# Tivo's business outlook.



## nuraman00 (Dec 28, 2012)

Reading the forums the past few months, there seems to be a less enthusiastic outlook towards Tivo's business outlook.

Is this assessment true?

What are some of the causes of this, from when there was a more positive outlook?

If this is the case, what can they do about it, to change it?


----------



## XIBM (Mar 9, 2013)

They have recently lost some patent lawsuits so their patent license revenue is threatened. With the movement to IP traditional cable seems limited.


----------



## tarheelblue32 (Jan 13, 2014)

The retail CableCARD DVR market is obviously a dying business, though TiVo does essentially have a monopoly on it, which they should to be able to milk for a few more years. Their MSO DVR business seems to be doing okay, but how long that will last in the age of cord-cutting and changing technology is unclear.

The cord-cutting trend is an opportunity for TiVo in the OTA DVR market, but unfortunately there is a lot more competition there, which leads to lower profits. TiVo's big problem is that it doesn't seem to be able to get all of the OTT apps that it needs to really make it a cord-cutter's one box the way Amazon's DVR is likely going to be.

What I think TiVo should have done is used Linux/Android-based apps for their platform. It probably would have made it much easier to port apps over from Android TV or Amazon Fire TV.


----------



## OrangeCrush (Feb 18, 2016)

I think they're basically healthy, but I don't see how they grow long term. They could've been what Roku is today, but that ship has sailed.

> What I think TiVo should have done is used Linux/Android-based apps for their platform. It probably would have made it much easier to port apps over from Android TV or Amazon Fire TV.

I think post-Bolt, they're going to transition the whole TiVo platform to software on a custom Android box built by manufacturing partners.


----------



## Diana Collins (Aug 21, 2002)

tarheelblue32 said:


> The retail CableCARD DVR market is obviously a dying business, though TiVo does essentially have a monopoly on it, which they should to be able to milk for a few more years. Their MSO DVR business seems to be doing okay, but how long that will last in the age of cord-cutting is unclear.
> 
> The cord-cutting trend is an opportunity for TiVo in the OTA DVR market, but unfortunately there is a lot more competition there, which leads to lower profits. TiVo's big problem is that it doesn't seem to be able to get all of the OTT apps that it needs to really make it a cord-cutter's one box the way Amazon's DVR is likely going to be.
> 
> *What I think TiVo should have done is used Linux/Android-based apps for their platform. It probably would have made it much easier to port apps over from Android TV or Amazon Fire TV.*


You realize that TiVos run Linux as their O/S right?

What they DID was use the Smart TV platform that Opera provides, so any app on the average smart TV can be ported easily to TiVo. The problem is that the services don't update the Smart TV apps as often as they do the Apple, Roku and Android ports. All these devices run Linux, but different flavors and with different APIs, particular around UI integration


----------



## Scooby Doo (Dec 18, 2002)

I believe TiVo's best days could well lie ahead, but they need to quit messing around with the dying cable industry and focus on growth.The global digital OTA market is very large (10x the US market) and there are fewer issues with reception (because of both superior technology choice and well-engineered network design). The global mobile market is huge and operators are just beginning to get their heads around 5G and video services. Content choices are absolutely exploding and improved personalized discovery is urgently needed. No reason why TiVo can't lead the charge into this brave new world.


----------



## tommiet (Oct 28, 2005)

I'm new to Tivo (again) and believe its on its last leg.... But no different than any other DVR. Moving the storage to the cloud is just around the corner and that will kill TIVO and many other DVR's. 

I do like my Bolt and mini's..... but understand they have a limit life. Just hate the crap the Charter provides.


----------



## smark (Nov 20, 2002)

Diana Collins said:


> You realize that TiVos run Linux as their O/S right?
> 
> What they DID was use the Smart TV platform that Opera provides, so any app on the average smart TV can be ported easily to TiVo. The problem is that the services don't update the Smart TV apps as often as they do the Apple, Roku and Android ports. All these devices run Linux, but different flavors and with different APIs, particular around UI integration


I doubt it would be easy but it's a bit too bad that Hydra wasn't Android based just solely because of that considering Hulu for example has only updated select models of LG and Samsung TVs to the new experience.


----------



## tarheelblue32 (Jan 13, 2014)

tommiet said:


> I'm new to Tivo (again) and believe its on its last leg.... But no different than any other DVR. Moving the storage to the cloud is just around the corner and that will kill TIVO and many other DVR's.


So then why is Amazon coming out with a DVR now? Things don't change just to change, things change if there is an advantage to that change. The truth is that there are many advantages to local storage over the cloud. I remember a few years ago, tech experts were predicting that by now personal computers and smartphones would no longer have hard drives because everything would be stored in the cloud. There will be a market for DVRs well into the future, TiVo just needs to figure out how to capture more of that market.


----------



## just4tivo (Dec 9, 2015)

Scooby Doo said:


> No reason why TiVo can't lead the charge into this brave new world.


As Lee Iacocca said decades ago... either lead, follow, or get out of the way.

TiVo has a one in three chance of getting it right. Time will tell.


----------



## OrangeCrush (Feb 18, 2016)

smark said:


> I doubt it would be easy but it's a bit too bad that Hydra wasn't Android based


An Android version of Hydra was being worked on (or planned) as of early 2017, but I haven't heard what came of that. Not sure if this died with Mavrik or it's still part of the roadmap, but that would be one path forward for the future of TiVo and IPTV.


----------



## nuraman00 (Dec 28, 2012)

I personally don't see myself cutting the cord. For things like live sports, not all channels have an app where games can be streamed. And even those that do, there's a time limit on how long they're available.

I also don't want a cloud DVR either. A hard drive based one seems more reliable, and is less likely to encounter bandwidth issues, buffering, or lag that a cloud DVR would.

So even if Tivo doesn't grow, I like what they currently provide.

Cable could be better though, in providing more HD channels.

That's not on Tivo, though.

I don't have any issues with them expanding, as long as they don't cut what they currently provide.


----------



## nuraman00 (Dec 28, 2012)

I was somewhere last week where a game was being streamed from a Fire TV. After half an hour, the stream was dropped. They then spent 20-30 mins trying to reconnect, but couldn't.

Things like this are great when they work, but when they don't, there's another layer of complication.


----------



## Scooby Doo (Dec 18, 2002)

tommiet said:


> I'm new to Tivo (again) and believe its on its last leg.... But no different than any other DVR. Moving the storage to the cloud is just around the corner and that will kill TIVO and many other DVR's.


Cloud DVR is a great technical idea, but commercially it's a disaster. Just another opportunity for broadcasters to demand retransmission fees, require no commercial skip etc.. Why do you think Amazon is launching a physical DVR when they practically invented the cloud?


----------



## Joe3 (Dec 12, 2006)

When Rovi, the current owners of TiVo, decided to put their technology to finding better ways of putting advertising on a TiVo platform, their business model became transparently lazy like their decision of overseas support. Instead of technical innovation, opening its platform and freeing developers and/or working with outside developers, Rovi reveals their only true business model is to milk the TiVo brand. Rovi's feeble excuse after buying the TiVo platform is to repeatedly say, we bought it, now, just wait the top developers will come and write to our platform doesn't pass the smell test in the real world. It's past time to get rid of Opera. The excuses are as lazy as their overseas support is a lazy. Rovi's current leadership is to be a lazy bottom feeder of a company. They will eventually drive the TiVo brand into bankruptcy if they don't change their lazy business model to one of open development within a TiVo home platform.


----------



## stile99 (Feb 27, 2002)

Short term? Fine. Medium term? Probably fine. Long term? Innovate or die.


----------



## tarheelblue32 (Jan 13, 2014)

Diana Collins said:


> You realize that TiVos run Linux as their O/S right?
> 
> What they DID was use the Smart TV platform that Opera provides, so any app on the average smart TV can be ported easily to TiVo. The problem is that the services don't update the Smart TV apps as often as they do the Apple, Roku and Android ports. All these devices run Linux, but different flavors and with different APIs, particular around UI integration


Yes, what I meant was that going with Opera for their app platform was a complete disaster. Whoever made that decision should be fired. Most Smart TV app selection is terrible, except for maybe Samsung TVs or one of those Roku smart TVs. They need to reverse course and switch to Android before it's too late.


----------



## stile99 (Feb 27, 2002)

tarheelblue32 said:


> Yes, what I meant was that going with Opera for their app platform was a complete disaster. Whoever made that decision should be fired. Most Smart TV app selection is terrible, except for maybe Samsung TVs or one of those Roku smart TVs. They need to reverse course and switch to Android before it's too late.


Flash flashbacks.


----------



## tommiet (Oct 28, 2005)

tarheelblue32 said:


> So then why is Amazon coming out with a DVR now? Things don't change just to change, things change if there is an advantage to that change. The truth is that there are many advantages to local storage over the cloud. I remember a few years ago, tech experts were predicting that by now personal computers and smartphones would no longer have hard drives because everything would be stored in the cloud. There will be a market for DVRs well into the future, TiVo just needs to figure out how to capture more of that market.


I think it's too late for TIVO.. the best they can do is sell their patents and call it a day. I like my TIVO, but understand its technology is on the way out....... Why do you think TIVO sold out? Why is the manufacturing of TIVO hardware going from place to place?

Ever heard of iPhones? A lot of your cell phone stuff is cloud stored as local storage is limited. Apple is bad about this.... Computers? My company has 18k of Citrix workstations. The computer is in the cloud (not just the data.) Music? Most is in the cloud now. Windows 10... Cloud-based data, apps and user profile/settings. Available on any Win10 device that you own. No need to copy data or purchase the same license for use on more than one device. And Auto backup.... NICE....

Just because Amazon is making a $300 DVR does not mean it's going to work. Remember the Amazon cell phone? Local storage will always be an option, but the cloud is where everyone is going. Cloud storage will cost less and make it easier to access your saved programs. No loss programs or dead hard drives... What's not to like?

Sorry.... 30+ years in the IT business.....


----------



## tommiet (Oct 28, 2005)

Scooby Doo said:


> Cloud DVR is a great technical idea, but commercially it's a disaster. Just another opportunity for broadcasters to demand retransmission fees, require no commercial skip etc.. Why do you think Amazon is launching a physical DVR when they practically invented the cloud?


Do you expect commercial skip with Amazon's DRV? The fees are there, local or cloud-based. On-Demand tv --- Cloud-based TV --- Getting bigger and bigger and putting a dent in DVR's.

TIVO's commercial skip is GREAT.. when it works. Seems to have a mind of its own. And when it doesn't work, the FF is SLOW.... SLOW... SLOW.... But I still like my TIVO.


----------



## compnurd (Oct 6, 2011)

Honestly as far as cable card depending on your MSO there is a good 5-10 years before there is an issue. Some of them just made significant investments in new hardware that uses cable cards. They aren’t touching that until they have to


----------



## Scooby Doo (Dec 18, 2002)

tommiet said:


> Do you expect commercial skip with Amazon's DRV?


Yes


> The fees are there, local or cloud-based.


Not true. Cable and OTT operators pay retransmission fees. OTA does not. See Aereo.


> TIVO's commercial skip is GREAT.. when it works.


I've never had a problem


----------



## compnurd (Oct 6, 2011)

Scooby Doo said:


> Yes
> 
> Not true. Cable and OTT operators pay retransmission fees. OTA does not. See Aereo.
> 
> I've never had a problem


Unless amazon licenses it from Tivo they will not have commercial skip


----------



## Scooby Doo (Dec 18, 2002)

compnurd said:


> Unless amazon licenses it from Tivo they will not have commercial skip


Correct, although I would add the possibility that Amazon invalidates the patent. Either way, Amazon has confirmed it expects to have this feature.We will see


----------



## eherberg (Feb 17, 2011)

compnurd said:


> Unless amazon licenses it from Tivo they will not have commercial skip


They don't need TiVo's permission to run comskip.


----------



## compnurd (Oct 6, 2011)

eherberg said:


> They don't need TiVo's permission to run comskip.


They do if TiVo has a patent on it


----------



## eherberg (Feb 17, 2011)

Comskip has been around since before TiVo did their implementation. Plex DVR uses it and doesn't have to pay TiVo (nor should they - since TiVo's implementation is different than what comskip does).


----------



## Sam Lovato (Nov 9, 2018)

I think tivo still has some time, old people like me like having an easy to use device to watch my shows, I like it for the time being


----------



## nuraman00 (Dec 28, 2012)

Scooby Doo said:


> I believe TiVo's best days could well lie ahead, but they need to quit messing around with the dying cable industry and focus on growth.*The global digital OTA market is very large (10x the US market) and there are fewer issues with reception (because of both superior technology choice and well-engineered network design)*. The global mobile market is huge and operators are just beginning to get their heads around 5G and video services. Content choices are absolutely exploding and improved personalized discovery is urgently needed. No reason why TiVo can't lead the charge into this brave new world.


How is Tivo doing with this with their new OTA Bolt? They've had other OTA DVRs before, but is there something about the Bolt that's better?


----------



## nuraman00 (Dec 28, 2012)

I had a Mitsubishi VCR with Commercial Skip. You would have to wait for the recording to stop, then it would spend 3 - 4 minutes putting markers on where the commercials were.

Then during playback, when it encountered a marker, it would fast forward on its own. When it got near the end marker, it would slow down its FF rate.

I think a later Panasonic VCR behaved similarly.


----------



## OrangeCrush (Feb 18, 2016)

As mentioned, comskip as been around for a while and Plex is a commercial product that uses it and they haven't been sued about it, as far as I know. It's possible TiVo or somebody else already has a patent about it and just hasn't noticed or bothered yet.

Although I'm not sure TiVo has that patent--they're marking commercials by hand. Plex & Comskip can do that automatically and you can set them up to slice out the commercials entirely, no need to hit a skip button.

Regardless, somebody can get a patent they shouldn't have and sue people over it. Even getting sued over a bad patent can be insanely expensive.


----------



## Scooby Doo (Dec 18, 2002)

nuraman00 said:


> How is Tivo doing with this with their new OTA Bolt? They've had other OTA DVRs before, but is there something about the Bolt that's better?


Sales of OTA DVRs in the USA are inevitably constrained by poor reception and the relatively small market size.TiVo has never tried marketing an OTA DVR outside of the USA to the best of my knowledge. I'm quite sure Amazon will sell Recast globally.


----------



## mschnebly (Feb 21, 2011)

compnurd said:


> They do if TiVo has a patent on it


I use Channels DVR and it has commercial skip on every recorded show. I'm pretty sure they cant afford to license anything from TiVo.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

tommiet said:


> Just because Amazon is making a $300 DVR does not mean it's going to work. Remember the Amazon cell phone? Local storage will always be an option, but the cloud is where everyone is going. Cloud storage will cost less and make it easier to access your saved programs. No loss programs or dead hard drives... What's not to like?


You would be 100% right if it weren't for retransmission fees. When you can get a free signal on an antenna, but not online (although Locast is challenging that), then there is a financial incentive to keep things running locally. I agree about the general cloudiziation of most things, heck Comcast's cable DVRs are already partially using IP video and cloud. Satellite will be the last bastion of the pay tv DVR, since there's no bandwidth available out in the boonies to go cloud, but it is going to go back to it's roots as a specialty service for rural and commercial users.



Scooby Doo said:


> Sales of OTA DVRs in the USA are inevitably constrained by poor reception and the relatively small market size.TiVo has never tried marketing an OTA DVR outside of the USA to the best of my knowledge. I'm quite sure Amazon will sell Recast globally.


