you over $2k for a Premiere 4 and two Minis(all with lifetime)?

It should be a whole lot less than that.


----------



## Arcady

I can't find any lifetime TiVo HD boxes on eBay that end tomorrow and have a $300 buy-it-now price. Did you put the word "lifetime" in the title? If not, nobody will ever find it.


----------



## jmpage2

wmhjr said:


> Wow, I'm not sure how you're making that math. My current setup with Tivo is well over $2000 including lifetime.
> 
> BTW, if anyone is saying those HDs with lifetime are worth $300, I've had one on eBay. No takers at either a $250 starting bid or $300 buy it now. Auction ends tomorrow. Seems as though maybe the resale value is in fact dropping. Who knows.


I sold a stock 160GB TiVo HD box in October for $300 + shipping on eBay. Last week (literally) I sold a 2nd one that I popped a $20 750GB WD drive in. That one sold for $349. It helps if you clearly state it has Lifetime AND you keep all of the original boxes and accessories.

If you look at sold listings for TiVo HD, you will see that very few of them sell for much less than $275 if they are working.


----------



## wmhjr

Arcady said:


> I can't find any lifetime TiVo HD boxes on eBay that end tomorrow and have a $300 buy-it-now price. Did you put the word "lifetime" in the title? If not, nobody will ever find it.


Yes I did. Here's the link.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=251251772079


----------



## wmhjr

aaronwt said:


> It cost you over $2k for a Premiere 4 and two Minis(all with lifetime)?
> 
> It should be a whole lot less than that.


3 Tuners are insufficient. A single Premier XL with a mini is not a solution.


----------



## Arcady

Oh okay, 1 day and 20 hours out. I guess I didn't scroll far enough.

You have virtually no description, no detailed pictures, and no mention of any included remote/cables/accessories or original box. The one picture you do have shows the unit tossed into a dusty cabinet. To top it off, you have a stock 160GB hard drive.

If you had about 10 more pictures taken in a clean environment, listed what comes with the unit (or doesn't) and threw a 500GB+ drive in it, you'd get $300 in a few hours on eBay.


----------



## wmhjr

BTW, currently trying to get a new XL4 working. VZ can't get the cablecard to work with HBO and Cinemax. Brand new cablecard. Been down this road before. Spent 3.5 hours this evening trying with them - no success. Had this problem with a Premiere in November. They replaced the card 3 times, hit it several times. Rolled a truck. Nothing worked. Field tech finally called VZ again and got a "good" tech, who seemed to know what they were doing and fixed it within 15 minutes. This time, no luck yet. 

So, don't underestimate the impact of this stuff either. Have a VZ reference number. They "say" they'll call back tomorrow.


----------



## wmhjr

Arcady said:


> Oh okay, 1 day and 20 hours out. I guess I didn't scroll far enough.
> 
> You have virtually no description, no detailed pictures, and no mention of any included remote/cables/accessories or original box. The one picture you do have shows the unit tossed into a dusty cabinet. To top it off, you have a stock 160GB hard drive.
> 
> If you had about 10 more pictures taken in a clean environment, listed what comes with the unit (or doesn't) and threw a 500GB+ drive in it, you'd get $300 in a few hours on eBay.


So, I need to upgrade the hard drive to sell it? I was quite clear as to what it was. I made no effort. Guys here made it seem like these "always" sell for $300. Sure doesn't seem to be that way.

What kind of "detailed" pics would you want to see? The box is there. I've sold a bunch of stuff on eBay (see my feedback) and never have had an issue. Oh well.


----------



## Arcady

I sold a TiVo HD on ebay for $320 with a dead HDMI port.

You need pics of the front, top, sides, back, the remote/cables/acessories/box, and everything needs to be clean. People want to examine the item they are about to spend $300 on.

I'm a power seller on eBay. I do $1000 a month in sales or more on there. Pictures are everything.

Most people on here upgrade their hard drives, so that may be a factor. Even with a stock 160GB, you should still get $250 for this item if properly presented. But for an investment of $25-50 for a bigger drive, you can easily get $50-100 more.


----------



## wmhjr

I'm not going to upgrade the drive. I'm not spending the time, money and effort to do that just to sell it, and was of the impression that there was easy demand for these things. That was the impression from all kinds of posts. People did not specific that you needed to upgrade the drive to get that money. If that's the case, then the math needs to be modified. Maybe if I have time tomorrow I'll take a few more pics of it in a different location. I truly didn't spend much time or effort - just stuck it in a location where there was a free display to use to prove lifetime service. 

We'll see what happens here. Seems to me that it's probable the my thoughts are being validated. Prices on these things are dropping. If I can't sell it for $250, I'll give it to somebody I know. Also, if I can't sell it for $250, then I think the idea that these things retain resale value that affects the entire "total cost" equation has been put in question. JMHO. Earlier in the post (and other posts) people were quite liberal in putting a $300+ resale tag on any Series 3 with lifetime.

Also, if "most people on here upgrade their hard drives" then that pretty much disqualifies their particular value proposition. Cracking a unit and swapping drives is simply not a "consumer friendly" process. I realize that the MSO stuff is also smaller drives in many cases, but for example, when they release larger capacity units you can swap for free - and you have not violated the warranty. Before anybody says you can't do that at no cost, yes you can. You can return your equipment at any time worst case. Or order a 2nd DVR. Then, reduce back to one and return the first one. The advantage of no up front investment. There are clear advantages that we should appreciate.

Right now I'm not appreciating cablecard hell with Verizon.


----------



## jmpage2

wmhjr said:


> I'm not going to upgrade the drive. I'm not spending the time, money and effort to do that just to sell it, and was of the impression that there was easy demand for these things. That was the impression from all kinds of posts. People did not specific that you needed to upgrade the drive to get that money. If that's the case, then the math needs to be modified.


You don't need to upgrade the drive. I sold a stock 160GB back in October for $300 plus shipping. If it hadn't been that long ago I could link the auction and prove it to you. If you look at sold listings for Tivo hd lifetime you'll see plenty of 160GB units that have sold in just the past 30 days.