I don't believe they've ever done a European model, and Canada can be considered the same as the US for the existing OTA DVR lineup, since they use the same ATSC-8VSB system, and due to their population's locations, some of their stations are actually broadcast out of the US, and several US markets get Canadian stations.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

TiVo has missed the boat on so many things, even though they were also the first to launch or popularize many things, including the DVR itself and MRV. However, when they got to the client/server model, they didn't innovate for years, and finally, years after Microsoft had a client/server system with MCE, launched the TiVo Mini. They still don't have a headless OTA box like Tablo and now Recast, although they are working on the apps for the Bolt that they should have had 2 or 3 years ago. I firmly believe that TiVo's future now is to do a headless DVR and integrate with other streaming devices as an app, and integrate into any content aggregation systems that Roku, Apple TV, FireTV, etc, devise. I think they could have gone the AndroidTV route if they had made a new platform a few years ago, but the market has come too far for them since then. If Roku launches a competitor to the Recast, then TiVo is in even bigger trouble in the retail market.

TiVo's software and platform are far superior to Comcast's X1, which has several other MSO partners including Cox, Videotron, Shaw, and Rogers. Unfortunately, those were all missed opportunities for TiVo. Comcast seems hell bent on re-inventing the wheel and doing a lousy job at it every time they do anything, but how did TiVo not land a major MSO deal somewhere between Cox, Charter, CableVision, and the Canadian MSOs? They have the best software platform, and a UX that sells itself and is one of the only 100% user intuitive interfaces I've seen in my life, and they weren't able to put the big deals together. They lost DirecTV, who also seems to be hell bent on re-inventing the wheel and doing a crappy job of it. Now TiVo is left with some small MSOs who are putting TiVo's brand front and center (not sure if that says more about a brand like Atlantic Broadband or TiVo's brand).

TiVo will survive for a while on the MSO partnerships alone, although TiVo hardware is more endangered. TiVo's software runs just fine on generic Arris cable boxes, and Arris doesn't exactly have anything great software wise, so the Arris-TiVo partnership makes perfect sense. The next big test for TiVo will be ATSC 3.0. I'd like to see a headless server box that has RF, Ethernet, power, USB, and nothing else that can stream to apps on FireTV, Roku, Chromecast, AndroidTV, and AppleTV, as well as all TiVo Minis for people who want the full TiVo Experience, transcoding as necessary for the older boxes of all types, including TiVo Minis that can't decode HEVC. I'd like to see it support at least 4 streams out of the box at once, all with hardware transcoding, and streaming over the LAN or internet to smartphones, tablets, and PCs. It should also come with at least 1TB of storage, although they could make a model that uses an external hard drive for folks who like to build their own system with more storage.


----------



## PSU_Sudzi (Jun 4, 2015)

No one knows, everyone here will offer their opinion on TiVo's business future. If you search the forum here you could spend months reviewing the thoughts on it.


----------



## mschnebly (Feb 21, 2011)

Bigg said:


> TiVo has missed the boat on so many things, even though they were also the first to launch or popularize many things, including the DVR itself and MRV. However, when they got to the client/server model, they didn't innovate for years, and finally, years after Microsoft had a client/server system with MCE, launched the TiVo Mini. They still don't have a headless OTA box like Tablo and now Recast, although they are working on the apps for the Bolt that they should have had 2 or 3 years ago. I firmly believe that TiVo's future now is to do a headless DVR and integrate with other streaming devices as an app, and integrate into any content aggregation systems that Roku, Apple TV, FireTV, etc, devise. I think they could have gone the AndroidTV route if they had made a new platform a few years ago, but the market has come too far for them since then. If Roku launches a competitor to the Recast, then TiVo is in even bigger trouble in the retail market.
> 
> TiVo's software and platform are far superior to Comcast's X1, which has several other MSO partners including Cox, Videotron, Shaw, and Rogers. Unfortunately, those were all missed opportunities for TiVo. Comcast seems hell bent on re-inventing the wheel and doing a lousy job at it every time they do anything, but how did TiVo not land a major MSO deal somewhere between Cox, Charter, CableVision, and the Canadian MSOs? They have the best software platform, and a UX that sells itself and is one of the only 100% user intuitive interfaces I've seen in my life, and they weren't able to put the big deals together. They lost DirecTV, who also seems to be hell bent on re-inventing the wheel and doing a crappy job of it. Now TiVo is left with some small MSOs who are putting TiVo's brand front and center (not sure if that says more about a brand like Atlantic Broadband or TiVo's brand).
> 
> TiVo will survive for a while on the MSO partnerships alone, although TiVo hardware is more endangered. TiVo's software runs just fine on generic Arris cable boxes, and Arris doesn't exactly have anything great software wise, so the Arris-TiVo partnership makes perfect sense. The next big test for TiVo will be ATSC 3.0. I'd like to see a headless server box that has RF, Ethernet, power, USB, and nothing else that can stream to apps on FireTV, Roku, Chromecast, AndroidTV, and AppleTV, as well as all TiVo Minis for people who want the full TiVo Experience, transcoding as necessary for the older boxes of all types, including TiVo Minis that can't decode HEVC. I'd like to see it support at least 4 streams out of the box at once, all with hardware transcoding, and streaming over the LAN or internet to smartphones, tablets, and PCs. It should also come with at least 1TB of storage, although they could make a model that uses an external hard drive for folks who like to build their own system with more storage.


I would think that Roku could come out with a system to use a USB drive for recordings. That would work for their standalone streamers AND could be connected to their Roku branded TVs. Maybe make a simple little box with a couple of tuners and a HDD? Less than a Benjamin? A simple plug in drive wouldn't be over the average person's head to do. Plug it into your Roku TV's USB and instant DVR that could be portable? Seems like some genius R&D guy could come up with something.

Maybe TiVo missed out on putting their UI in cable Cos DVR because the license fees were just too high? I don't know but what other reason would their be? Not able to negotiate over metrics and ad revenues?


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

nuraman00 said:


> How is Tivo doing with this with their new OTA Bolt? They've had other OTA DVRs before, but is there something about the Bolt that's better?


Handles 4K content, snappier with apps.


----------



## PSU_Sudzi (Jun 4, 2015)

mschnebly said:


> I would think that Roku could come out with a system to use a USB drive for recordings. That would work for their standalone streamers AND could be connected to their Roku branded TVs. Maybe make a simple little box with a couple of tuners and a HDD? Less than a Benjamin? A simple plug in drive wouldn't be over the average person's head to do. Plug it into your Roku TV's USB and instant DVR that could be portable? Seems like some genius R&D guy could come up with something.
> 
> Maybe TiVo missed out on putting their UI in cable Cos DVR because the license fees were just too high? I don't know but what other reason would their be? Not able to negotiate over metrics and ad revenues?


I'm guessing TiVo's proposed licensing fees were too big for Comcast to pay each year for millions(?) of cable boxes and decided it was cheaper to build their own UI however poor it may be. This is a common business strategy which sometimes can be foolish but there is also an upside in having more people try to design something better to drive innovation. It's just not always readily apparent to an end user.


----------



## NashGuy (May 2, 2015)

PSU_Sudzi said:


> I'm guessing TiVo's proposed licensing fees were too big for Comcast to pay each year for millions(?) of cable boxes and decided it was cheaper to build their own UI however poor it may be. This is a common business strategy which sometimes can be foolish but there is also an upside in having more people try to design something better to drive innovation. It's just not always readily apparent to an end user.


It's also about branding. Major MSOs -- Comcast, AT&T, etc. -- want to own the look and feel of their UIs and they want to be able to brand their hardware/software platform (X1, Genie, etc.) because that ties into their overall brand. Outsourcing all of that to a third party like TiVo, who is also used by competing MSOs (including tiny ones), is seen by these major MSOs as a loss of their consumer-facing identity.


----------



## Scooby Doo (Dec 18, 2002)

PSU_Sudzi said:


> I'm guessing TiVo's proposed licensing fees were too big for Comcast to pay each year for millions(?) of cable boxes and decided it was cheaper to build their own UI however poor it may be.


I"m sure cost was a factor, but I suspect it's more about control. Comcast would prefer to have a bad UI they control than a good UI they don't. Control of UI gives control over many other revenue streams including for example content discovery, which has real value. Comcast doesn't want to just be an app; they want to be the operating system


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

mschnebly said:


> I would think that Roku could come out with a system to use a USB drive for recordings. That would work for their standalone streamers AND could be connected to their Roku branded TVs. Maybe make a simple little box with a couple of tuners and a HDD? Less than a Benjamin? A simple plug in drive wouldn't be over the average person's head to do. Plug it into your Roku TV's USB and instant DVR that could be portable? Seems like some genius R&D guy could come up with something.


Yeah, you would think that they would be doing both a plug-in for Roku TVs and a separate box for people with Roku streaming boxes. OTA is the missing part of what Roku is doing.



NashGuy said:


> Outsourcing all of that to a third party like TiVo, who is also used by competing MSOs (including tiny ones), is seen by these major MSOs as a loss of their consumer-facing identity.


Entirely true. These MSOs are pretty arrogant, and think that their brands are what they should put front and center. Atlantic Broadband is smart- they put TiVo front a center in giant letters in their ads, and at the bottom, you see a smaller logo for Atlantic Broadband. They know that TiVo is their biggest asset.



Scooby Doo said:


> I"m sure cost was a factor, but I suspect it's more about control. Comcast would prefer to have a bad UI they control than a good UI they don't. Control of UI gives control over many other revenue streams including for example content discovery, which has real value. Comcast doesn't want to just be an app; they want to be the operating system


I agree. I think control is the first thing, branding is the second, and cost was probably not a huge factor, as Comcast is large enough that they could have beaten TiVo down on the cost, especially if Comcast handled buying the hardware end of things. In an ironic turn of events, TiVo's software runs on the XG1 which Comcast developed for X1, and is now used by other MSOs, some using X1, and at least one using TiVo. I think data is also part of the picture, as the XG1 is cloud integrated and has it's own internal modem, and sends data back continuously on what the user is doing. Granted, an MSO the size of Comcast could have gotten TiVo's software to do the exact same thing, but they have more control over the data collection at the software level when they write it.

Comcast experimented with the now ill-fated ComcasTiVo, but then they floundered around with crappy iGuide boxes until they finally decided to re-invent the wheel many years after TiVo has already invented it. Comcast wants to control the UX and create more of a traditional digital cable type of model, with DVR, XoD, and Live TV all on equal footing, while TiVo's UX is a DVR first, and everything else second. Comcast's old iGuide DVRs were a cable box first and a DVR second. Comcast is huge into selling On Demand to people who don't understand how to properly use a DVR, and pushing Live TV as well, while sophisticated TiVo users use little to no XoD, and only watch sports or news live.


----------



## nuraman00 (Dec 28, 2012)

Bigg said:


> TiVo has missed the boat on so many things, even though they were also the first to launch or popularize many things, including the DVR itself and MRV. However, when they got to the client/server model, they didn't innovate for years, and finally, years after Microsoft had a client/server system with MCE, launched the TiVo Mini. They still don't have a headless OTA box like Tablo and now Recast, although they are working on the apps for the Bolt that they should have had 2 or 3 years ago. I firmly believe that TiVo's future now is to do a headless DVR and integrate with other streaming devices as an app, and integrate into any content aggregation systems that Roku, Apple TV, FireTV, etc, devise. I think they could have gone the AndroidTV route if they had made a new platform a few years ago, but the market has come too far for them since then. If Roku launches a competitor to the Recast, then TiVo is in even bigger trouble in the retail market.
> 
> TiVo's software and platform are far superior to Comcast's X1, which has several other MSO partners including Cox, Videotron, Shaw, and Rogers. Unfortunately, those were all missed opportunities for TiVo. Comcast seems hell bent on re-inventing the wheel and doing a lousy job at it every time they do anything, but how did TiVo not land a major MSO deal somewhere between Cox, Charter, CableVision, and the Canadian MSOs? They have the best software platform, and a UX that sells itself and is one of the only 100% user intuitive interfaces I've seen in my life, and they weren't able to put the big deals together. They lost DirecTV, who also seems to be hell bent on re-inventing the wheel and doing a crappy job of it. Now TiVo is left with some small MSOs who are putting TiVo's brand front and center (not sure if that says more about a brand like Atlantic Broadband or TiVo's brand).
> 
> TiVo will survive for a while on the MSO partnerships alone, although TiVo hardware is more endangered. TiVo's software runs just fine on generic Arris cable boxes, and Arris doesn't exactly have anything great software wise, so the Arris-TiVo partnership makes perfect sense. The next big test for TiVo will be ATSC 3.0. I'd like to see a headless server box that has RF, Ethernet, power, USB, and nothing else that can stream to apps on FireTV, Roku, Chromecast, AndroidTV, and AppleTV, as well as all TiVo Minis for people who want the full TiVo Experience, transcoding as necessary for the older boxes of all types, including TiVo Minis that can't decode HEVC. I'd like to see it support at least 4 streams out of the box at once, all with hardware transcoding, and streaming over the LAN or internet to smartphones, tablets, and PCs. It should also come with at least 1TB of storage, although they could make a model that uses an external hard drive for folks who like to build their own system with more storage.


What does MSO stand for?

What do you mean by headless server box?

If the box streamed to FireTV, Roku, etc., would it also record?


----------



## JoeKustra (Dec 7, 2012)

List of multiple-system operators - Wikipedia


----------



## Barnstormer (Sep 23, 2015)

tommiet said:


> Just because Amazon is making a $300 DVR does not mean it's going to work. Remember the Amazon cell phone? Local storage will always be an option, but the cloud is where everyone is going. Cloud storage will cost less and make it easier to access your saved programs. No loss programs or dead hard drives... What's not to like?
> 
> .


I remember the Amazon phones. Not their brightest moment.

Amazon's DVR needs to stand the test of time. I rarely buy version 1 of a product because Version 2 is usally so much better. So, I will continue to get by rather well with my Roamio OTA units for a few more years. When the new TV broadcast standard is functional, I will consider a new DVR unit and look at Tivo, Tablo, Amazon and others.


----------



## mschnebly (Feb 21, 2011)

PSU_Sudzi said:


> I'm guessing TiVo's proposed licensing fees were too big for Comcast to pay each year for millions(?) of cable boxes and decided it was cheaper to build their own UI however poor it may be. This is a common business strategy which sometimes can be foolish but there is also an upside in having more people try to design something better to drive innovation. It's just not always readily apparent to an end user.


The fees would never be too big for Comcast to pay, maybe more than they felt it was worth. Around here almost everyone has an X1 and they love it. So, poor is just how someone perceives it. Comcast has full control now and can innovate their IPTV, On Demand and their cloud storage without worrying about any other company's software so maybe it's worth it to them. My wife loves the X1 over our TiVo and every other thing she has tried. To me it wasn't as good as TiVo but a very close 2nd. I'm not using either now and I'm happy.


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

Tivo is dead. They were already hurt by the cable dvr. But now streaming makes a dvr obsolete.

So I don't see a future for Tivo although it doesn't mean they don't hang around for many years yet like Sears or Kmart have. 

I guess with OTA a dvr makes sense for the customer although probably not for the OTA network affiliate business. 

A dvr makes sense for the satellite customer that can't get broadband internet.

I don't think the answer is copy and pasting cable or satellite onto a streaming service either. I think the answer is doing what Netflix is doing and doing it better.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

nuraman00 said:


> If the box streamed to FireTV, Roku, etc., would it also record?


Like Tablo. It's a headless box that acts as a server for recorded content. Yes, it would have to have a tuner in order to record.



mschnebly said:


> The fees would never be too big for Comcast to pay, maybe more than they felt it was worth. Around here almost everyone has an X1 and they love it. So, poor is just how someone perceives it. Comcast has full control now and can innovate their IPTV, On Demand and their cloud storage without worrying about any other company's software so maybe it's worth it to them. My wife loves the X1 over our TiVo and every other thing she has tried. To me it wasn't as good as TiVo but a very close 2nd. I'm not using either now and I'm happy.


It's not about the money, Comcast could have beaten TiVo up on the pricing, they are huge, and X1 wasn't cheap. People like X1 because they've never used TiVo, so it's like going from a Geo Metro to a Honda Civic, which is great in comparison, they just don't know what a Rolls Royce is like. Not sure what's up with your wife, I have used both side by side, and TiVo's UX is WAY ahead of X1. X1 is certainly an improvement over iGuide in many ways, but at the end of the day, it's a crappy, poorly implemented rip-off of TiVo.