The difference between your auction and mine though are substantial. I provided a full listing for the item including the actual model number (a quick search during the listing process provides all of these details). I also disconnected the device, wiped it down with a cloth and took GOOD photos of it with the original box and all accessories. I specified in the auction description the accurate condition of the unit and how I would ship it (in the original box, no double boxing, via UPS ground).

If spending an extra 30 minutes "doing it right" isn't worth it to you for your auction to sell for $50-$100 higher then your time is clearly much more valuable than mine.


----------



## Arcady

Here's a screenshot of completed listings on ebay right now. The guy with a BROKEN unit got $197. Another guy with a 160GB unit got $261. These do sell.

This screenshot is not a hand-picked list. It is literally the beginning of the list when I searched for "TiVo HD Lifetime" and clicked on completed auctions.


----------



## todd_j_derr

1 day and 20 hours is awfully premature to even speculate about this, isn't it?


----------



## Arcady

True. I often put up items for seven days only to have the first bids in the last 30 seconds of the auction.


----------



## lessd

Arcady said:


> I can't find any lifetime TiVo HD boxes on eBay that end tomorrow and have a $300 buy-it-now price. Did you put the word "lifetime" in the title? If not, nobody will ever find it.


I sold a Series 3 (lifetime) at a fixed price of $359 in about two days (free S&H) I have sold a number of them and none have had a hard drive upgrade, but I had the original packing and provided a much used remote, these are for friends and I do clean them up, inside and outside, and use a stock E-Bay picture.
This is a link to one of my sales on 2/29/2013

http://www.ebay.com/itm/230926334941?ssPageName=STRK:MESOX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1587.l2649


----------



## dpalmi

I sold my HD with the original hard drive for $300 last month no issue. It's all about pictures and descriptions. Mine didn't even include any manuals or the original box. You are selling to a stranger on the Internet. If your auction looks like ****, no one is going to bid for fun...

http://www.ebay.com/itm/TiVo-HD-TCD652160-DVR-Product-Lifetime-Service-2-Tuners-160GB-S3-Series-3-/290866198158

dpalmi


----------



## aaronwt

Whenever I sell a TiVo or other item on eBay, I first look at the previously sold items. I see which ones sold for the most, and then I try to emulate what they did for their auctions. This has typically worked very well for me to maximize the price I get on my auctions.

So i'll typically double box, use the original packaging, sometimes do free shipping, use multiple pictures, put the item in multiple categories, and have a concise description. And start off with a low first bit price.


----------



## sbiller

PCMag's Joel Santiago posted his review of the TiVo Mini. I attempted to correct the record related to WiFi but his response clearly indicates that jes thinking of this from the perspective of a Roku or ATV. Anyway, I thought I would link the review here to see if anyone else might want to chime in.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2417166,00.asp


----------



## jmpage2

sbiller said:


> PCMag's Joel Santiago posted his review of the TiVo Mini. I attempted to correct the record related to WiFi but his response clearly indicates that jes thinking of this from the perspective of a Roku or ATV. Anyway, I thought I would link the review here to see if anyone else might want to chime in.
> 
> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2417166,00.asp


Consumers don't care or understand why Wi-Fi is a poor choice for accurate, reliable streaming of video. They just perceive Wi-Fi as being "better" because there are "fewer cords".

In the case of the Mini it is particularly comical because almost every location in the home that has a TV already has a coax connection that can be used to deploy the Mini.


----------



## slowbiscuit

Judging by all the posts about MoCA here, people understand it even less than why WiFi is a bad choice. But when mpeg4 transcoding shows up in the new boxes (hopefully), WiFi might be a good idea again. Then questions will be asked about why the Mini doesn't have it.


----------



## wmhjr

jmpage2 said:


> Consumers don't care or understand why Wi-Fi is a poor choice for accurate, reliable streaming of video. They just perceive Wi-Fi as being "better" because there are "fewer cords".
> 
> In the case of the Mini it is particularly comical because almost every location in the home that has a TV already has a coax connection that can be used to deploy the Mini.


Absolutely not true!!!!!

One of the primary places I'd consider a mini is in my shop/garage! AT various times, I spend a good deal of time there, and am considering the mini for that location. Now, I have CAT5E there, but many people would not, and I certainly do not have RG6 there.

I actually thought the review was pretty accurate. IF you're a Tivo customer, and in particular a heavy Tivo advocate, the mini (outside of the serious defect of the tuner dedication) is really nice. However, I think it's also safe to say that it is not a game changer. Sales seem to prove out this assumption. For current Tivo subscribers who have, or will own, a 4 tuner, the mini is pretty nice. I'm pretty happy with its performance, and for my perspective I'm just unhappy with the lack of dynamic tuner allocation - and with the service fee, whether it be the monthly sub or the $150 lifetime. I think Tivo is simply out in left field with a catchers mitt with that decision.


----------



## sbiller

slowbiscuit said:


> Judging by all the posts about MoCA here, people understand it even less than why WiFi is a bad choice. But when mpeg4 transcoding shows up in the new boxes (hopefully), WiFi might be a good idea again. Then questions will be asked about why the Mini doesn't have it.


With that said, transcoding has its own set of issues associated with performance degradation and loss of video quality so I hope the Mini continues to operate with the native stream. I think newer wireless technologies like ac might be the step needed to resolve this issue and confusion once and for all.


----------



## wmhjr

slowbiscuit said:


> Judging by all the posts about MoCA here, people understand it even less than why WiFi is a bad choice. But when mpeg4 transcoding shows up in the new boxes (hopefully), WiFi might be a good idea again. Then questions will be asked about why the Mini doesn't have it.


You're right. And if it's being compared to Roku, etc, then clearly MPEG2 also isn't important. Just because the mini "can" doesn't mean that consumers "want".