For Comcast, it's all about the branding and control aspects of it. If they wanted TiVo, they would have gotten TiVo at a price that was acceptable to them.



trip1eX said:


> I guess with OTA a dvr makes sense for the customer although probably not for the OTA network affiliate business.


It's not great for the broadcasters, but it's not like they have a choice. If they want to broadcast, people will record it. The legality of time shifting was established many years ago.



> I don't think the answer is copy and pasting cable or satellite onto a streaming service either. I think the answer is doing what Netflix is doing and doing it better.


I agree- the sticking points are news and sports, which is where YouTube TV fills in the gaps. Netflix and other OTT SVOD services have completely re-invented what TV is in a way that retail DVRs never could do at scale.


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

Bigg said:


> It's not great for the broadcasters, but it's not like they have a choice. If they want to broadcast, people will record it. The legality of time shifting was established many years ago.


Yep and they don't have a choice if revenue doesn't come in via advertisers either. 



Bigg said:


> I agree- the sticking points are news and sports, which is where YouTube TV fills in the gaps. Netflix and other OTT SVOD services have completely re-invented what TV is in a way that retail DVRs never could do at scale.


Yep and even sports and news may go streaming. John Skipper, the old ESPN president is Chairman of some new sports streaming service that is bidding for sports rights. He said unlike most of the world, american sport leagues have long tv contracts so the rights to lots of the sports in the US don't come up for bid for a number of years yet. So they have to wait to bid for rights of major sports. So for now they are going after whatever is in reach. Their biggest score is Camilo Avarez, arguably the biggest boxing star of today. The streaming service is DAZN.

ESPN also has ESPN+. It basically carries sports and then some games not found its channels.

News is something anyone can watch clips of on the internets.


----------



## nuraman00 (Dec 28, 2012)

Bigg said:


> Like Tablo. It's a headless box that acts as a server for recorded content. Yes, it would have to have a tuner in order to record.


What is a non headless box?

Since newer Tivos have built-in streaming, aren't they also acting as servers for recorded content?



Bigg said:


> I agree- the sticking points are news and sports, which is where YouTube TV fills in the gaps. Netflix and other OTT SVOD services have completely re-invented what TV is in a way that retail DVRs never could do at scale.


Not to get too off topic. But for me at least, having YouTube TV only keep recordings for 9 months is a deal-breaker. I have recordings that I get to 1+ years later, sometimes more. Because most of the year, I watch sports, but during some off-days, I'll watch movies. So during those days, I'll look for movies that I recorded, and often they were 1 or 2 years ago.

Even for sports, sometimes I'll watch things a few days later, and I'll avoid score spoilers. But not everyone is like that.

And second, since my cable company now has a monthly data limit for internet, I'm more conscious of how much data I use. Yes, I'd have to stream almost all day to probably reach the limit, but there is a limit now. I also prefer freeing up my router's traffic.

It's a good solution, for many people, though, since they offer sports.


----------



## nuraman00 (Dec 28, 2012)

trip1eX said:


> .
> 
> *ESPN also has ESPN+. * It basically carries sports and then some games not found its channels.
> 
> News is something anyone can watch clips of on the internets.


I believe ratings are still better on the TV version of ESPN, rather than ESPN+. For example, a tennis tournament, the Washington Open left ESPN, because the network was only committing 4 hours of live coverage, with the rest on ESPN3. It went to Tennis Channel, which was giving it start to finish coverage. The CEO said a major reason for leaving was because ratings weren't as good on ESPN3. Even though not as many people have Tennis Channel as ESPN / ESPN3 overall, just having it on TV vs. streaming was better for ratings.

Tennis Channel mostly has paid streaming, so if someone wants to watch, they will probably watch/record on TV.


----------



## nuraman00 (Dec 28, 2012)

So to recap, @Bigg, you think the direction Tivo should go in is to have a device that integrates with Roku, Apple TV, FireTV devices?


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

trip1eX said:


> Yep and they don't have a choice if revenue doesn't come in via advertisers either.


Live events. Football. News.



> Yep and even sports and news may go streaming. John Skipper, the old ESPN president is Chairman of some new sports streaming service that is bidding for sports rights. He said unlike most of the world, american sport leagues have long tv contracts so the rights to lots of the sports in the US don't come up for bid for a number of years yet.


Exactly. That's why vMVPDs are doing as well as they are.



> News is something anyone can watch clips of on the internets.


Some people like to watch cable news channels, but yes, there is a lot of free news out there, and even live streaming channels like CBSN.



nuraman00 said:


> What is a non headless box?


Look at the obvious. TiVos aren't headless. Nor is the Channelmaster DVR.



> Since newer Tivos have built-in streaming, aren't they also acting as servers for recorded content?


They are not yet able to stream out to devices like Roku and FireTV (although for a while there was a FireTV app). The Bolt will be able to soon. Of course, it could be used as a headless box by simply unplugging the HDMI cable, but the point of going to a headless server model is ultimately to provide something cheaper and easier to set up. You still would need to plug the Bolt into a TV with HDMI to set it up unless they made some significant software updates to the setup process.



> Not to get too off topic. But for me at least, having YouTube TV only keep recordings for 9 months is a deal-breaker.


That's a niche use case all considering. They also have Unlimited storage, multiple profiles, etc, so there are pluses and minuses.



> And second, since my cable company now has a monthly data limit for internet, I'm more conscious of how much data I use. Yes, I'd have to stream almost all day to probably reach the limit, but there is a limit now. I also prefer freeing up my router's traffic.


That can be an issue if you're right on the edge of a 1TB data cap, but for most people, live TV is only one small portion of their streaming, so they'd either be way over and have to pay the extortion money to their ISP to not have an arbitrary and capricious data cap, or they'd be nowhere close to the cap anyway.



nuraman00 said:


> So to recap, @Bigg, you think the direction Tivo should go in is to have a device that integrates with Roku, Apple TV, FireTV devices?


That's what I said, yes. I didn't think that a few years ago, but at this point, going the route of a cheaper headless server makes sense. Tablo has a 2-tuner, a 2-tuner with 64GB of onboard storage, and a 4-tuner model that cost $290, $320, and $370 with Lifetime service, respectively. If TiVo could hit the same price points with a headless OTA DVR, I think it would be quite successful.

They need to support FireTV, Roku, Android TV, Chromecast, Apple TV, iOS, Android, FireOS, Windows, and Mac at a minimum.


----------



## CloudAtlas (Oct 29, 2013)

NashGuy said:


> It's also about branding. Major MSOs -- Comcast, AT&T, etc. -- want to own the look and feel of their UIs and they want to be able to brand their hardware/software platform (X1, Genie, etc.) because that ties into their overall brand. Outsourcing all of that to a third party like TiVo, who is also used by competing MSOs (including tiny ones), is seen by these major MSOs as a loss of their consumer-facing identity.


In addition the major MSOs are no different than other electronics makers (Apple, Samsung, LG) who want as much control of their hardware and software as possible. It allows for the best performance, the ability to integrate into their proprietary networks and backend servers including account billing systems. And it allows them to innovate.

Look at DISH (I've never owned a DISH) for innovations they had LONG before anyone else. 2009 DISH Anywhere, outside the home viewing. Hopper/Joey whole-home DVR in 2012, a design TIVO used in 2013 with Roamio/Mini. 2013 wireless Joey a feature TiVO still does not offer in the latest Mini VOX.

It's very costly to develop in-house, with software developers making $100k+, but with Comcast pulling in over a billion dollars yearly in STB box rental fees somehow they manage.


----------



## mschnebly (Feb 21, 2011)

Bigg said:


> Like Tablo. It's a headless box that acts as a server for recorded content. Yes, it would have to have a tuner in order to record.
> 
> Not sure what's up with your wife, I have used both side by side, and TiVo's UX is WAY ahead of X1. X1 is certainly an improvement over iGuide in many ways, but at the end of the day, it's a crappy, poorly implemented rip-off of TiVo.


I didn't mind the X1. It's not as pretty as TiVo but ours worked perfectly. No lag and never missed a recording. The voice control was absolutely perfect for us. You could pretty much get to anything with just saying it. Word recognition never failed. My wife almost exclusively used it by voice. Not to mention you could watch live TV, On Demand or recordings from any device anywhere.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

CloudAtlas said:


> Look at DISH (I've never owned a DISH) for innovations they had LONG before anyone else. 2009 DISH Anywhere, outside the home viewing. Hopper/Joey whole-home DVR in 2012, a design TIVO used in 2013 with Roamio/Mini. 2013 wireless Joey a feature TiVO still does not offer in the latest Mini VOX.


To be fair to DISH, they have done some cool stuff. DISH was not the first with the client/server boxes, I don't know if it was Moxi or Microsoft, but they definitely existed pre-DISH. However, they did do a bunch of innovative things. They had the DVRs with RF out for the second TV for a long time, then with they did PTAT with their satellite system to use one tuner to record four channels at once, then they did Hopper with 16 tuners, 4k, Alexa, etc, etc.

That being said, Comcast and DirecTV have done nothing innovative with their platforms, with possibly the singular exception of using T9-esque text input on the X1 remote that actually works fairly well. Nothing else in their systems is ahead of what TiVo has, and most of it is way behind. It's all about control and their branding, not having the ultimate/best UX. If they had wanted the best UX that they could get, they would have licensed TiVo.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

mschnebly said:


> I didn't mind the X1. It's not as pretty as TiVo but ours worked perfectly. No lag and never missed a recording. The voice control was absolutely perfect for us. You could pretty much get to anything with just saying it. Word recognition never failed. My wife almost exclusively used it by voice. Not to mention you could watch live TV, On Demand or recordings from any device anywhere.


You must have the new XG1v4, the previous iterations of the box were horribly laggy at times, and would often fall behind the button presses. The UX just isn't as good as TiVo, stuff doesn't make as much sense, the remote is decent, but it's no peanut, that's for sure. You can still do live TV and on demand anywhere without X1, and you can stream shows from some of the newer TiVo Roamio and Bolt models.


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

nuraman00 said:


> I believe ratings are still better on the TV version of ESPN, rather than ESPN+. For example, a tennis tournament, the Washington Open left ESPN, because the network was only committing 4 hours of live coverage, with the rest on ESPN3. It went to Tennis Channel, which was giving it start to finish coverage. The CEO said a major reason for leaving was because ratings weren't as good on ESPN3. Even though not as many people have Tennis Channel as ESPN / ESPN3 overall, just having it on TV vs. streaming was better for ratings.
> 
> Tennis Channel mostly has paid streaming, so if someone wants to watch, they will probably watch/record on TV.


Yeah and what's your point? That streaming sports have not overtaken cable overnight? Don't disagree.


----------



## mschnebly (Feb 21, 2011)

Bigg said:


> You must have the new XG1v4, the previous iterations of the box were horribly laggy at times, and would often fall behind the button presses. The UX just isn't as good as TiVo, stuff doesn't make as much sense, the remote is decent, but it's no peanut, that's for sure. You can still do live TV and on demand anywhere without X1, and you can stream shows from some of the newer TiVo Roamio and Bolt models.


Yes, we had the 4K box. I don't have a 4K Tv so I never saw any shows like that but it was a pretty darn good box for a cable co DVR.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

mschnebly said:


> Yes, we had the 4K box. I don't have a 4K Tv so I never saw any shows like that but it was a pretty darn good box for a cable co DVR.


The SoC in the XG1v4 is much faster, so that would take care of the lagginess issue, but it doesn't fix X1's medicore interface that is not nearly as logical as TiVo's.


----------



## compnurd (Oct 6, 2011)

Bigg said:


> The SoC in the XG1v4 is much faster, so that would take care of the lagginess issue, but it doesn't fix X1's medicore interface that is not nearly as logical as TiVo's.


Isn't that the Pace MG1 hardware which is the same as the Roamio


----------



## hahathatsfunny (Jul 29, 2008)

What I would like TiVo to offer:
A TiVo like Sling, but with local channels in the top 40 or 50 US markets, for an extra cost (let's say $10/extra). TiVo offering it's own TV packages like Sling TV.

So, for example, in the Philly market, TiVo would offer the equivalent of all the local channels covered by locast.org and a few more missing ones, have channel packages for cable networks like Sling does, all integrated, in as well. In addition, it would have the TiVo interface that we are familiar with, and have channel numbers and regular TiVo remote so one can type in a channel number.

As far as storage, no physical hard-drive, but TiVo DVR could be cloud based. Hard drive storage would probably drive up the price of the product.

Could there be a market for a TiVo product such as this, and could TiVo make enough money as well?

Sling charges
$25-Sling Blue
$5-Cloud DVR

A comparable TiVo package:
$30 base package (includes TiVo cloud DVR). About same channels as Sling Blue though. *More tiers of packages and premium channels available at extra cost.
$10 Local channels
--
Total: $40/mo but includes 3 streams. I think this could be price competitive with Sling, and Tivo could charge $150 for the device (similar cost as Apple TV) and with it includes the remote with channel numbers.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

compnurd said:


> Isn't that the Pace MG1 hardware which is the same as the Roamio


The Pace MG1 is in use as well for TiVo. I don't know if the XG1 is still in use for TiVo, but at one point Medicom had an XG1 TiVo.



hahathatsfunny said:


> Could there be a market for a TiVo product such as this, and could TiVo make enough money as well?


TiVo cannot compete with AT&T, DISH, Google, etc in the vMVPD space, and it defeats the entire purpose of TiVo, which is to have a local DVR. Further, it would be a bad move to try and compete with their vMVPD partners. TiVo needs to make DVRs, not streaming services that barely have any margin to begin with. YouTube TV is believed to be losing money, but Google is Google, DirecTV NOW is barely making money, AT&T is trying to grind out a profit on scale and vertical integration through the TW merger, and PS Vue is probably going to implode.


----------



## Scooby Doo (Dec 18, 2002)

hahathatsfunny said:


> A TiVo like Sling, but with local channels in the top 40 or 50 US markets, for an extra cost (let's say $10/extra)


A bit of perspective on why you are not going to see that. According to the ACA, average retransmission fees paid by cable and streaming operators are expected to rise to $19 per subscriber per month by 2020. That's $19 that Sling needs to pay and TiVo does not. Which gives you some idea of why in-home DVRs aren't going away soon.
(Corporate Broadcasters Force Exorbitant Rate Increases On Cable Customers)


----------



## compnurd (Oct 6, 2011)

Bigg said:


> The Pace MG1 is in use as well for TiVo. I don't know if the XG1 is still in use for TiVo, but at one point Medicom had an XG1 TiVo.
> 
> TiVo cannot compete with AT&T, DISH, Google, etc in the vMVPD space, and it defeats the entire purpose of TiVo, which is to have a local DVR. Further, it would be a bad move to try and compete with their vMVPD partners. TiVo needs to make DVRs, not streaming services that barely have any margin to begin with. YouTube TV is believed to be losing money, but Google is Google, DirecTV NOW is barely making money, AT&T is trying to grind out a profit on scale and vertical integration through the TW merger, and PS Vue is probably going to implode.


Correct. They now also use the MG2 which is bolt hardware


----------



## hahathatsfunny (Jul 29, 2008)

Bigg said:


> TiVo cannot compete with AT&T, DISH, Google, etc in the vMVPD space, and it defeats the entire purpose of TiVo, which is to have a local DVR. Further, it would be a bad move to try and compete with their vMVPD partners. TiVo needs to make DVRs, not streaming services that barely have any margin to begin with. YouTube TV is believed to be losing money, but Google is Google, DirecTV NOW is barely making money, AT&T is trying to grind out a profit on scale and vertical integration through the TW merger, and PS Vue is probably going to implode.


Well, how can TiVo compete with free DVR promotions offered by cable companies, such as Xfinity, and FIOS?