----------



## sbiller

wmhjr said:


> Absolutely not true!!!!!
> 
> One of the primary places I'd consider a mini is in my shop/garage! AT various times, I spend a good deal of time there, and am considering the mini for that location. Now, I have CAT5E there, but many people would not, and I certainly do not have RG6 there.
> 
> I actually thought the review was pretty accurate. IF you're a Tivo customer, and in particular a heavy Tivo advocate, the mini (outside of the serious defect of the tuner dedication) is really nice. However, I think it's also safe to say that it is not a game changer. Sales seem to prove out this assumption. For current Tivo subscribers who have, or will own, a 4 tuner, the mini is pretty nice. I'm pretty happy with its performance, and for my perspective I'm just unhappy with the lack of dynamic tuner allocation - and with the service fee, whether it be the monthly sub or the $150 lifetime. I think Tivo is simply out in left field with a catchers mitt with that decision.


You sure like absolutes! 

Can you clarify your source of the statement that sales estimates seem to prove out that assumption?


----------



## wmhjr

sbiller said:


> You sure like absolutes!
> 
> Can you clarify your source of the statement that sales estimates seem to prove out that assumption?


Nope - I don't like absolutes. That's why I've constantly pushed back on the financial models that "prove" TiVo is always the lesser expensive.

In any case, I have no metric driven source for sales estimates other than what I have gotten as answers when talking to Tivo themselves, Weakknees, and Amazon when I was starting to think about ordering them - as well as watching volume here. It is a subjective opinion, which is why I used the term "seem to".

The PCMag review was pragmatic, and viewed not from the lens of a Tivo fanatic, but from the general market. It pointed to pros and cons, as seen through a product agnostic perspective. I've read it several times and while the "tone" may be argued, the content seems pretty darned accurate and unbiased.


----------



## sbiller

wmhjr said:


> Nope - I don't like absolutes. That's why I've constantly pushed back on the financial models that "prove" TiVo is always the lesser expensive.
> 
> In any case, I have no metric driven source for sales estimates other than what I have gotten as answers when talking to Tivo themselves, Weakknees, and Amazon when I was starting to think about ordering them - as well as watching volume here. It is a subjective opinion, which is why I used the term "seem to".
> 
> The PCMag review was pragmatic, and viewed not from the lens of a Tivo fanatic, but from the general market. It pointed to pros and cons, as seen through a product agnostic perspective. I've read it several times and while the "tone" may be argued, the content seems pretty darned accurate and unbiased.


Amazon isn't actually selling the Mini (3rd parties only) so that could impact sales at this point. It will be interesting to see if they pick it up. Amazon still doesn't sell the XL4. TiVo clearly soft-launched the product at this point. I expect we could see a bigger marketing push after tivo addresses some of the needed improvements and works through some of the early-adopter installation troubles.


----------



## atmuscarella

wmhjr said:


> The PCMag review was pragmatic, and viewed not from the lens of a Tivo fanatic, but from the general market. It pointed to pros and cons, as seen through a product agnostic perspective. I've read it several times and while the "tone" may be argued, the content seems pretty darned accurate and unbiased.


Well kind of. The review starts out correctly identifying that the Mini is not a stand alone product and that it is equivalent to a Dish Network Joey.

After that I consider the review is somewhat of a failure. They just stated it wasn't a stand alone product and then go on to review it like it is a stand alone product - which to me means the reviewer doesn't know what he is reviewing.

The Mini is part of a whole home digital cable DVR system.  For the review to be useful to someone looking into a whole home DVR system the review needs to be reviewing the enter whole home system, not just one part of it that doesn't even function without the rest of the system.

I got the impression that they don't actually care about whole home DVR systems at all as they decided without actually reviewing the "whole system" that the Mini would do nothing to bring new subscribers to TiVo.

Frankly if someone had done a similar writeup about the Dish Network Joey and not reviewed it with the whole home Hopper DVR system everyone would have thought the review was a joke.


----------



## HarperVision

atmuscarella said:


> Frankly if someone had done a similar writeup about the Dish Network Joey and not reviewed it with the whole home Hopper DVR system everyone would have thought the review was a joke.


Well said and exactly on point!


----------



## wmhjr

I felt differently. I thought it looked from the 'non-TiVo" perspective at general feature/function. It mentions the dedication of a tuner, the small amount of interaction, the fact that you can only see "that tuner" and not other XL4/P4 tuners, content across the devices, etc.


----------



## sbiller

HarperVision said:


> Well said and exactly on point!


+1. :up:

I just went back and re-read all the reviews that are linked to the gdgt.com review.

Josh Goldman at Cnet provides the most balanced review which he has updated significantly since it was originally published. Ben (@bjdraw) wrote a good review as well. Dave's review is solid as well. Most/all of the remaining reviews reflect a fundamental misunderstanding of the product and incorrectly compare the Mini to a Roku or ATV.

JMHO...


----------



## atmuscarella

wmhjr said:


> I felt differently. I thought it looked from the 'non-TiVo" perspective at general feature/function. It mentions the dedication of a tuner, the small amount of interaction, the fact that you can only see "that tuner" and not other XL4/P4 tuners, content across the devices, etc.


I am not looking at it form a TiVo point of view I am looking at it from what I think someone should be reviewing when they review a whole home DVR system point of view.

The reviewer just wanted to talk to much about things that are just not part of whole home DVR system at this time. It was clear he wants a wireless system and one that centers around IP/Internet Streaming services. Nothing wrong with that but how does that help anyone understand what is actually available and what the differences are in the various whole home DVR systems currently being offered?

In my opinion a good review provides details about the product being reviewed but also provides bench mark references comparing it to other competing products. This review did not do that because they really didn't want to talk about whole home DVR systems but appeared to be dreaming about some mystical product that doesn't exist.


----------



## bdraw

sbiller said:


> Ben (@bjdraw) wrote a good review as well. I don't think his conclusion accurately reflects the Mini's value proposition to an existing or new TiVo user. I think the discussions Ben has had on his podcast reflect more of the value-prop of the Mini.


I'm really not sure what you are talking about here. I said there were a few missing pieces but TiVo owners wouldn't mind waiting for them. I'm not sure what would be more accurate.


----------



## wmhjr

bdraw said:


> I'm really not sure what you are talking about here. I said there were a few missing pieces but TiVo owners wouldn't mind waiting for them. I'm not sure what would be more accurate.


FWIW, I actually thought your review was also pretty accurate - though I do think it reflects a far more "Tivo Centric" view. I still think that the PCMag review is also accurate, as it is viewing it from a "general market" perspective.

I just don't think people adequately understand the difference.


----------



## wmhjr

atmuscarella said:


> I am not looking at it form a TiVo point of view *I am looking at it from what I think someone should be reviewing *when they review a whole home DVR system point of view.


I think that's the point here. We don't agree on what constitutes a "whole home" point of view. Yours is Tivo centric. PCMag is not. You're not wrong. Neither are they. Different viewpoints.

And that IS the point. 10 years ago, we wouldn't even be talking about Amazon streaming downloads, Roku, Hulu+. Do you really think those changes will not continue?


----------



## sbiller

bdraw said:


> I'm really not sure what you are talking about here. I said there were a few missing pieces but TiVo owners wouldn't mind waiting for them. I'm not sure what would be more accurate.


Actually I re-read your statement,



> Exactly how the whole-home functionality will look after a few updates will be something to watch out for, but as it stands now, the Mini falls short of the competition in regards to consistency. The Ceton Echo, Dish Joey and DirecTV RVU client all provide a more seamless whole-home DVR experience than the Mini. But none of them work with your TiVo, and for those who believe that there is no substitute, you can finally enjoy a genuine whole-home DVR experience while spending less than the price of another DVR.


I basically interpreted that you believe the Mini is inferior to Ceton's Echo, Dish's Joey, and DTV's RVU client. I can't really compare since I haven't used the other three and you have. I can say the Mini is an improvement over the majority of cable operator provided whole-home experiences.

Sorry for the confusion. I'm editing the above post for accuracy.


----------



## atmuscarella

wmhjr said:


> I think that's the point here. We don't agree on what constitutes a "whole home" point of view. Yours is Tivo centric. PCMag is not. You're not wrong. Neither are they. Different viewpoints.


 A review either actually reviews the product being offered or they don't. This review was as much or more about wanting a different product as reviewing the one being offered.



wmhjr said:


> And that IS the point. 10 years ago, we wouldn't even be talking about Amazon streaming downloads, Roku, Hulu+. Do you really think those changes will not continue?


Sorry but Rokus have nothing to do with digital cable whole home DVR systems, just like a blu-ray players has nothing to do with a digital cable whole home DVR system, neither are DVRs or are designed to provide digital cable throughout ones home.

Now if someone wants to write a review about different sources of video and includes a section on the hardware needed for each video source that is fine the hardware might even be a major factor in deciding which video source someone is going to use but that is not what this review was doing.

I get that many people want TiVo to build something they are not building that is fine so do I. But the reality is they are building DVRs with some addition features and the Mini is part of TiVos whole home digital cable DVR system not something else. Either someone wants a digital cable whole home DVR system or they do not, if they do they can evaluate if what TiVo is offering is the best for them or not.


----------



## wmhjr

We will have to agree to disagree. And the point is you have an opinion as to what the review (and apparently the product) should be. Others don't agree, including the person who reviewed it. The fact that you have a different opinion and viewpoint in no way diminishes the value of that review. You just don't like it. Part of that review just might have been a reflection that the reviewer thinks Tivo is missing the mark on where the industry and the market is going...... Hmmmmmm......


----------



## wmhjr

sbiller said:


> I can say the Mini is an improvement over the majority of cable operator provided whole-home experiences.


In your opinion. In one respect it is inferior. That is, the requirement to dedicate a (now non-recording) tuner from the DVR. We hope that will be corrected. If it is, then I would agree that the Mini is IMHO better. Not until then. And only (again) if one is willing to overlook the investment necessary to use the Mini, which is not required for the alternative.


----------



## atmuscarella

wmhjr said:


> In your opinion. In one respect it is inferior. That is, the requirement to dedicate a (now non-recording) tuner from the DVR. We hope that will be corrected. If it is, then I would agree that the Mini is IMHO better. Not until then. And only (again) if one is willing to overlook the investment necessary to use the Mini, which is not required for the alternative.


Does your cable provider offer a 4 tuner whole home DVR?

A TWC whole home DVR (only 2 tuners) and 2 STBs offers the same amount of tuners as a Premiere 4 and 2 Minis regardless how you setup tuner sharing. As far as I can remember everyone who has said what their cable provider provides has indicate they only have dual tuner whole home DVRs.

Regarding paying up front or monthly that is a personal preference. However with credit options and monthly or lifetime service options Tivo purchasers have choices, cable equipment renters do not.


----------



## moyekj

atmuscarella said:


> Does your cable provider offer a 4 tuner whole home DVR?
> 
> A TWC whole home DVR (only 2 tuners) and 2 STBs offers the same amount of tuners as a Premiere 4 and 2 Minis regardless how you setup tuner sharing. As far as I can remember everyone who has said what their cable provider provides has indicate they only have dual tuner whole home DVRs.
> 
> Regarding paying up front or monthly that is a personal preference. However with credit options and monthly or lifetime service options Tivo purchasers have choices, cable equipment renters do not.


 Supposedly Q1 of this year (which is just about ending) Cox was going to launch a 6-tuner, 2TB whole home DVR solution with capability for individual user profiles and viewing on mobile devices:
http://www.zatznotfunny.com/2013-01/new-coxcisco-guide-shows-promise-reveals-kinks/#
Of course it's still vaporware as I haven't seen any other info on it but since the Satellite companies and U-verse already offer 4+ tuner solutions they have to try and keep pace.