To the point of defeating the purpose of TiVo, I don't think TiVo purpose can be forever on just non cloud hard-drive based DVRs. It has been in the past and now, but that is it's quite limiting for the future. I've perceived TiVo wants people to use TiVo for the enhanced way of watching TV. It's business model is more geared towards the monthly subscription customer, as well.

If the vMVPD space is losing money, how come there more companies getting into it? philo isn't backed by a billion dollar company.



Scooby Doo said:


> A bit of perspective on why you are not going to see that. According to the ACA, average retransmission fees paid by cable and streaming operators are expected to rise to $19 per subscriber per month by 2020. That's $19 that Sling needs to pay and TiVo does not. Which gives you some idea of why in-home DVRs aren't going away soon.
> (Corporate Broadcasters Force Exorbitant Rate Increases On Cable Customers)


$11 to $19 over the next three years? Anyways, Sling doesn't offer ABC or CBS so it's not impacted as much. And for the rest of the carriers, from cable to YouTubeTV, they do carry the big 4 broadcast networks and end up passing on the retransmission fees to the consumer, but it wouldn't make a TiVo streaming any less competitive if it had it in the packages as well. I guess if that is the big issue, I'd rather it have the OTA input support then like the TiVo Bolt - although OTA reception is problematic for many.


----------



## tarheelblue32 (Jan 13, 2014)

hahathatsfunny said:


> If the vMVPD space is losing money, how come there more companies getting into it? philo isn't backed by a billion dollar company.


It's pretty well documented that the vMVPD companies are all either barely breaking even or are losing money. Philo exists because there was an opening in the market for a streaming service without any of the costly sports channels, but I'm guessing they're also barely breaking even.

All these streaming services are basically trying to build up a large enough user base with low prices before they start cranking up the price to actually start making a profit. It's essentially the same thing the cable and satellite companies do--offer you a low intro rate to suck you in and then raise the price on you later. Sling recently went from $20 to $25, a 25% price increase. Expect more price increases to come in the future.

Deeper Dive-What can be done to resuscitate the vMVPD market? | FierceVideo


----------



## tapokata (Apr 26, 2017)

The technology box canyon that TiVo is entering puts their current business model at some risk, and that is one reason why TiVo is moving away from making their own hardware. The CATV world, led by the likes of Comcast, is fast moving to IP distribution, and at some point soon, the cable card interface goes boom. The OTA market will be pressured, albeit more slowly, from the adoption of ATSC 3.0, which will quickly render current TV tuner technology obsolete. With the adoption of 3.0 at the local level, the local broadcaster will have the ability to fully deliver content to OTT devices. With all of that, the local hosted DVR becomes a quaint memory, like the VHS VCR. Rovi/TiVo's longterm business model focus will return to where it was before- on guide content, and the customer metrics generated from the use of that content.


----------



## mschnebly (Feb 21, 2011)

Some of the things that I really love about these streaming packages are no channel numbers, the ability to start and stop them with no contracts, the price is the price with no surprise fees and taxes and I can change back and forth between them without having to get new hardware any time I feel like swapping. I have an antenna for my locals (SD tuners) so the packages don't have to cover those. Nothing I hate more than having to be stuck to a contract for TV and then having to beg for a renewal at the end to keep "The Deal".


----------



## OrangeCrush (Feb 18, 2016)

mschnebly said:


> I would think that Roku could come out with a system to use a USB drive for recordings. That would work for their standalone streamers AND could be connected to their Roku branded TVs. Maybe make a simple little box with a couple of tuners and a HDD? Less than a Benjamin? A simple plug in drive wouldn't be over the average person's head to do. Plug it into your Roku TV's USB and instant DVR that could be portable? Seems like some genius R&D guy could come up with something.


If you set up a RokuTV with an antenna, it'll grab guide data and let you browse and search for upcoming shows. Add a USB flash drive and it can pause live TV. It's just a buffer though, it won't let you keep recordings or schedule an upcoming show to record, but really, they've already done most of the work to implement a full-fledged DVR system if they felt like it. It doesn't seem like Roku has much interest in going down that path, but maybe if the Amazon Recast is successful they'll change their mind.


----------



## mschnebly (Feb 21, 2011)

OrangeCrush said:


> If you set up a RokuTV with an antenna, it'll grab guide data and let you browse and search for upcoming shows. Add a USB flash drive and it can pause live TV. It's just a buffer though, it won't let you keep recordings or schedule an upcoming show to record, but really, they've already done most of the work to implement a full-fledged DVR system if they felt like it. It doesn't seem like Roku has much interest in going down that path, but maybe if the Amazon Recast is successful they'll change their mind.


It could be any after market company that could pull this off. As long as the apps are compatible with the different streamers. I use SD tuners with a Roku and ATV. The tuners are headless and will work with apps on multiple streamer at the same time. I can watch different local channels or the recordings on different TVs from my Roku and ATV at the very same time from the same set of tuners. Apps are the liberating part of all this change. The hardware is just cheap streamers that are becoming commodities.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

compnurd said:


> Correct. They now also use the MG2 which is bolt hardware


Is it the exact same motherboard, or just the same SoC?



hahathatsfunny said:


> Well, how can TiVo compete with free DVR promotions offered by cable companies, such as Xfinity, and FIOS?


By RCN, Atlantic Broadband, and other MSOs offering similar promotions with TiVos as the DVRs instead of X1 or VMS.



> To the point of defeating the purpose of TiVo, I don't think TiVo purpose can be forever on just non cloud hard-drive based DVRs. It has been in the past and now, but that is it's quite limiting for the future. I've perceived TiVo wants people to use TiVo for the enhanced way of watching TV. It's business model is more geared towards the monthly subscription customer, as well.


Eventually we might get to everything being streamed, but for the time being, there is still a market for DVRs, both in the MSO and retail spaces for OTA.



> If the vMVPD space is losing money, how come there more companies getting into it? philo isn't backed by a billion dollar company.


I don't know Philo's exact financial situation, but I'd guess VC funding. Most of them are backed by enormous companies, some enormous pay tv companies like AT&T and DISH, others enormous companies that are small players in the pay tv market like Google and Sony.



> $11 to $19 over the next three years? Anyways, Sling doesn't offer ABC or CBS so it's not impacted as much. And for the rest of the carriers, from cable to YouTubeTV, they do carry the big 4 broadcast networks and end up passing on the retransmission fees to the consumer, but it wouldn't make a TiVo streaming any less competitive if it had it in the packages as well. I guess if that is the big issue, I'd rather it have the OTA input support then like the TiVo Bolt - although OTA reception is problematic for many.


The small cable companies are probably going to be out of the TV business in a few years if that rate keeps up. My guess is that they will offer something like an AT&T or T-Mobile IP-based TV service bundled with their internet and phone service, and let the big guys deal with the greedy networks who keep jacking rates up farther and farther. This market is completely broken, which is why cord cutting is on track to accelerate even more. I would think that the vMVPDs either have to drop local channels or break them out into a separate package at some point, as the cost structure is not sustainable for them. AT&T might have a shot at it since they are so big, and SlingTV just won't pay exorbitant costs, as we've seen from DISH, which will just drop channels if they overcharge for carriage.


----------



## compnurd (Oct 6, 2011)

Bigg said:


> Is it the exact same motherboard, or just the same SoC?


That i dont know but the hardware specs last i looked where identical


----------



## OrangeCrush (Feb 18, 2016)

mschnebly said:


> It could be any after market company that could pull this off.


That's what Tablo, SiliconDust, Plex & Emby are doing, to varying degrees. Amazon could too, if they wanted to support non-Fire streamers with the Recast. There are probably new entrants waiting in the wings to release something too.


----------



## NashGuy (May 2, 2015)

mschnebly said:


> It could be any after market company that could pull this off. As long as the apps are compatible with the different streamers. I use SD tuners with a Roku and ATV. The tuners are headless and will work with apps on multiple streamer at the same time. I can watch different local channels or the recordings on different TVs from my Roku and ATV at the very same time from the same set of tuners. Apps are the liberating part of all this change. The hardware is just cheap streamers that are becoming commodities.


Yes. But the difference between the app-based approach you describe and what Amazon is doing on Fire TV with their Recast (or what Roku has done a little bit on Roku TVs with built-in tuners) is that Amazon and Roku are offering native/built-in/first-party/integrated (pick an adjective) support for OTA TV in their own home-screen UIs.

All of these TV-connected streaming platforms began with (and to a large extent, still have) a focus on third-party apps lined up as rows of little rectangles behind which is locked different discrete bundles of content organized by different UIs. But the next stage of these platforms' evolution is toward bringing together content from various sources into their own UIs. This move also supports their own direct-to-consumer video offerings, including add-on subscriptions from third parties. Amazon leads the way there with Prime Video and Amazon Channels but Roku and Apple have already publicly stated that they're going to follow suit soon.


----------



## nuraman00 (Dec 28, 2012)

hahathatsfunny said:


> What I would like TiVo to offer:
> A TiVo like Sling, but with local channels in the top 40 or 50 US markets, for an extra cost (let's say $10/extra). TiVo offering it's own TV packages like Sling TV.
> 
> So, for example, in the Philly market, TiVo would offer the equivalent of all the local channels covered by locast.org and a few more missing ones, have channel packages for cable networks like Sling does, all integrated, in as well. In addition, it would have the TiVo interface that we are familiar with, and have channel numbers and regular TiVo remote so one can type in a channel number.
> ...


Would the channels be in HD? All of them?


----------



## Scooby Doo (Dec 18, 2002)

Bigg said:


> The small cable companies are probably going to be out of the TV business in a few years if that rate keeps up. My guess is that they will offer something like an AT&T or T-Mobile IP-based TV service bundled with their internet and phone service, and let the big guys deal with the greedy networks who keep jacking rates up farther and farther. This market is completely broken, which is why cord cutting is on track to accelerate even more. I would think that the vMVPDs either have to drop local channels or break them out into a separate package at some point, as the cost structure is not sustainable for them. AT&T might have a shot at it since they are so big, and SlingTV just won't pay exorbitant costs, as we've seen from DISH, which will just drop channels if they overcharge for carriage.


I wouldn't say the market is broken. More like in transition. It's why I don't agree with those who suggest TiVo is finished. I think the fun is just beginning.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

Scooby Doo said:


> I wouldn't say the market is broken. More like in transition. It's why I don't agree with those who suggest TiVo is finished. I think the fun is just beginning.


The market is entirely broken. The price of cable TV is rocketing upwards due to greed and the tragedy of the commons. The entire business model is based around the late 1970's technology of analog traps that survived into the 2000's creating two arbitrary bundles of channels, which makes absolutely no sense in an all-digital world where a la carte is trivially easy for a cable company to do technically by pushing and revoking crypto keys instead of using physical analog traps. The channels that have benefitted from the bundle have gotten fat and lazy, are pushing out garbage content, and now with digital cable, there are so many channels that each try to have one show that a small but vocal minority of viewers "must have" along with a handful of relatively popular channels that still don't attract anything resembling a majority of pay tv subscribers. Then you've got ESPN that vastly overpaid for rights to every sport under the sun so that anyone who likes any sport "must have" ESPN, giving ESPN ridiculous leverage over pay tv providers.

The result is that each player has increased their carriage costs over and over again so that cable has shot up in price, causing cord cutting. I can guarantee that if Expanded Basic TV was still 50 channels and $30/mo, cord cutting would not be happening at nearly the rate that it is, even with Netflix and Amazon and Hulu all competing for viewers. Then, we also have the networks which are jacking up their rates over and over again, overcharging the affiliates, who then are left with no choice but to overcharge the cable companies who overcharge customers, causing yet more cord cutting.

Because the negotiations are all done in secret, and the local broadcast affiliates are allowed to charge cable companies for the "privilege" of doing the hard work of reliably repeating their signal to all corners of a market over tens of thousands of miles of fiber and coax, the prices that various providers pay are all different, and not known to other players. This encourages massive consolidation, i.e. Charter-TWC-BHN and AT&T-DirecTV to the point where most of the country is controlled by a few giant players in the market.

The result of all of this is that the whole pay tv industry is massively inefficient and bloated, churning out vast quantities of garbage that would never survive in a free market. Because of the tragedy of the commons, where various content providers have jacked up rates over and over again at a much higher rate than inflation, with no incentive to stop, the entire market is going to have some extremely painful changes in the coming decade. The pay tv industry cannot continue to grow at a rate higher than inflation indefinitely, as that would suggest that it eventually overtakes the entire US economy, which of course is ridiculous.

Instead of innovating and offering competitively priced services to compete with Netflix, Amazon, and Hulu, the industry has dug in even further and continued to raise prices over and over again, pushing more people to cord cutting, making the markets for streaming services, cord cutting devices and the like ever larger. Meanwhile, streaming service have snapped up a lot of the good content, created their own content, and broken a lot of the rules of the whole TV industry, re-inventing it.

Over the course of the next decade, we are going to see many, many cable channels go out of business and off the air, and the remaining cable channels will have to adjust to a new market that is much smaller and more concentrated. The broadcast networks will also have to adapt, as a lot of people are cutting the cord and not bothering with OTA, so they either have to market OTA or distribute content via alternate means. Live sports are the last stronghold of live TV, so there will be increased competition for those sports and the viewer attention that they garner, which is insanely valuable to advertisers.

TiVo is doing fairly well with MSO partnerships, but that's a shrinking market. The OTA DVR market might survive for a very long time due to the retransmission laws and the networks' reluctance to provide free streaming of their content to replace their free OTA broadcasts. If the current situation with broadcast holds, then TiVo has a big opportunity to move their industry-leading UX to ATSC 3.0 and the streaming model with a headless streaming DVR that works on many platforms, and has good, solid hardware. However, there will be a lot competition, as there are already several players in that space. TiVo's upside is that they have the best DVR UX out there, they have the best software, they know how to make a DVR work. TiVo's downside is that they are way too slow to adapt to new trends in the market and adopt new technologies. We'll see how they do over the course of the next few years as ATSC 3.0 goes live.


----------



## Diana Collins (Aug 21, 2002)

TiVo started out as a consumer electronics company, but over the last 10 years or so has become a MSO supplier. They have become ever more tightly bound to traditional MVPD industry and sees that as their market. This reached its end game when Rovi acquired TiVo. Rovi is a totally cable industry focused company. That's who TE4/Hydra was designed for, and that's who drives R&D. Sure the MSO market is shrinking, and TiVo is a part of it.


----------



## nuraman00 (Dec 28, 2012)

Bigg said:


> If the current situation with broadcast holds, then TiVo has a big opportunity to move their industry-leading UX to ATSC 3.0 and the streaming model with a headless streaming DVR that works on many platforms, and has good, solid hardware.


Could such a DVR also have a model that integrates with both streaming, and cable?


----------



## Joe3 (Dec 12, 2006)

Just a theory, no one who controls TiVo is under 30. 

It is run by old, decrepit, turstfund benefactors who are pushed around in wheelchairs by their nurses who warn them not to fart because they're tired of cleaning up the resulting accidents. One suggestion is that someone younger than 80 follow them around with a paper bag, and pop it. The sudden startling sound may send them off to meet their maker and they may be replaced by someone living in this century and not the last. Again, just an opinion.


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

Joe3 said:


> Just a theory, no one who controls TiVo is under 30.
> 
> It is run by old, decrepit, turstfund benefactors who are pushed around in wheelchairs by their nurses who warn them not to fart because they're tired of cleaning up the resulting accidents. One suggestion is that someone younger than 80 follow them around with a paper bag, and pop it. The sudden startling sound may send them off to meet their maker and they may be replaced by someone living in this century and not the last. Again, just an opinion.


I've met TiVo staffers. Nope.


----------



## Joe3 (Dec 12, 2006)

Mikeguy said:


> I've met TiVo staffers. Nope.


Never ment the staff as they do not set the company directives or company direction. I am sure the staff are a great group of hard working people who do what their boss tells them.

And the post was ment as a joke to poke the bear, not you.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

nuraman00 said:


> Could such a DVR also have a model that integrates with both streaming, and cable?