----------



## wmhjr

atmuscarella said:


> Does your cable provider offer a 4 tuner whole home DVR?
> 
> A TWC whole home DVR (only 2 tuners) and 2 STBs offers the same amount of tuners as a Premiere 4 and 2 Minis regardless how you setup tuner sharing. As far as I can remember everyone who has said what their cable provider provides has indicate they only have dual tuner whole home DVRs.
> 
> Regarding paying up front or monthly that is a personal preference. However with credit options and monthly or lifetime service options Tivo purchasers have choices, cable equipment renters do not.


No, VZ does not at this time. You're quoting TWC and your contract, and I am aware of VZ and my contract as well as Comcast. As stated before, since at least a good deal of VZ customers have a first DVR free for life, then a second DVR can add 2 more tuners easily. Then, the STB's provide tuners in addition to access to content stored elsewhere.

Regarding payment, that IS a personal preference, however you are far too cavalier with that attitude. Many people have limited means or don't want to tie up credit cards with such payments. Further, when doing that you have the worst of both worlds. You are committed to Tivo, but still making monthly payments, at the same time as remaining responsible for repairs. It is NOT the same as a month to month, no obligation, capability to add, subtract, or simply eliminate that equipment at any time.

From a monthly service option, it is very very hard to find a measurement that allows Tivo to not be more expensive if you stay that way. Plus, you're STILL locked into a minimum of a one year obligation. So no matter what, with Tivo you are locked in. With MSO you are not. Period.

I find it interesting that so many are unwilling to recognize that not everyone is as fortunate as they are, or that not everyone values the Tivo relationship that much. Tivo - and MSO DVRs - consume disposable income. Many - if not MOST - people are not willing to have a long term commitment of such a size in this matter. For that, I assume I don't need to provide backup data, as the pure gross sales of Tivo compared to the combined DVR lease numbers of the MSOs, would kind of point in that direction, no?


----------



## HenryFarpolo

Verizon currently does not offer a 4 tuner DVR, and nothing resembling the TIVO MINI. They do offer a whole home DVR, but you need a full sized HD or DVR box to use that application.

With the implementation of their "Media Server", Verizon will be offering six available tuners, and small satellite boxes. This will happen this year, hopefully.


----------



## cherry ghost

Loach said:


> To duplicate my current 3 TV whole home setup with Cox WHDVR would cost as follows (monthly):
> 
> Whole home DVR service - $15.00
> WHDVR receivers $8.50 x 3 = $25.50
> Subtotal - $40.50
> Less - $1.99 for Cablecard
> Net incremental cost - $38.51
> Tax @ 7% - 2.70
> Total with tax - 41.21
> 
> Here's what I paid for my Tivo setup:
> Premiere 4 with lifetime - $625
> 2 minis with lifetime - $500
> MoCA adapter & POE filter - $66
> Total - $1,191
> 
> $1,191 / $41.21 = 29 months to breakeven. If I keep my setup 4 years, I will save at least $783 using Tivo during that period. 5 years would equal $1,277. Those numbers assume no cable co. price increases on WHDVR service (yeah, right).
> 
> Some people wouldn't even need the MoCA adapter (I did because my P4 is not near an ethernet jack so I had to enable MoCA elsewhere). Even if my P4 completely failed to the point of being irreparable (unlikely), I could replace it with the monthly cost savings and still be ahead. And my analysis also gives no consideration to any market value of the P4 and Minis at the end of the usage period.





wmhjr said:


> And actually, among other things, consider this.
> 
> You have less tuners than with Cox. You have only two recording tuners. One P4, two minis, either they can't watch live TV whatsoever (then you keep 4 recording tuners) only one can watch live TV (then you have 3 recording tuners) or both can independently watch live TV (then you have 2 recording tuners.
> 
> You also had to pay 100% up front.


Since Cox doesn't have a 4 tuner host, the number of tuners is the same


----------



## atmuscarella

wmhjr said:


> No, VZ does not at this time. You're quoting TWC and your contract, and I am aware of VZ and my contract as well as Comcast. As stated before, since at least a good deal of VZ customers have a first DVR free for life, then a second DVR can add 2 more tuners easily. Then, the STB's provide tuners in addition to access to content stored elsewhere.


Well several people with VZ here have posted they do not get a free DVR and a Person just posted he is getting one for 1 Yr. So I have no idea - frankly people with access to VZ are very lucky competition is a great thing but last I saw VZ had less than 5 million cable customers and has all but stop expanding so there are not that many lucky people compared to the 100 million plus house holds in the U.S.



wmhjr said:


> Regarding payment, that IS a personal preference, however you are far too cavalier with that attitude. Many people have limited means or don't want to tie up credit cards with such payments. Further, when doing that you have the worst of both worlds. You are committed to Tivo, but still making monthly payments, at the same time as remaining responsible for repairs. It is NOT the same as a month to month, no obligation, capability to add, subtract, or simply eliminate that equipment at any time.


Well commitments are not that unusually satellite is 2 years some cable companies require them now also to get the best deals, my phone company requires 1 year for their DSL or phone deals and charges a disconnect fee.



wmhjr said:


> From a monthly service option, it is very very hard to find a measurement that allows Tivo to not be more expensive if you stay that way. Plus, you're STILL locked into a minimum of a one year obligation. So no matter what, with Tivo you are locked in. With MSO you are not. Period.


maybe you are maybe you are not depends on where you are and what is going on at the moment. Really does not matter to me as I would give up TV before I gave up a DVR so being able to turn one in would be of no value to me. The reality is most people are not giving up pay TV and if they value a DVR are not going to give that up either.



wmhjr said:


> I find it interesting that so many are unwilling to recognize that not everyone is as fortunate as they are, or that not everyone values the Tivo relationship that much. Tivo - and MSO DVRs - consume disposable income. Many - if not MOST - people are not willing to have a long term commitment of such a size in this matter. For that, I assume I don't need to provide backup data, as the pure gross sales of Tivo compared to the combined DVR lease numbers of the MSOs, would kind of point in that direction, no?


My belief is that people who value DVRs are going to have a DVR for the long term. Of course not everyone values a DVR but the people I know with DVRs have no thought of giving them up so long term commitment or not they are going to pay for them long term.


----------



## wmhjr

atmuscarella said:


> Well several people with VZ here have posted they do not get a free DVR and a Person just posted he is getting one for 1 Yr. So I have no idea - frankly people with access to VZ are very lucky competition is a great thing but last I saw VZ had less than 5 million cable customers and has all but stop expanding so there are not that many lucky people compared to the 100 million plus house holds in the U.S.


And people here posted that they didn't pay the full $499 for lifetime when they didn't have a qualifying box, and others (according to Tivo) do. Don't understand the point. Things are different in different places . Up front costs remain the same no matter what.



atmuscarella said:


> Well commitments are not that unusually satellite is 2 years some cable companies require them now also to get the best deals, my phone company requires 1 year for their DSL or phone deals and charges a disconnect fee.


Who cares of "commitments are not than unusual". The point is that the commitment for Tivo is pretty heavy. Up front investment PLUS service costs. And the alternatives don't. I'm not saying that makes Tivo terrible. I'm saying that regardless of "your" personal opinion, it is a factor, and one that is not in Tivos favor.



atmuscarella said:


> maybe you are maybe you are not depends on where you are and what is going on at the moment. Really does not matter to me as I would give up TV before I gave up a DVR so being able to turn one in would be of no value to me. The reality is most people are not giving up pay TV and if they value a DVR are not going to give that up either.


And your reality is flawed. What you state is your opinion. Not reality. More people ARE giving up pay TV. Entertainment is fundamentally changing as we speak. The younger generations are choosing to give up home phones in favor of a single cell phone, pay cable in favor of online content, etc. It is even changing the face of advertisement. Who knows how it will end up.



atmuscarella said:


> My belief is that people who value DVRs are going to have a DVR for the long term. Of course not everyone values a DVR but the people I know with DVRs have no thought of giving them up so long term commitment or not they are going to pay for them long term.


And your belief is for you - not for the general public. Here are some interesting links that illustrate actual data, as opposed to the common viewpoints often shared on this site. We are NOT representative of the general marketplace. Also, note in much of this, the term "DVR" also includes game consoles with the ability to record entertainment content, and is NOT restricted to what we consider DVR (ie, Tivo or MSO DVR).

http://www.deloitte.com/view/en_GX/...d210VgnVCM2000001b56f00aRCRD.htm#.UVZA3N3D9wE

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/study-pay-tv-industry-sees-422987

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/nielsen-5-million-zero-tv-427247

Looks like analysts, data, and trends do not support your position here.


----------



## wmhjr

cherry ghost said:


> Since Cox doesn't have a 4 tuner host, the number of tuners is the same


The number of recording tuners, you are right. I misread the way you posted it. I had 3 time 2 for tuners. I'm assuming you mean one dual tuner box, and 3 STB, correct? That does change it. You do have the ability in that scenario to have more different channels displayed at one time, but that isn't likely a real advantage.


----------



## sbiller

Check out the latest 1 star review on the Mini ->

http://www.amazon.com/TiVo-TCDA92000-Mini/dp/B00BUCLVZU/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top

*$5.99 per month? For what!???, April 26, 2013*

This review is from: TiVo TCDA92000 TiVo Mini (Electronics)
We're a 1 Tivo household, mainly because we've never been able to justify the cost of a second Tivo, since 95% of our Tivo viewing is on 1 TV. For so long, though, I've wished that we could watch recordings from the one Tivo on the other televisions in the home, and when Tivo announced plans for the Tivo Mini, I was ecstatic!

But then Tivo announced the ridiculous. $5.99 per month if you want the privilege of transferring records from one DVR, containing recordings that you ALREADY PAID A FEE TO RECORD. It's complete and utter nonsense. Tivo's pitch: "It's a great value, because it's cheaper than paying for 2 Tivos." While that may be true, if one were paying for a second or third Tivo, just so they could transfer recordings from one Tivo to the other, then they were getting ripped off to begin with. So basically, Tivo thinks you should be happy with paying $5.99 per month because you'll be getting ripped off less than you were before.

Their other excuse..."Well, it's not like we're the only ones doing this. Our competitors also charge a monthly fee for their media extenders." Again, it's a ridiculous comparison, because WITH THE COMPETITION, YOU'RE NOT SUBSCRIBING TO SOME MADE UP SERVICE. YOU'RE LEASING THE EQUIPMENT! If I pay a monthly fee for the Tivo Mini, and then all of a sudden the hardware dies, are they going to swap me equipment? I didn't think so.

The Tivo Mini cannot operate on its own. All it does is talk to other Tivos that you're ALREADY PAYING A FEE TO OPERATE. Any additional functionality beyond that are things we get for free with a Roku box.

I hate to be "that guy" that writes a review for a product they don't own, but I feel compelled to in this instance. Anyone willing to pay a monthly fee for this is either 1) a fool, or 2)aware that it's borderline theft but want it badly enough that they're willing to pay it anyway.

---------------------------------------

Interesting to note that Amazon has been stocking/selling the Mini for a while now.

---------------------------------------

I'm looking forward to seeing more members of TCF, in addition to Jason and myself, posting their actual reviews of the Mini.


----------



## slowbiscuit

This kind of reaction is what Tivo has to deal with everyday. You see it in a lot of AVS threads too, and even though this 'review' of something he didn't buy was more of a rant, the sentiment is not uncommon.


----------



## mr_smits

What's interesting is how people fail to compare Tivo's offering to what the cable company offers. At least with Tivo, you have the option to buy 'lifetime' and equipment. With the cable company, you pay to lease inferior equipment...forever.


----------



## lessd

mr_smits said:


> What's interesting is how people fail to compare Tivo's offering to what the cable company offers. At least with Tivo, you have the option to buy 'lifetime' and equipment. With the cable company, you pay to lease inferior equipment...forever.