I suppose, if MSOs wanted to get on board with it, but traditionally, they have wanted their own hardware (or TiVo's hardware in this case) and more control over what apps and services their customers use on those boxes, versus allowing their services into an open marketplace.

Further, if they did want to allow their services on Roku and other platforms, why would they need to install a DVR at all when they could do everything in the cloud like Comcast has done with their Roku app? Maybe TiVo could provide the software for that type of experience, but there wouldn't need to be any hardware in-home.


----------



## CloudAtlas (Oct 29, 2013)

Diana Collins said:


> TiVo started out as a consumer electronics company, but over the last 10 years or so has become a MSO supplier. They have become ever more tightly bound to traditional MVPD industry and sees that as their market. This reached its end game when Rovi acquired TiVo. Rovi is a totally cable industry focused company. That's who TE4/Hydra was designed for, and that's who drives R&D. Sure the MSO market is shrinking, and TiVo is a part of it.


*'MVPD* stands for *multichannel* *video* *programming* *distributor*. What that means, in layman's terms, is a service that provides multiple television channels - a.k.a. a *cable* or *satellite* *television* service like Comcast, DirecTV, DISH, Cox, etc. *These were often formerly known as "operators" or "MSOs."'*

So in the above post acronymns MVPD and MSO are used interchangeably? I read the above post and I figured I might as well understand it.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

CloudAtlas said:


> So in the above post acronymns MVPD and MSO are used interchangeably? I read the above post and I figured I might as well understand it.


They may have gotten crossed somewhere, but MVPD is supposed to be a Multichannel Video ProviDer, i.e. any provider that offers bundles of channels via their own infrastructure, be it satellite, cable, or IPTV. An MSO is a Multiple System Operator, i.e. a cable company that bought up a bunch of smaller cable systems. Verizon, Frontier, and Cinci Bell aren't really MSOs even though they offer cable, since they built their system at regional scale on their own, versus operating a bunch of little systems, although I suppose you could argue that each Verizon or Frontier VHO is a system, even though it's orders of magnitude larger than the systems cable companies are operating, which typically cover half a dozen towns, not entire regions of the country like VHOs.


----------



## ej42137 (Feb 16, 2014)

Don't they have Google where you live?

This is what I get at the top of the page when I search on "defing mvpd":

The Telecommunications Act of 1996 amended Section 602 (13) of the Communications Act of 1934 to *define* a "Multichannel video programming distributor" (*MVPD*) as "a person such as, but not limited to, a cable operator, a multichannel multipoint distribution service, a direct broadcast satellite service, or a television ...​So apparently it's a term with a legal definition.


----------



## wco81 (Dec 28, 2001)

Diana Collins said:


> TiVo started out as a consumer electronics company, but over the last 10 years or so has become a MSO supplier. They have become ever more tightly bound to traditional MVPD industry and sees that as their market. This reached its end game when Rovi acquired TiVo. Rovi is a totally cable industry focused company. That's who TE4/Hydra was designed for, and that's who drives R&D. Sure the MSO market is shrinking, and TiVo is a part of it.


Is MSO shrinking or just not growing?

Seems cord-cutting hasn't really accelerated.

Tivo is going to have to tap into the installed base for upgrades. For that, it's pretty much dependent on what MSOs do. For instance, if 4k channels became available and cable systems upgraded to support enough of those channels, I'm sure a lot of Tivo owners will upgrade.

Otherwise, I see no point in upgrading from Roamio to Bolt.

Maybe if they upgraded the boxes to become a great streaming client in addition to working well with cable, that would be an enticement as well.

I've used Amazon Prime and Hulu with my Roamio but the experience isn't the best. I would probably be in the market for Apple TV 4K or their next streaming box at some point. Tivo could improve its streaming experience but it would still be tied to expensive hardware and services that put it way beyond the price of even the most expensive streaming boxes.

Plus you have to ask, for those who want the best streaming box, why would they bother with an expensive piece of hardware which serves cable channels? You can get better video and audio from streaming services now so why pay for recording cable TV shows?

That is why Tivo needs broadcast and cable networks to offer 4K HDR content and for MSOs to offer those channels. Then they'll get a lot of existing customers to upgrade.


----------



## TiVo_Ted (Oct 3, 2000)

compnurd said:


> That i dont know but the hardware specs last i looked where identical


Hmm. Did you check the line for network connectivity?


----------



## TiVo_Ted (Oct 3, 2000)

Joe3 said:


> Just a theory, no one who controls TiVo is under 30.
> 
> It is run by old, decrepit, turstfund benefactors who are pushed around in wheelchairs by their nurses who warn them not to fart because they're tired of cleaning up the resulting accidents. One suggestion is that someone younger than 80 follow them around with a paper bag, and pop it. The sudden startling sound may send them off to meet their maker and they may be replaced by someone living in this century and not the last. Again, just an opinion.


OMG, I laughed so hard I think I just peed a little. Nurse, bring me a new diaper stat!!


----------



## skypros (May 19, 2015)

Nothing like the -30 y/o that walk around with their head down staring at their phone while sucking on a vape pen..... Trying to hold up their pants.
I am just kidding, I am just trying to poke the Otter



Joe3 said:


> Just a theory, no one who controls TiVo is under 30.
> 
> It is run by old, decrepit, turstfund benefactors who are pushed around in wheelchairs by their nurses who warn them not to fart because they're tired of cleaning up the resulting accidents. One suggestion is that someone younger than 80 follow them around with a paper bag, and pop it. The sudden startling sound may send them off to meet their maker and they may be replaced by someone living in this century and not the last. Again, just an opinion.


----------



## jfalkingham (Jul 23, 2002)

As long as they are able to monetize data, then they are in good shape. The only changes to any TiVo software will happen only if it does one of the following :

- feeds what the MSO wants. 
- supports the harvesting of more data to monetize. 

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk


----------



## compnurd (Oct 6, 2011)

TiVo_Ted said:


> Hmm. Did you check the line for network connectivity?


Lol am I missing something with this?

Seems like they both have gigabit and Moca


----------



## compnurd (Oct 6, 2011)

wco81 said:


> Is MSO shrinking or just not growing?
> 
> Seems cord-cutting hasn't really accelerated.
> 
> ...


I would say MSO is growing as the cable companies convert people on there old Motorola and SA cable boxes to TiVo ones


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

wco81 said:


> Is MSO shrinking or just not growing?


MSO refers to the physical system, so growing, since broadband is growing, even though TV is shrinking. As long as you go by number of subs anyway, ARPU might be shrinking a bit. But then again, profit margins are about constant. So I guess it depends on how you count.



> Seems cord-cutting hasn't really accelerated.


It's been accelerating for several years. But when the MSO is a monopoly, they make just as much money off of cord cutting as they do off of the cord.



> Tivo is going to have to tap into the installed base for upgrades. For that, it's pretty much dependent on what MSOs do. For instance, if 4k channels became available and cable systems upgraded to support enough of those channels, I'm sure a lot of Tivo owners will upgrade.


The major MSOs would only do 4k over IPTV, which they won't open up to TiVo.



compnurd said:


> I would say MSO is growing as the cable companies convert people on there old Motorola and SA cable boxes to TiVo ones


But the MSO video market as a whole is shrinking. That's a good point though. TiVo's MSO market could be growing while the entire MSO market is shrinking.


----------



## just4tivo (Dec 9, 2015)

TiVo_Ted said:


> OMG, I laughed so hard I think I just peed a little. Nurse, bring me a new diaper stat!!


The expected time frame for the resolution of your diaper problem is between 7-14 days.


----------



## TiVo_Ted (Oct 3, 2000)

compnurd said:


> Lol am I missing something with this?
> 
> Seems like they both have gigabit and Moca


BOLT has 2x2 802.11ac. MG2 does not have wireless. Same generation of silicon, completely different design.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## CloudAtlas (Oct 29, 2013)

Bigg said:


> The major MSOs would only do 4k over IPTV, which they won't open up to TiVo.


Unless it was FCC mandated like CC was, right? I'd imagine it would just take one of the FAANG companies putting political pressure to open up IPTV proprietary networks. I'm assuming at least one of companies is interested in being part of the future of home viewing.


----------



## mschnebly (Feb 21, 2011)

CloudAtlas said:


> Unless it was FCC mandated like CC was, right? I'd imagine it would just take one of the FAANG companies putting political pressure to open up IPTV proprietary networks. I'm assuming at least one of companies is interested in being part of the future of home viewing.


I'd think those companies would just try to get an app created for them. Similar to YTTV or DirecTV Now.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

CloudAtlas said:


> Unless it was FCC mandated like CC was, right? I'd imagine it would just take one of the FAANG companies putting political pressure to open up IPTV proprietary networks. I'm assuming at least one of companies is interested in being part of the future of home viewing.


That whole effort imploded, as the cable people undermined the whole standard, and it eventually died. The other issue is that the entire pay tv market is imploding, so building a standard today for something that probably won't exist in any significant form in 10 years doesn't really make much sense.


----------



## NashGuy (May 2, 2015)

Latest wrinkle in the corporate drama surrounding TiVo: one analyst covering the pending acquisition of Arris by CommScope thinks that CommScope will likely sell off Arris's struggling set-top box business after the merger. Arris, of course, is TiVo's manufacturing partner, handling production of TiVo hardware for both retail and MSO sales. From the article at Light Reading:

_Arris's set-top box business has been pressured by components shortages, the US tariffs on Chinese goods and the video market's general migration to Roku players and other retail streaming devices that support pay-TV apps. Excluding the tariffs issue, Technicolor is also dealing with similar pressures and is reportedly considering a sale of its set-top box business too.
_​Will be interesting to see what shakes out with Arris in 2019 and how that impacts TiVo's future.


----------



## wco81 (Dec 28, 2001)

As streaming takes off, viewers are being conditioned to settle for having restricted access to on demand content in the cloud.

That means you have a certain window to watch older seasons of a show but once you get passed that, you have to pay to get that old content.

So the content owners don't want people to have Tivos to store older content indefinitely. For instance, I have a partial season of Unreal show on my Roamio. But I subscribed to Hulu, with commercials, to view the episodes I don't have. You can't skip those obnoxious commercials either.

But I've had these recordings for 2-3 years now and when I view them, I can skip commercials easily.

Viewers are being conditioned to subscribe to streaming services or having to buy iTunes downloads, rather than keep such older content under their control.


----------



## Joe3 (Dec 12, 2006)

Good news for Rovi/TiVo!

However, can they know a gift when they see it?

The belows link reveals Comcast is raising their prices.

Comcast raises cable TV bills again-even if you're under contract - Ars Technica

You may wonder why it's good news for Rovi/TiVo. It is because they are standing in the way of the Evil Empire's (cable) plan "B", which is to migrate to streaming, bring in subscriptions at a lower cost to subscribers, and to slowly bring the prices up to where they are now by controlling subscribers through their cloud. This also will allow the Evil Empire to control content so you can pay for it over and over again as they make content go in an out of circulation. It's a trick they play that works ever since when.

Rovi/TiVo gives their subscribers a personal cloud that the subscribers control or at least gives subscribers a way stay in control by allowing for a personal library where Rovi/TiVo subscribers don't have to pay for their entertainment twice because they control availability of that content.

But whether Rovi/TiVo current direction is capable of seeing this as its salvation while in bed with the dying, old, STD, smelling hag, the cable industry, remains to be seen.


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

NashGuy said:


> Latest wrinkle in the corporate drama surrounding TiVo: one analyst covering the pending acquisition of Arris by CommScope thinks that CommScope will likely sell off Arris's struggling set-top box business after the merger. Arris, of course, is TiVo's manufacturing partner, handling production of TiVo hardware for both retail and MSO sales. From the article at Light Reading:
> 
> _Arris's set-top box business has been pressured by components shortages, the US tariffs on Chinese goods and the video market's general migration to Roku players and other retail streaming devices that support pay-TV apps. Excluding the tariffs issue, Technicolor is also dealing with similar pressures and is reportedly considering a sale of its set-top box business too.
> _​Will be interesting to see what shakes out with Arris in 2019 and how that impacts TiVo's future.


Maybe TiVo/Rovi can buy the division.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

wco81 said:


> So the content owners don't want people to have Tivos to store older content indefinitely. For instance, I have a partial season of Unreal show on my Roamio. But I subscribed to Hulu, with commercials, to view the episodes I don't have. You can't skip those obnoxious commercials either.


Most people aren't archiving content. We are a tiny, tiny minority. As more and more great content comes out, long term storage and archival becomes less attractive, and people move on to the next thing anyway.


----------



## wco81 (Dec 28, 2001)

I agree. I'm not archiving content, just haven't gotten around to watching it.

But I guess people are okay subscribing to watch older content.


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

Bigg said:


> Most people aren't archiving content. We are a tiny, tiny minority. As more and more great content comes out, long term storage and archival becomes less attractive, and people move on to the next thing anyway.


I was just thinking the contrary view the other day, when I went to YouTube to watch some theatrical clips I wanted to watch, only to find they are there no longer.


----------



## nuraman00 (Dec 28, 2012)

Mikeguy said:


> I was just thinking the contrary view the other day, when I went to YouTube to watch some theatrical clips I wanted to watch, only to find they are there no longer.


I've ran into this before too. I bookmark some videos on YouTube to watch later. Then when I'm ready to watch, they're gone.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

Mikeguy said:


> I was just thinking the contrary view the other day, when I went to YouTube to watch some theatrical clips I wanted to watch, only to find they are there no longer.


That's true. People or companies can, for whatever illogical reasons, remove YouTube content. I just don't see most people looking to retain stuff over the long term in the fast-paced world with tons of great content that we are living in. I also find that the niche content that I watch stays up forever, I can dig back years on YouTube. In my experience with YouTube on the TV, however, I have found that YouTube's 10 foot interface sucks, and doesn't allow you to effectively manage your Water Later or do much of anything else. They really need to revamp it, as their 10 foot interface watching is skyrocketing as more 5- to 15-minute content is being produced for YouTube that is well suited to couch viewing. The actual video quality and CDN is great, it's just the UX isn't quite where it needs to be. I have to manually manage my videos on my smartphone if I want to manage my Watch Later list while I'm watching on my TV.


----------



## Joe3 (Dec 12, 2006)

Bigg said:


> As more and more great content comes out, long term storage and archival becomes less attractive, and people move on to the next thing anyway.


No, people want to do both. You can't dismiss the Disney business model of rotation of their library in and out of availability, which causes people to rent or buy their product again and again because they did not have the ability to purchase once and to archive once under their control. Also, the movies like "It's a Wonderful Life," movies that are licenses so many times with each new license holder expecting most people who can not archive to a personal archive will inevitably purchase, again and again.

This is a big TiVo selling point. This is why to many of us, the lack of PC transfers back to TE4 is a real big issue. We are concerned that are investment and future investments are in the wrong hands because it shows the utter blindness of Rovi/TiVo directional leadership to one of its best and unique selling points. Because it has already been pointed out that people will *not* spend big money on something prettier than a standard cable box, but will spend money on a TiVo if it gives them more freedom in their homes to control the content.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

Joe3 said:


> No, people want to do both. You can't dismiss the Disney business model of rotation of their library in and out of availability, which causes people to rent or buy their product again and again because they did not have the ability to purchase once and to archive once under their control. Also, the movies like "It's a Wonderful Life," movies that are licenses so many times with each new license holder expecting most people who can not archive to a personal archive will inevitably purchase, again and again.
> 
> This is a big TiVo selling point. This is why to many of us, the lack of PC transfers back to TE4 is a real big issue. We are concerned that are investment and future investments are in the wrong hands because it shows the utter blindness of Rovi/TiVo directional leadership to one of its best and unique selling points. Because it has already been pointed out that people will *not* spend big money on something prettier than a standard cable box, but will spend money on a TiVo if it gives them more freedom in their homes to control the content.