That why it's hard to compare, because with cable you rent the package so you get free in home service and equipment updates/replacements. TiVo has no way to offer that, for a TiVo customer if you want the newest stuff you must put the up the cost of Lifetime Service and be willing to sell the old TiVos on E-Bay, the longer you delay selling the lower the price is for the older TiVos, a Series 2 with Lifetime is now less that $100, when I upgraded to the TP I got about $350 for my Series 3s, when I upgraded to the TP-4 I got about $550 for my TPs (with 1Tb drives), it still cost me money each time and I had to go through the effort of selling and shipping the old TiVos, something one would not have to do with a MSOs equipment for a upgrade.
For me it is well worth the trouble, but for others it is not, no pat answer to the question of this thread, just peoples options on how they look at it and how much (and what programs) TV they (and their family) watch.


----------



## sbiller

Glad to see the number of Amazon TiVo Mini reviews up to 19... looks like the Signal-to-Noise ratio has been improved and the overall view of the current Mini is 4-stars.


----------



## jmpage2

So less than stellar reviews of the Mini are "noise" and gushing reviews are "signal"? Classy. I've had lots of problems with my Minis. It is an underwhelming value proposition at this time.


----------



## sbiller

jmpage2 said:


> So less than stellar reviews of the Mini are "noise" and gushing reviews are "signal"? Classy. I've had lots of problems with my Minis. It is an underwhelming value proposition at this time.


No. I don't have a problem with your current 3-star review. I had a problem with the 1-star review complaining about the subscription fee. My Mini's have been pretty stable although I'm looking forward to DTA and hopefully configurable time-outs.


----------



## sbiller

sbiller said:


> Glad to see the number of Amazon TiVo Mini reviews up to 19... looks like the Signal-to-Noise ratio has been improved and the overall view of the current Mini is 4-stars.


Almost 4 weeks and another 10 reviews. FWIW, the last 10 reviews were:

1 Star - (1)
2 Star - (0)
3 Star - (2)
4 Star - (2)
5 Star - (5)


----------



## sbiller

Another 4 weeks, another 15 reviews of the TiVo Mini. Here is the tally from the most recent 15 Amazon reviews.

1 Star - (0)
2 Star - (0)
3 Star - (0)
4 Star - (6)
5 Star - (9)


----------



## jmpage2

And my 3 star review is still the most well-rated review.


----------



## sbiller

jmpage2 said:


> And my 3 star review is still the most well-rated review.


I noticed that Jason. I'm jealous! 

I'm looking forward to you moving it up to at least 4 stars when they release DTA.


----------



## jmpage2

sbiller said:


> I noticed that Jason. I'm jealous!
> 
> I'm looking forward to you moving it up to at least 4 stars when they release DTA.


They will need DTA as well as Netflix on the Mini, for its premium price, in order for me to give it 4 stars.


----------



## sbiller

jmpage2 said:


> They will need DTA as well as Netflix on the Mini, for its premium price, in order for me to give it 4 stars.


I expect (and hope) that you might see both! :up:


----------



## jmpage2

Let's hope so, tired of being a beta tester for these guys 

They will need to improve stability too. Needing to re-boot the thing periodically is unacceptable to me.


----------



## sbiller

jmpage2 said:


> Let's hope so, tired of being a beta tester for these guys
> 
> They will need to improve stability too. Needing to re-boot the thing periodically is unacceptable to me.


I suspect that it will get more stable over time with newer software builds. I would reclassify you from public beta tester to "early adopter"!


----------



## wmhjr

Given that DTA is being released for Series 5 but not Premiere, and no real word on DTA for anyone else, I would at this point bet that we will never see DTA for Premieres. I'd classify this in the same fashion as for fixing Amazon Prime, correcting long standing quality issues with Amazon instant download, etc. Tivo claimed to be "working on those" 2 yrs ago - and when you have issues and call, they still say they're "working on it".


----------



## jmpage2

They've said it's coming for Premieres so I would hold off on the witch hunt for a while yet.

Clearly though the Mini was designed for use with the Roamio first and foremost.


----------



## wmhjr

They've said it was coming for Premieres since the mini was released. 

They also said they were working on Amazon prime streaming......

I would hardly consider it a witch hunt. It's just a reflection of how Tivo has made decisions in the past. Very few "new" features end up cascading into older models. I totally understand this and cannot disagree with that approach - so long as they also make good on what they "insinuate" (using that word since Tivo so rarely actually "promises" anything. To me, a "promise" is more a scheduled release with anticipated GA.


----------



## jrtroo

They never said any such thing on Amazon prime. It is not their app to write, it was never promised to us Premiere users.


----------



## tivoboy

They also said it was coming for the mini's "in the fall", but man if they back out of that I'm going to be a tad bit annoyed since I bought the LT on it thinking it was really worth it as a permanent solution going forward. I can live with 4T in the P4XL, but don't like losing one always to a mini in the den just to have a mini in the den.


----------



## sbiller

Mini is sold out directly from Amazon.com for 2 to 3 weeks. Connection Depot has a few (4) remaining units.

http://www.amazon.com/TiVo-TCDA92000-Mini/dp/B00BUCLVZU/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1377266207&sr=8-1&keywords=tivo+mini


----------



## magnus

sbiller said:


> No. I don't have a problem with your current 3-star review. I had a problem with the 1-star review complaining about the subscription fee. My Mini's have been pretty stable although I'm looking forward to DTA and hopefully configurable time-outs.


I have a problem with Tivo thinking that it's worth $150 for lifetime when the box is robbing service/shows from a real Tivo.


----------



## CrispyCritter

magnus said:


> I have a problem with Tivo thinking that it's worth $150 for lifetime when the box is robbing service/shows from a real Tivo.


IMO, the primary reason there's a service fee at all (instead of being bundled into a fixed price) is to keep the stock analysts happy that the number of subscriptions is not going down as folks change over to a whole house solution. The division of income between hardware price and service price is quite arbitrary for all TiVo models.


----------



## magnus

CrispyCritter said:


> IMO, the primary reason there's a service fee at all (instead of being bundled into a fixed price) is to keep the stock analysts happy that the number of subscriptions is not going down as folks change over to a whole house solution. The division of income between hardware price and service price is quite arbitrary for all TiVo models.