There are a small subset of power user archivers, but I think for the most part, your average person is fine with whatever is available at that point in time, and isn't going to put much time, energy, or money into archival. I don't think archival was ever a selling point for TiVo except amongst a small group of very technologically advanced users like us. Losing a feature like that is inexcusable, as the small fan base is pretty avid about stuff like that, but it's not something that has any mass-market appeal, and I'd bet that 80% of TiVo users out there have never transferred a recording off to a PC. The ones who are doing mobile transfers are likely watching and deleting pretty quickly. I think your first point is valid, which is why TiVo's retail market keep shrinking, as cable DVRs good "good enough for government work", and now cable itself is imploding, but I don't think TiVo's selling point was ever about having more control over content, other than MRV and TiVo Minis before the MSOs rolled out that type of functionality. That, however, was for a use case that was still watch-and-delete, just with multiple TVs and multiple users spread out throughout a household. That functionality was never marketed, nor received by the market as an archival strategy, or for TTG.

I think TiVo was ahead of the curve in some ways, with mobile device viewing, multi-room viewing, etc, but the mobile device stuff especially was too kludge to use in-home, and now has largely been replaced by cloud and streaming, while multi-room viewing is now available on most cable and satellite systems, and in the case of cable is moving towards the cloud for both DVR and VOD (which is already all IP-based on Comcast X1). TiVo also pioneered binge watching in a way with bigger hard drives that could be used to store up multiple episodes to watch at once, but again, the use case never took off until Netflix, cloud and streaming came together to make it super simple and cheap to use.


----------



## nuraman00 (Dec 28, 2012)

Bigg said:


> I'd like to see a headless server box that has RF, Ethernet, power, USB, and nothing else that can stream to apps on FireTV, Roku, Chromecast, AndroidTV, and AppleTV, as well as all TiVo Minis for people who want the full TiVo Experience, transcoding as necessary for the older boxes of all types, including TiVo Minis that can't decode HEVC. I'd like to see it support at least 4 streams out of the box at once, all with hardware transcoding, and streaming over the LAN or internet to smartphones, tablets, and PCs. It should also come with at least 1TB of storage, although they could make a model that uses an external hard drive for folks who like to build their own system with more storage.


So would someone be able to stream and store content?


----------



## dadrepus (Jan 4, 2012)

A little company called Silicondust is doing most of what we want Tivo to do. It now has the dvr software for multiple clients, a box that can do the transcoding (with 2 tuners they are working on more). You need an external hard drive although I heard they are working on a 1 box solution like the Recast. They are starting to offer "premium" channels of their own and the guide is only $2/month. I think "Lon" has a few videos on the subject. Certainly a consideration when my Tivo's finally bite the dust. It easily integrates with Plex as well although Plex has their own DVR software that also removes commercials. I read the reviews on the Amazon Recast, not very good so far.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

nuraman00 said:


> So would someone be able to stream and store content?


Huh? It would be like a Tablo, but with TiVo's UI/UX.


----------



## NYHeel (Oct 7, 2003)

Bigg said:


> Most people aren't archiving content. We are a tiny, tiny minority. As more and more great content comes out, long term storage and archival becomes less attractive, and people move on to the next thing anyway.


Is that why shows like Seinfeld and Friends make a fortune in syndication? Sure, storing all that data isn't common. But the desire to watch older content is as prevalent as it ever was, if not more prevalent now. There's a reason there are websites which track shows/movies moving off of Netflix/streaming. People like to watch old content regardless of the availability of new content. The move towards streaming is likely to make that process more expensive and more restrictive.


----------



## mschnebly (Feb 21, 2011)

Joe3 said:


> Good news for Rovi/TiVo!
> 
> However, can they know a gift when they see it?
> 
> ...


I think TiVo is such a drop in the bucket that your "Evil Empire" doesn't even notice they are around. 
Most of the folks I know who use streamers don't have a clue what they want to watch, or maybe just a general idea, until they look around and something catches their eye.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

NYHeel said:


> Is that why shows like Seinfeld and Friends make a fortune in syndication? Sure, storing all that data isn't common. But the desire to watch older content is as prevalent as it ever was, if not more prevalent now. There's a reason there are websites which track shows/movies moving off of Netflix/streaming. People like to watch old content regardless of the availability of new content. The move towards streaming is likely to make that process more expensive and more restrictive.


Sure, lots of people watch re-runs or buy DVDs or Blu-Rays of older shows. However, most people don't archive. They just don't.



mschnebly said:


> I think TiVo is such a drop in the bucket that your "Evil Empire" doesn't even notice they are around.
> Most of the folks I know who use streamers don't have a clue what they want to watch, or maybe just a general idea, until they look around and something catches their eye.


Exactly. A lot of people just browse, as opposed to people like us who already know what we want to watch. Streaming just makes browsing so much easier, as it's all on demand now.


----------



## NYHeel (Oct 7, 2003)

Bigg said:


> Sure, lots of people watch re-runs or buy DVDs or Blu-Rays of older shows. However, most people don't archive. They just don't.
> 
> Exactly. A lot of people just browse, as opposed to people like us who already know what we want to watch. Streaming just makes browsing so much easier, as it's all on demand now.


There's a big difference between archiving and just watching a show 6-12 months after it aired. Few people archive but many do the latter. Heck that's Netflix's TV business model.


----------



## Joe3 (Dec 12, 2006)

mschnebly said:


> I think TiVo is such a drop in the bucket that your "Evil Empire" doesn't even notice they are around.
> Most of the folks I know who use streamers don't have a clue what they want to watch, or maybe just a general idea, until they look around and something catches their eye.





NYHeel said:


> There's a big difference between archiving and just watching a show 6-12 months after it aired. Few people archive but many do the latter. Heck that's Netflix's TV business model.





Bigg said:


> Sure, lots of people watch re-runs or buy DVDs or Blu-Rays of older shows. However, most people don't archive. They just don't.
> Exactly. A lot of people just browse, as opposed to people like us who already know what we want to watch. Streaming just makes browsing so much easier, as it's all on demand now.


Streaming is about to get more complicated as you may know, streaming will be changed in next 18-24 months into something more complicated and much more expensive. Netflix, Amazon Prime, and Hulu are about to become a lot thinner with their offerings. "The Evil Empire," starting with Disney, will be taking back their content and creating their own streaming silos and will be charging separately you if want that program. What use to be offered in one place for about ten dollar will be broken up and sold separately from many places, which we have no control over in cost and availability. Therefore, adding to our cost of entertainment dollars. They're getting ready to come after our dollar like a swarm locusts. The new content streaming services coming down the road are not giving, they're taking!

I still say it's good news for Rovi/TiVo if they play this smart, (however, there's no evidence of it) because you purchased once and save it once to your own digital library without spending 10 dollars a month per service for one or two show a year.

Example of what's happening, X 10 below:

WarnerMedia's new streaming service will determine what you can access based on three tiers of membership


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

Already happened with espn (Disney). Used to be able to get a ton of stuff “free” if you were a tv subscriber via ESPN3. Now a good chunk of that content is now ESPN+ and costs money. There is still some ESPN3 with a tv sub but a lot less. They added more games but still they got people using streaming then added a tier.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

NYHeel said:


> There's a big difference between archiving and just watching a show 6-12 months after it aired. Few people archive but many do the latter. Heck that's Netflix's TV business model.


Some might do that, but I think DVRs are primarily used to time shift within a week or two of when something was aired.



Joe3 said:


> Streaming is about to get more complicated as you may know, streaming will be changed in next 18-24 months into something more complicated and much more expensive. Netflix, Amazon Prime, and Hulu are about to become a lot thinner with their offerings. "The Evil Empire," starting with Disney, will be taking back their content and creating their own streaming silos and will be charging separately you if want that program. What use to be offered in one place for about ten dollar will be broken up and sold separately from many places, which we have no control over in cost and availability. Therefore, adding to our cost of entertainment dollars. They're getting ready to come after our dollar like a swarm locusts. The new content streaming services coming down the road are not giving, they're taking!


I think that will happen, but I think there's going to be a lot of pushback from consumers, either by just not subscribing to Disney when they pull this stunt, or by rotating streaming services, sharing passwords, etc. People have gotten used to entertainment being WAY cheaper, so they're not going to start paying more without a fight.



> I still say it's good news for Rovi/TiVo if they play this smart, (however, there's no evidence of it) because you purchased once and save it once to your own digital library without spending 10 dollars a month per service for one or two show a year.


What?


----------



## mschnebly (Feb 21, 2011)

Joe3 said:


> Streaming is about to get more complicated as you may know, streaming will be changed in next 18-24 months into something more complicated and much more expensive. Netflix, Amazon Prime, and Hulu are about to become a lot thinner with their offerings. "The Evil Empire," starting with Disney, will be taking back their content and creating their own streaming silos and will be charging separately you if want that program. What use to be offered in one place for about ten dollar will be broken up and sold separately from many places, which we have no control over in cost and availability. Therefore, adding to our cost of entertainment dollars. They're getting ready to come after our dollar like a swarm locusts. The new content streaming services coming down the road are not giving, they're taking!
> 
> I still say it's good news for Rovi/TiVo if they play this smart, (however, there's no evidence of it) because you purchased once and save it once to your own digital library without spending 10 dollars a month per service for one or two show a year.
> 
> ...


I just don't see where it's going to benefit TiVo since they cant record streaming TV. That is done through each app.


----------



## Joe3 (Dec 12, 2006)

Bigg said:


> mschnebly said:
> 
> 
> > I just don't see where it's going to benefit TiVo since they cant record streaming TV. That is done through each app.
> ...


After the initial release.

DVD to PC and PC to TiVo.


----------



## smark (Nov 20, 2002)

Bigg said:


> Some might do that, but I think DVRs are primarily used to time shift within a week or two of when something was aired.
> 
> I think that will happen, but I think there's going to be a lot of pushback from consumers, either by just not subscribing to Disney when they pull this stunt, or by rotating streaming services, sharing passwords, etc. People have gotten used to entertainment being WAY cheaper, so they're not going to start paying more without a fight.
> 
> What?


They have had the ability to be far more restrictive in streaming as far as password sharing, home location and multiple streams. I expect these will begin to tighten up.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

Joe3 said:


> After the initial release.
> 
> DVD to PC and PC to TiVo.


What are you saying? Those aren't even sentences, just a bunch of words mashed together. EXPLAIN what you are trying to say.


----------



## mschnebly (Feb 21, 2011)

Joe3 said:


> After the initial release.
> 
> DVD to PC and PC to TiVo.


If you have the DVD there is no reason to go to PC and then on to TiVo. Just watch the DVD


----------



## Joe3 (Dec 12, 2006)

mschnebly said:


> If you have the DVD there is no reason to go to PC and then on to TiVo. Just watch the DVD


Well, the same reason I would not put in a CD to listen to a song. I like content in one place digitally, with no mess to go through and no fuss to get it to play. One purchase, one save to my digital personal library on TiVo accomplishes it for me.

I don't know how many times I go through my content and change my original choice because I discovered something better to watch. Personal control of content in the home by hard drives, controls the cost from many pay streaming services now and to come. I don't need be charged for each delivery stream that will be commingling and running down the road, chasing my credit card for the privilege of using their streaming systems, when I can create one personal TiVo hard drive, server, which delivers content control better than any streaming services because it does it instantly. No hassle from the Evil Empire throttling back bits or buffers that will give you a quality PQ stream if Evil Empire feels like giving it. No being slowly dragged by the Evil Empire back into the same old content control business model that allows you the privilege of paying top dollar for cheap content. The Evil Empire's business model is all about controlling content. The Evil Empire was never about a free open competition because the Evil Empire knows once they're back in control it's cheaper for them to shine s**t, and they know if you have nothing better to compare it to, you'll buy sh**t and make them richer than anything imaginable. This is our consumer Death Star. The rebellion has destroyed Death Star Cable. The Evil Empire is now frantically building the next Death Star to accomplish the same mission of control.

Giving the Rovi/TiVo direction as of late, and undone capacity, I wonder what side is Rovi/TiVo on.


----------



## nuraman00 (Dec 28, 2012)

Bigg said:


> Huh? It would be like a Tablo, but with TiVo's UI/UX.


How is a Tablo different than a Tivo Bolt OTA? Other than a Tablo having built in Wi-Fi, and a different amount of internal storage available.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

nuraman00 said:


> How is a Tablo different than a Tivo Bolt OTA? Other than a Tablo having built in Wi-Fi, and a different amount of internal storage available.


Totally different paradigm of a local DVR vs. a headless network DVR. 180 degree opposite solutions to the same problem.


----------



## Lurker1 (Jun 4, 2004)

nuraman00 said:


> How is a Tablo different than a Tivo Bolt OTA? Other than a Tablo having built in Wi-Fi, and a different amount of internal storage available.


https://www.tablotv.com/blog/tablo-vs-tivo-roamio-ota-cost-feature-comparison/


----------



## nuraman00 (Dec 28, 2012)

Bigg said:


> Totally different paradigm of a local DVR vs. a headless network DVR. 180 degree opposite solutions to the same problem.





Lurker1 said:


> https://www.tablotv.com/blog/tablo-vs-tivo-roamio-ota-cost-feature-comparison/


That was helpful.

Now I understand it better.

One of my TVs is not a smart TV. It doesn't appear that Tablo has a HDMI connection.

Would I have to buy an external streamer, and have that connect to my TV, as well as Tablo?

Also, how could I use Tablo if I was using the non smart TV, and all I wanted was OTA channels (no streaming)?


----------



## BobCamp1 (May 15, 2002)

nuraman00 said:


> That was helpful.
> 
> Now I understand it better.
> 
> ...


You want the Amazon Recast DVR for $230 including the service. Then you buy a $40 Fire TV stick (or two for $50) and turn that "dumb" TV into a smart one. With the stick, you can also stream other stuff besides your DVR content.

That's the product most people ever need. Time shift a few shows and watch them within a week or two. Stream everything else.

Tivo's product is high end, and makes sense for some people. But most can get by with just the Recast. That's Rovi's problem -- they don't have a low end or mid-range solution.


----------



## CloudAtlas (Oct 29, 2013)

Joe3 said:


> Well, the same reason I would not put in a CD to listen to a song. I like content in one place digitally, with no mess to go through and no fuss to get it to play. One purchase, one save to my digital personal library on TiVo accomplishes it for me.


For $2 you can get an online digital copy of a DVD or BluRay viewable anywhere. There's even an option to upgrade your DVDs to full 1080p (HDX) for those who'd rather not watch 480P SD. Avoids the need for a PC for archive storage.

Also allows you to import your movies from iTunes, Amazon, Google Play, Vudu, Microsoft Movies & FandangoNOW. I moved most of my DVDs to the cloud so I could get rid of them, and watch them anywhere, much like I did with my CDs and iTunes Match.


----------



## Joe3 (Dec 12, 2006)

CloudAtlas said:


> For $2 you can get an online digital copy of a DVD or BluRay viewable anywhere. There's even an option to upgrade your DVDs to full 1080p (HDX) for those who'd rather not watch 480P SD. Avoids the need for a PC for archive storage.
> 
> Also allows you to import your movies from iTunes, Amazon, Google Play, Vudu, Microsoft Movies & FandangoNOW. I moved most of my DVDs to the cloud so I could get rid of them, and watch them anywhere, much like I did with my CDs and iTunes Match.


Sounds good, what is the option and who owns and controls the content?


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

nuraman00 said:


> Would I have to buy an external streamer, and have that connect to my TV, as well as Tablo?
> 
> Also, how could I use Tablo if I was using the non smart TV, and all I wanted was OTA channels (no streaming)?


Go on Tablo's website. It's compatible with Roku, Apple TV, etc. The cost to scale out is super cheap, as streaming devices can be had for $25 on Prime Day (FireTV) or Black Friday types of sales.



BobCamp1 said:


> You want the Amazon Recast DVR for $230 including the service. Then you buy a $40 Fire TV stick (or two for $50) and turn that "dumb" TV into a smart one. With the stick, you can also stream other stuff besides your DVR content.


Tablo is a much better buy, as it works with virtually any streaming device, not just FireTV.


----------



## CloudAtlas (Oct 29, 2013)

Joe3 said:


> Sounds good, what is the option and who owns and controls the content?


Disc to digital via Vudu. Movies Anywhere is owned by Disney (was Disney Movies Anywhere). The studios participating are Disney, Sony Pictures, Twentieth Century Fox, Universal, Warner Bros along with Apple, Google, Amazon and Walmart/Vudu.

The idea is to allow legal viewing of your purchased movies anywhere regardless of if you bought a DVD, BluRay, or a digital copy from iTunes, Google Play, Prime Video, or Vudu. 
https://help.moviesanywhere.com/hc/...my-Blu-ray-or-DVD-if-it-didn-t-come-with-one-


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

mschnebly said:


> If you have the DVD there is no reason to go to PC and then on to TiVo. Just watch the DVD


While O have zero desire to watch a DVD. Since I stopped watch in them thirteen years ago. I do go BD to PC, and can stream to TiVo and other devices through Plex. Just like my TiVo recordings go to Plex, in case I need to watch something later that has been deleted off of a TiVo.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

CloudAtlas said:


> Disc to digital via Vudu. Movies Anywhere is owned by Disney (was Disney Movies Anywhere). The studios participating are Disney, Sony Pictures, Twentieth Century Fox, Universal, Warner Bros along with Apple, Google, Amazon and Walmart/Vudu.
> 
> The idea is to allow legal viewing of your purchased movies anywhere regardless of if you bought a DVD, BluRay, or a digital copy from iTunes, Google Play, Prime Video, or Vudu.
> https://help.moviesanywhere.com/hc/...my-Blu-ray-or-DVD-if-it-didn-t-come-with-one-


The same thing I've been doing since 2007 with Vudu. All the content I purchased between 2007 and 2009 is still available to watch. But in 2009:I started ripping my BD titles to a home server, so I don't purchase digital versions as much as I used to.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk


----------



## Diana Collins (Aug 21, 2002)

This goes back to a very old discussion about the use of DVRs that predates the advent of streaming services: _Are DVRs a viable archival storage device?_

My opinion has always been "No." That's why we have a Plex server with a 24TB RAID 5 array. DVRs are for transient storage...record, view, erase.

As for PC to TiVo transfers, I honestly find using Plex far simpler. For TiVo recordings I want to archive, I use kmttg to move from TiVo to PC, and extract the skip points if available, and then use VideoReDo to edit out commercials, and save as a MKV file. Then I drop it into a folder on the Plex server. Done.

The reality is that there is very little on TV these days that I want to archive. Most of the additions to our library for the past year or two have been movies, either ripped from BD or downloaded digital copies.


----------



## CloudAtlas (Oct 29, 2013)

aaronwt said:


> The same thing I've been doing since 2007 with Vudu. All the content I purchased between 2007 and 2009 is still available to watch. But in 2009:I started ripping my BD titles to a home server, so I don't purchase digital versions as much as I used to.


Unlike BD if you buy a HD digital copy from iTunes and later on a higher quality version becomes available (4K, HDR10, Dolby Vision, or Dolby Atmos) you will be upgraded for free. Nice way to future-proof your movie investment.

And the iTunes digital copy is added to your Movies Anywhere library viewable on Vudu, Prime and Google Play.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

CloudAtlas said:


> Unlike BD if you buy a HD digital copy from iTunes and later on a higher quality version becomes available (4K, HDR10, Dolby Vision, or Dolby Atmos) you will be upgraded for free. Nice way to future-proof your movie investment.
> 
> And the iTunes digital copy is added to your Movies Anywhere library viewable on Vudu, Prime and Google Play.


I only recently started using Apple. My first Apple HArdware in forty years. I had actively avoided using Apple products since the late 70's. But I got an ATV 4K for free with the DTV Now promotion. So I only have a few titles that were upgraded to UHD. And I'm guessing those may have been by accident. Since all those carried over from Vudu or my UltraViolet redemptions.


----------



## Joe3 (Dec 12, 2006)

Diana Collins said:


> This goes back to a very old discussion about the use of DVRs that predates the advent of streaming services: _Are DVRs a viable archival storage device?_
> 
> My opinion has always been "No." That's why we have a Plex server with a 24TB RAID 5 array. DVRs are for transient storage...record, view, erase.


We seem to be in agreement that off loading content to a server is a good thing. However, using a Plex as a server or anyone else is depending on them to stick around and not so much you. I remember *Vox* was an Internet blogging service but when they went down and out of business on them, everyone lost their content and there wasn't anything anyone could do about their loss. Theses so-called services could get up one morning and change their services.

The opportunity for Rovi/TiVo is to put their customers in control by allowing them to set up their own server with a 24TB RAID 5 array or any other of a variety of solutions that they can purchase for themselves. Some solutions would even have better backup than the Rovi/TiVo DVRs. This to me would be a no brainer and a good personal security selling point for those who care about their personal security or a company's server going out of business on them or being down or a company changing service on them or a company selling the information to some unknown party. Not to mention, if there is ever a company that could use some good and easy PR along the "we got the the customers back," it's Rovi/TiVo.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

Joe3 said:


> The opportunity for Rovi/TiVo is to put their customers in control by allowing them to set up their own server with a 24TB RAID 5 array or any other of a variety of solutions that they can purchase for themselves. Some solutions would even have better backup than the Rovi/TiVo DVRs. This to me would be a no brainer and a good personal security selling point for those who care about their personal security or a company's server going out of business on them or being down or a company changing service on them or a company selling the information to some unknown party. Not to mention, if there is ever a company that could use some good and easy PR along the "we got the the customers back," it's Rovi/TiVo.


That's an idiotic business plan. That's a niche of a niche of users, and TiVo's business is primarily MSOs anyway, who don't want that type of things going on. Barely anyone is going to even understand the concept, much less how to implement it, and among the few who do, most (like me) aren't going to care about it. I have maybe a terabyte of TiVo recordings on a hard drive, I stopped archiving almost anything, as the use case is weak when there is so much amazing new content constantly coming out that I'm always backlogged anyway.


----------



## Diana Collins (Aug 21, 2002)

Joe3 said:


> We seem to be in agreement that off loading content to a server is a good thing. *However, using a Plex as a server or anyone else is depending on them to stick around and not so much you.* I remember *Vox* was an Internet blogging service but when they went down and out of business on them, everyone lost their content and there wasn't anything anyone could do about their loss. Theses so-called services could get up one morning and change their services.
> 
> The opportunity for Rovi/TiVo is to put their customers in control by allowing them to set up their own server with a 24TB RAID 5 array or any other of a variety of solutions that they can purchase for themselves. Some solutions would even have better backup than the Rovi/TiVo DVRs. This to me would be a no brainer and a good personal security selling point for those who care about their personal security or a company's server going out of business on them or being down or a company changing service on them or a company selling the information to some unknown party. Not to mention, if there is ever a company that could use some good and easy PR along the "we got the the customers back," it's Rovi/TiVo.


Plex is available for free download. You can buy a "Plex Pass" that adds a bunch of features, but the free version does all the logging, management and presentation. It is purely a metadata and streaming engine. Your recordings remain plain vanilla MPEG (or XVID) files. If plex goes out of business, I still will have all my content and my plex server will keep running for the foreseeable future.

I archive recordings selectively. Almost half of the content in our library are titles that are not readily available online (e.g. every existing Dr Who episode going all the way back to 1963). The rest are high bit rate BD rips of movies that are worth watching more than once, or are personal favorites. I basically disagree with Bigg's comment that "there is so much amazing new content constantly coming out." We have about a dozen series that we watch on HBO, Showtime, AMC, Netflix and Amazon at various points during the year. The rest of what's on broadcast, cable and streaming is mostly junk IMHO.


----------



## Joe3 (Dec 12, 2006)

Bigg said:


> That's an idiotic business plan.


If I said that's all Rovi/TiVo had to do, it would be an idiotic plan made by an idiot. I only bring it up as another distinction to add a difference. I believe many Rovi/TiVo customers are smart enough to make the choices of what's best for them.


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

I don't save anything on my Tivo. If it's there for a long time and I haven't watched it then it means I'm not watching it.  The percentage of shows that I've watched after it sits on my Tivo for over a month is really really low. 

You can only watch so much content. 

And all the better stuff eventually comes around again and again not only on traditional cable but also on the on-demand streaming services and so I feel like I can always find the stuff again if I need to whether I watched it or not.


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

Tivo's business outlook is the same as Kmart and Sears of 5-10 years ago. 

You can feel the slow slide into oblivion but not sure when and where that slide will end.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

Diana Collins said:


> "I basically disagree with Bigg's comment that "there is so much amazing new content constantly coming out." We have about a dozen series that we watch on HBO, Showtime, AMC, Netflix and Amazon at various points during the year. The rest of what's on broadcast, cable and streaming is mostly junk IMHO.


There's a constant stream of great content coming out. Add up a few Netflix series, an Amazon series or two, a couple of series coming from cable to streaming, then look at the HBO and Showtime stuff, all the movies that come out, plus regular TV shows from PBS and such, and you've got a massive amount of content available. I don't know how long this golden age will last, but there's a HUGE amount of great stuff out there, far exceeding what most people have time to actually watch.

EDIT: Fix quote


----------



## Diana Collins (Aug 21, 2002)

Bigg said:


> There's a constant stream of great content coming out. Add up a few Netflix series, an Amazon series or two, a couple of series coming from cable to streaming, then look at the HBO and Showtime stuff, all the movies that come out, plus regular TV shows from PBS and such, and you've got a massive amount of content available. I don't know how long this golden age will last, but there's a HUGE amount of great stuff out there, far exceeding what most people have time to actually watch.
> 
> EDIT: Fix quote


To each their own...I don't watch comedies much (find the humor sophomoric most times) or unscripted (aka "reality") shows. Most of what we watch are actually foreign productions like "Babylon Berlin", "The Rain" or "Dark" (I'm looking forward to watching "1983" this week), most of which have seasons of only 10 to 13 episodes at most. The only things we record from broadcast TV are the DC series that my son follows on the CW network. Mostly we watch news or documentaries, and films for entertainment. We follow a few series on cable ("Better Call Saul" and "Outcast" for example). Most nights we spend a good half hour just looking for something to watch. This may be a "golden age" of content in terms of quantity, but it sure isn't a golden age of quality.


----------



## Joe3 (Dec 12, 2006)

All I see coming is subscribers burn out, if it's not happening already. The assumption that cord cutters will replace their $100 plus cable bill with many smaller subscriptions service bills, adding up to the same amount of their old cable bills, is the wishful thinking of billion dollar studios that got jealous of a few one stop subscription services making so much money.


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

Diana Collins said:


> To each their own...I don't watch comedies much (find the humor sophomoric most times) or unscripted (aka "reality") shows. Most of what we watch are actually foreign productions like "Babylon Berlin", "The Rain" or "Dark" (I'm looking forward to watching "1983" this week), most of which have seasons of only 10 to 13 episodes at most. The only things we record from broadcast TV are the DC series that my son follows on the CW network. Mostly we watch news or documentaries, and films for entertainment. We follow a few series on cable ("Better Call Saul" and "Outcast" for example). Most nights we spend a good half hour just looking for something to watch. This may be a "golden age" of content in terms of quantity, but it sure isn't a golden age of quality.


 You need to put out a list so I know what to watch.  It sounds like your tastes are similar to mine.


----------



## CloudAtlas (Oct 29, 2013)

Joe3 said:


> All I see coming is subscribers burn out, if it's not happening already. The assumption that cord cutters will replace their $100 plus cable bill with many smaller subscriptions service bills, adding up to the same amount of their old cable bills, is the wishful thinking of billion dollar studios that got jealous of *a few one stop subscription services making so much money.*


Other than Netflix which one stop subscription service is making so much money? Hulu is estimated to lose $1.5 billion this year up from $1 billion last year. Amazon Prime video is a loss leader.

Also I'm not sure why having a multiple subscription services to choose from leads to burn out? It's no different than current multiple TV/Cable network offerings, right? Disney's new subscription service should do well with families.


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

trip1eX said:


> And all the better stuff eventually comes around again and again not only on traditional cable but also on the on-demand streaming services and so I feel like I can always find the stuff again if I need to whether I watched it or not.


Sometimes yes, sometimes no--some PBS "Live from Lincoln Center" broadcasts may never be re-broadcast, due to contractual limits (seeming to limit the broadcasts to a single showing + overnight repeat); people beg for these shows online.

Plus, "eventually" can be a long time.​


----------



## Joe3 (Dec 12, 2006)

CloudAtlas said:


> I'm not sure why having a multiple subscription services to choose from leads to burn out? It's no different than current multiple TV/Cable network offerings, right?...


Right, it's another distinction without a difference to the entertainment bills that pour in every month that leads to the monotony of having your chain jerked come bill time. A sucker is born every minute is a stupid business model and is unsustainable, people learn. The opportunity for Rovi/TiVo is that they still have time to create a distinction and make a difference to a family's monthly bottom line through their technology. Rovi/TiVo can be a successful disruptor to how content is delivered if they only show they have a brain and put their customers needs first. They must also phase out it's too close relationships with the dying cable technology and be smarter.


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

Mikeguy said:


> Sometimes yes, sometimes no--some PBS "Live from Lincoln Center" broadcasts may never be re-broadcast, due to contractual limits (seeming to limit the broadcasts to a single showing + overnight repeat); people beg for these shows online.
> 
> Plus, "eventually" can be a long time​


yeah there's always going to be a few things that you very well not be able to watch in the future. I'm sure live events are more likely fall under that exception category.

But I look at it more like the glass is half full. I'll be able to rewatch what I need rewatch.


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

trip1eX said:


> yeah there's always going to be a few things that you very well not be able to watch in the future. I'm sure live events are more likely fall under that exception category.
> 
> But I look at it more like the glass is half full. I'll be able to rewatch what I need rewatch.


Just great to have a TiVo box/DVR around at least for those once-in-a-blue-moon events (and for things that might take their sweet time to get to streaming)!


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

Diana Collins said:


> To each their own...I don't watch comedies much (find the humor sophomoric most times) or unscripted (aka "reality") shows. Most of what we watch are actually foreign productions like "Babylon Berlin", "The Rain" or "Dark" (I'm looking forward to watching "1983" this week), most of which have seasons of only 10 to 13 episodes at most. The only things we record from broadcast TV are the DC series that my son follows on the CW network. Mostly we watch news or documentaries, and films for entertainment. We follow a few series on cable ("Better Call Saul" and "Outcast" for example). Most nights we spend a good half hour just looking for something to watch. This may be a "golden age" of content in terms of quantity, but it sure isn't a golden age of quality.


I don't tend to watch a lot of comedy or "reality" shows either. Most of the reality stuff is garbage, comedies are all over the map. However, there are a ton of great dramas, and shows based on a true story. There is a golden age in terms of high quality content when you look at Netflix, Amazon, HBO, etc. I have a massive backlog of great content for when I get around to watching it.


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

Mikeguy said:


> Just great to have a TiVo box/DVR around at least for those once-in-a-blue-moon events (and for things that might take their sweet time to get to streaming)!


Yeah I have a handful of local newscasts recorded and saved that each have a few seconds of my kid playing tennis in the high school sports highlights.


----------



## Mikeguy (Jul 28, 2005)

trip1eX said:


> Yeah I have a handful of local newscasts recorded and saved that each have a few seconds of my kid playing tennis in the high school sports highlights.


pyTivo Desktop--save copies to your PC. 