Agreed but a $250 cost without subscription would have me wondering the same thing. You're only able to watch your already recorded shows. So, it doesn't really hold any more value than a $99 Roku.


----------



## jmpage2

magnus said:


> Agreed but a $250 cost without subscription would have me wondering the same thing. You're only able to watch your already recorded shows. So, it doesn't really hold any more value than a $99 Roku.


You can watch recorded and live cable. Which Roku and ATV cant offer. Yet.


----------



## magnus

jmpage2 said:


> You can watch recorded and live cable. Which Roku and ATV cant offer. Yet.


I believe that Slingplayer is going to have an app for it on Roku. Than what?


----------



## jmpage2

magnus said:


> I believe that Slingplayer is going to have an app for it on Roku. Than what?


Then you need a sling box ($$) plus you have a slow interface with command delay and a highly compressed picture. Plus you only have one remote user that can work at a time. Not sure why you are making that argument, it's a loser.


----------



## bareyb

Did they ever implement dynamic tuner allocation or do you still have to sacrifice a tuner for live TV?


----------



## jmpage2

bareyb said:


> Did they ever implement dynamic tuner allocation or do you still have to sacrifice a tuner for live TV?


Implemented for Roamio. "Coming" soon for XL4.


----------



## magnus

jmpage2 said:


> Then you need a sling box ($$) plus you have a slow interface with command delay and a highly compressed picture. Plus you only have one remote user that can work at a time. Not sure why you are making that argument, it's a loser.


I'm not sure why you keep making the argument that live tv and recording are some how worth spending another $150 for service. You've already paid for service on the Tivo itself.

Anyway, you said that you can't watch live tv or recording on a Roku. And while that's not currently an option... I'm sure it will be. I have a slingbox already and so there is no more cost to that (for me). It's still going to be an option even if it's not completely ideal. Roku still has a lot more to offer in terms of channels for streaming than Tivo ever has.


----------



## bareyb

jmpage2 said:


> Implemented for Roamio. "Coming" soon for XL4.


I hope that means for Elite too... but good news on the Roamio.


----------



## jmpage2

magnus said:


> I'm not sure why you keep making the argument that live tv and recording are some how worth spending another $150 for service. You've already paid for service on the Tivo itself.
> 
> Anyway, you said that you can't watch live tv or recording on a Roku. And while that's not currently an option... I'm sure it will be. I have a slingbox already and so there is no more cost to that (for me). It's still going to be an option even if it's not completely ideal. Roku still has a lot more to offer in terms of channels for streaming than Tivo ever has.


I'm not going to argue that Roku isn't a superior solution for number of apps supported, etc, compared to Mini. That's a no brainer.

However your assertion that people won't pay $150 for the convenience of having live/recorded (high quality) TV in other rooms of the house does not appear to be panning out, as the Mini is selling.

Another data point. I had both a Sling catcher and a Boxee Box (with Sling app) on a TV in my work-out room. For TV viewing I replaced these with Mini and it kicks the ass out of either one. Much better picture and sound, instantaneous remote control response, etc.

Obviously it's up to each person what their entertainment dollars go towards, but for me, Mini was well worth it. I bought two, and might even buy a 3rd for the guest room once my Roamio is set up.


----------



## magnus

jmpage2 said:


> I'm not going to argue that Roku isn't a superior solution for number of apps supported, etc, compared to Mini. That's a no brainer.
> 
> However your assertion that people won't pay $150 for the convenience of having live/recorded (high quality) TV in other rooms of the house does not appear to be panning out, as the Mini is selling.
> 
> Another data point. I had both a Sling catcher and a Boxee Box (with Sling app) on a TV in my work-out room. For TV viewing I replaced these with Mini and it kicks the ass out of either one. Much better picture and sound, instantaneous remote control response, etc.
> 
> Obviously it's up to each person what their entertainment dollars go towards, but for me, Mini was well worth it. I bought two, and might even buy a 3rd for the guest room once my Roamio is set up.


I'm not saying that no one would. People drink the koolaid all the time. I just think its over priced for what it does and that they could really get Tivo into every household by pricing these guys competitively.


----------



## jmpage2

With the delivery of DTA for the Mini (when used with Roamio) and Netflix, I have grudgingly bumped my popular Amazon review of the Mini up to 4 stars, and provided some pointers to TiVo (Margaret, are you listening ?) on what they could do to make this a 5 star product.


----------



## Dan203

They added Netflix and you can now access the SP Manager and To Do List via short cuts. That was pretty much my wish list. If they get rid of all the SD screens I think it'll be pretty much perfect.


----------



## TimA

jmpage2 said:


> Implemented for Roamio. "Coming" soon for XL4.


Has anyone performed extensive testing of DTA with multiple Minis and a Roamio? I haven't seen any information on how well it works. Or is no news good news?


----------



## aaronwt

Someone posted in the Roamio thread that they had four Minis working with a Roamio and had live TV on five screens.


----------



## lessd

aaronwt said:


> Someone posted in the Roamio thread that they had four Minis working with a Roamio and had live TV on five screens.


I am setting up a system with 5 Minis and a Roamio for a friend, should be able to run any 4 Minis and the Roamio at the same time, will let you know when I get the system installed.


----------



## lessd

lessd said:


> I am setting up a system with 5 Minis and a Roamio for a friend, should be able to run any 4 Minis and the Roamio at the same time, will let you know when I get the system installed.


Finished my 5 Mini to single Roamio Plus setup, and I can tune to five different stations, one for each Mini, the Roamio shows what stations are being tuned by what Mini, when I am using 5 Minis I can only tune one station on the Roamio Plus. The system works great and each Mini updated itself to make Netflix available. The only problem I see is when I first go to live TV I get a blank screen, press the TiVo button and go back to Live TV and all works great, may be a problem because this system is for a friend so I have two accounts on the same network in my home, my friends MAK and my MAK. MAK= Media Access Key

So with 5 Minis working I can record one program on the Roamio and also watch another program that had been recorded, system seem very stable.


----------