Easier to use pyTivo


----------



## Diana Collins (Aug 21, 2002)

Joe3 said:


> Right, it's another distinction without a difference to the entertainment bills that pour in every month that leads to the monotony of having your chain jerked come bill time. A sucker is born every minute is a stupid business model and is unsustainable, people learn. The opportunity for Rovi/TiVo is that they still have time to create a distinction and make a difference to a family's monthly bottom line through their technology. Rovi/TiVo can be a successful disruptor to how content is delivered if they only show they have a brain and *put their customers needs first*. They must also phase out it's too close relationships with the dying cable technology and be smarter.


They do...their important customers (the ones they make a profit on) are the MSOs. Retail users are just a QA and market research tool.


----------



## PSU_Sudzi (Jun 4, 2015)

Joe3 said:


> Right, it's another distinction without a difference to the entertainment bills that pour in every month that leads to the monotony of having your chain jerked come bill time. A sucker is born every minute is a stupid business model and is unsustainable, people learn. The opportunity for Rovi/TiVo is that they still have time to create a distinction and make a difference to a family's monthly bottom line through their technology. Rovi/TiVo can be a successful disruptor to how content is delivered if they only show they have a brain and put their customers needs first. They must also phase out it's too close relationships with the dying cable technology and be smarter.


You could cut cable and buy an OTA TiVo and TiVo would be saving you money.


----------



## nuraman00 (Dec 28, 2012)

trip1eX said:


> Yeah I have a handful of local newscasts recorded and saved that each have a few seconds of my kid playing tennis in the high school sports highlights.


That is pretty cool.

What was the news segment about? Were they covering high school sports like they do every day or week, or was there something even more special? Like a feature about the team, or coach, etc.


----------



## CloudAtlas (Oct 29, 2013)

Joe3 said:


> Right, it's another distinction without a difference to the entertainment bills that pour in every month that leads to the monotony of having your chain jerked come bill time. A sucker is born every minute is a stupid business model and is unsustainable, people learn.


I thought paying for only the channels you watch was what cord cutters wanted? Then given that choice with OTT you now complain about the bills pouring in. Look somehow content needs to be paid for otherwise a lot of people are out of work. And due to inflation the price of goods rise as do peoples salaries.

Do you not buy pizza anymore complaining that the cost has gone from 50 cents slice in the 80s to $3 today?


----------



## tenthplanet (Mar 5, 2004)

CloudAtlas said:


> I thought paying for only the channels you watch was what cord cutters wanted? Then given that choice with OTT you now complain about the bills pouring in. Look somehow content needs to be paid for otherwise a lot of people are out of work. And due to inflation the price of goods rise as do peoples salaries.
> 
> Do you not buy pizza anymore complaining that the cost has gone from 50 cents slice in the 80s to $3 today?


These situations, are not new but before the internet you didn't hear about them so much. The pizza analogy nails it.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

CloudAtlas said:


> I thought paying for only the channels you watch was what cord cutters wanted? Then given that choice with OTT you now complain about the bills pouring in. Look somehow content needs to be paid for otherwise a lot of people are out of work. And due to inflation the price of goods rise as do peoples salaries.
> 
> Do you not buy pizza anymore complaining that the cost has gone from 50 cents slice in the 80s to $3 today?


Of course content needs to be paid for. But the existing cable bundle system is not working. It cannot continue to increase in costs at several times the rate of inflation forever. The bloated cable bundle has too much garbage in it, and the tv industry in one of several industries in the US that needs right-sizing. It's become way too big and way too bloated to support, and it needs some serious paring down. Yes, some people will lose their jobs as cord cutting continues, but other new jobs will be created as people can earn a living with a YouTube channel, or people are hired to make content for Amazon or Netflix.

In terms of having multiple OTT subscriptions, people are going to have to be smart and disciplined and choose wisely what subscription services they pay for. This will force the content providers to compete hard for people's money and have a reason for them to keep their subscriptions and not just subscribe for a month and binge everything. It's more like an actual free market than the mess that is cable, and that's a great thing.


----------



## Joe3 (Dec 12, 2006)

CloudAtlas said:


> I thought paying for only the channels you watch was what cord cutters wanted? Then given that choice with OTT you now complain about the bills pouring in. Look somehow content needs to be paid for otherwise a lot of people are out of work. And due to inflation the price of goods rise as do peoples salaries.
> 
> Do you not buy pizza anymore complaining that the cost has gone from 50 cents slice in the 80s to $3 today?


Yes, paying only for what you want to watch is one reason for cord cutting. They are many reasons to why people are dumping Cable. The biggest reason is what consumers think is highway or cableway robbery. People are not stupid. They know when they are being robbed. But content providers who have hidden behind Cable are not given up the golden goose just because Cable is dying. After all, the billionaire elite content providers gave Cable the rope that hung them and are now, trying to pass that rope directly to the consumer without their middle men, the Cable.

Now, the content providers, finally seeing the writing on the wall with Cables's demise, which they themselves caused, and having seen profits soar for a few streaming providers; the content providers now want to jump in on those streaming distribution profits, which is good for them, but a bad thing for consumers.

Let's take half of a $2 Coke next to the $3 pizza and fill half of the empty glass of the next person. Now, repeatedly do this to everyone down the line. Get a water jug, fill all the glasses, and charge everyone $2 for their coke. This is not inflation. This is a well thought out con and what is called, being robbed.

The business plan of the content providers is the same as watering down the Cokes. It is the same as ordering a $3 pizza, once having it delivered, findings the pizza guy slice up the pizza and sold each slice as a $3 pizza to you and everyone on your block.

The Entertainment content is like the $3 pizza. The pizza pie guy is like the content owners. The streaming services are like the sliced pizza he sells you for $3. You call up to complain, "where are the rest of my shows" like you call the pizza guy asking for the rest of your pizza. The streaming services tell you it's the new prices and like the pizza guy telling you it's the new price; if you want more pizza, what you think is or was a whole pizza, like you think was once a whole streaming service, " Hey, you gotta pay more to get there."

This brings us back to the beginning, to the ridiculousness of cost, which is one of the main reasons people are dumping Cable, Hey, you gotta pay more to get there.


----------



## mschnebly (Feb 21, 2011)

Joe3 said:


> Yes, paying only for what you want to watch is one reason for cord cutting. They are many reasons to why people are dumping Cable. The biggest reason is what consumers think is highway or cableway robbery. People are not stupid. They know when they are being robbed. But content providers who have hidden behind Cable are not given up the golden goose just because Cable is dying. After all, the billionaire elite content providers gave Cable the rope that hung them and are now, trying to pass that rope directly to the consumer without their middle men, the Cable.
> 
> Now, the content providers, finally seeing the writing on the wall with Cables's demise, which they themselves caused, and having seen profits soar for a few streaming providers; the content providers now want to jump in on those streaming distribution profits, which is good for them, but a bad thing for consumers.
> 
> ...


Maybe to be healthy we only need one piece of pizza. Think of it as a forced diet. They are just looking out for you!


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

nuraman00 said:


> That is pretty cool.
> 
> What was the news segment about? Were they covering high school sports like they do every day or week, or was there something even more special? Like a feature about the team, or coach, etc.


sports highlights. HEre they show a lot of high school sports highlights on the newscasts. This year my kid was #1 on the tennis team so he got on there a few times. last year he was on once or twice. i guess I have to look into transferring or maybe just film them my phone. They are pretty short. PRobably take me an hour or two to get up to speed on transferring them otherwise lol. IT's been probably close to 10 years since I messed with transferring stuff off of a Tivo.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

trip1eX said:


> sports highlights. HEre they show a lot of high school sports highlights on the newscasts. This year my kid was #1 on the tennis team so he got on there a few times. last year he was on once or twice. i guess I have to look into transferring or maybe just film them my phone. They are pretty short. PRobably take me an hour or two to get up to speed on transferring them otherwise lol. IT's been probably close to 10 years since I messed with transferring stuff off of a Tivo.


KMTTG will do it.


----------



## PSU_Sudzi (Jun 4, 2015)

Joe3 said:


> Yes, paying only for what you want to watch is one reason for cord cutting. They are many reasons to why people are dumping Cable. The biggest reason is what consumers think is highway or cableway robbery. People are not stupid. They know when they are being robbed. But content providers who have hidden behind Cable are not given up the golden goose just because Cable is dying. After all, the billionaire elite content providers gave Cable the rope that hung them and are now, trying to pass that rope directly to the consumer without their middle men, the Cable.
> 
> Now, the content providers, finally seeing the writing on the wall with Cables's demise, which they themselves caused, and having seen profits soar for a few streaming providers; the content providers now want to jump in on those streaming distribution profits, which is good for them, but a bad thing for consumers.
> 
> ...


I can't make any sense of this pizza or soda.


----------



## JoeKustra (Dec 7, 2012)

PSU_Sudzi said:


> I can't make any sense of this pizza or soda.


I stopped reading at "People are not stupid."


----------



## foghorn2 (May 4, 2004)

Well most people are stupid. Lots like to pay to watch commercials on cable, and even do so with streaming services.

Content providers want to charge you for their channels , and then make you watch annoying commercials. And suckers ( I used to be one  ) fall for it.


----------



## Scooby Doo (Dec 18, 2002)

PSU_Sudzi said:


> I can't make any sense of this pizza or soda.


I couldn't understand a word of it either, but then I watched the 4K version and it all became clear


----------



## ej42137 (Feb 16, 2014)

Perhaps Joe3's outrage is due to his being unfamiliar with the commerce system of manufacturer to wholesaler to retailer to consumer. Or maybe he is a country boy and never actually bought pizza by the slice.


----------



## ajwees41 (May 7, 2006)

compnurd said:


> I would say MSO is growing as the cable companies convert people on there old Motorola and SA cable boxes to TiVo ones


 no cable company that I know of is replacing the motorola/cisco with Tivo


----------



## compnurd (Oct 6, 2011)

ajwees41 said:


> no cable company that I know of is replacing the motorola/cisco with Tivo


Mine is. Mostly to get rid of old MPEG2 boxes


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

ajwees41 said:


> no cable company that I know of is replacing the motorola/cisco with Tivo


TiVo's MSO market is growing, even as the MSO's own market is shrinking and basically circling the drain. Look at ABB, which slurped up Metrocast, and is pushing TiVo hard. RCN and others are pushing TiVo hard as well. It's a dying market, but it's got a long decline to ride out. As those smaller MSOs work harder to compete for video customers, TiVo is increasingly a part of their strategy.


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

CloudAtlas said:


> I thought paying for only the channels you watch was what cord cutters wanted? Then given that choice with OTT you now complain about the bills pouring in. Look somehow content needs to be paid for otherwise a lot of people are out of work. And due to inflation the price of goods rise as do peoples salaries.
> 
> Do you not buy pizza anymore complaining that the cost has gone from 50 cents slice in the 80s to $3 today?


At least in my case, you thought wrong. I really do not like the term cord cutter. Most people do not cut any cord -- streamers need high speed internet and satellite users never actually had a cord. Worse, the term suggests that all of these people are of one mind and purpose. People like you generalize without understanding.

Some people simply do not want to pay for television. Put up an antenna, point it, and plug it in to a digital tuner and you have free tv forever. Most people I know who have left a premium provider are just like this. It's not a terrible choice. I have a TCL Roku television. Plug a USB thumb drive into it and you get OTA Trick Play (pause, rewind, fast forward through 90 minutes of buffer). It has a grid style guide too. Add high speed internet for all the services a Roku supports.

The second most populous cohort are people who have a premium provider on one or two sets and use an antenna or a streaming service for the rest. This is a consequence of the change which forced consumers to pay for a box for each television. I actually started in this group. Given the choice between a free SD box, an expensive HD rental, or an antenna, I 'trimmed' my service, got better picture quality, and still got to enjoy nudity and profanity in the living room and the bedroom. What could be better than that?

A lot of kids are opting for Netflix only or Netflix and HBO (Game of Thrones). My kid does this. My niece does this.

Some people simply want to bail on a company they hold in contempt. You start out with everything for a reasonable price then watch the cost rise and decide to trim your service to save money only to find out savings are blunted by loss of bundling discounts. Wouldn't be nice if premium providers rewarded long term customers with perks like monthly discounts or bonus channels? When Comcast told me I might as well get basic cable with my high speed internet because it was basically the same price, I got a new high speed internet provider. I did not save a lot, but [email protected]#$% Comcast, right?

I fired Comcast nine years ago. I have a couple antennas in my attic and coax to every set in the house. The antennas feed the same distribution infrastructure as external sources, so I can swap a television from antenna to premium service as desired. Comcast is welcome to bid on my entertainment -- just like everyone else. Right now, I have DirecTV with HBO (satellite dish) for $20/month as a consequence of my cell plan. From time to time, I take advantage of various promotions. At the end of a promotion, I sometimes make an offer to a provider (I offered Comcast $150/month for a specific set of channels plus uncapped, unthrottled high speed internet on four televisions). When they decline, I move on.

I pay $50 for high speed internet (uncapped, unthrottled, and guaranteed for life). I don't actually have a phone on my cell plan, so that is a transient cost -- I'll be looking for a less expensive or move inclusive plan once my DirecTV commitment is complete and may not even have a phone plan when my kids are on their own. I have a DVR on every set in my home. I have an extensive library of my favorite things. In other words, I have what I want for a price I am happy with. That is what _this_ cord cutter wants.

*** Warning: Silly comparison follows ***

BTW, there is NO WAY I am going to pay $26 for a Pizzeria Uno pie when I can get a very good alternative at Pizza Hut or Papa Ginos for 1/3 the price or out of my grocer's freezer for 1/8 the price. And there is no way I am going to pay full price for that pizza when I know their Insiders get BOGO several times a month. Fortunately, I am allowed to choose any of these options and the Insiders discount is not limited to new customers. For many of us, there are only one or two ISPs available. Also, broadcast television is not 'no television' so someone who chooses to watch tv coming over the air is not going to starve for entertainment.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

wizwor said:


> At least in my case, you thought wrong. I really do not like the term cord cutter. Most people do not cut any cord -- streamers need high speed internet and satellite users never actually had a cord. Worse, the term suggests that all of these people are of one mind and purpose. People like you generalize without understanding.


Cord cutting 1.0 = cutting the landline phone
Cord cutting 2.0 = cutting pay tv
Cord cutting 3.0 = cutting wired internet access

You have to look at where the term "cord cutter" came from. It started with Cord cutting 1.0 with people getting rid of their landlines, which were very literally a cord. Then they started Cord cutting 2.0 by cutting TV, and now we have seen the very, very beginning of Cord cutting 3.0 by cutting the internet cord with 5G home internet access (albeit it being literally a few neighborhoods in the entire country that have it right now).

Cord cutting 3.0 in some ways does't really gain anything, since you still have to pay for it, although it could be bundled with mobile phone service, but then you're in the murky territory of bundling, and you have to figure out if getting cable Triple Play is Cord cutting 1.0 because you don't have a landline per se, even though you're still sort of paying for a wired telephone, and definitely paying through the nose for pay tv.

In terms of the semantics of it, the Cord cutting world needs to stop calling people who get YouTube TV or DirecTV NOW "Cord cutters". They are Cord replacers. There are perfectly valid reasons to Cord replace, but calling them "Cord cutters" when they are getting a very similar cord through another mechanism is just dishonest.

I thought that Cord cutting was a right-sizing of the market of people who didn't watching much TV, but boy was I wrong. It turns out that the way people are buying and enjoying content and the content itself is fundamentally changing with new distribution medium.

However, to wrap around back to your original point, CloudAtlas's point is ill-informed, since cord cutting is all about alternative ways to subscribe to content. However, there will have to be a right-sizing of the whole industry. I believe that there are about half a dozen industries in the US that are severely bloated and ripe for disruption, but some, like healthcare and defense, literally require an Act of Congress to de-bloat, some are fairly well entrenched in various institutions and change very slowly like financial services and higher education while others, like pay tv, and thus professional and college sports leagues are much more susceptible to market pressure, and will have to radically change much sooner as a result.



> I pay $50 for high speed internet (uncapped, unthrottled, and guaranteed for life). I don't actually have a phone on my cell plan, so that is a transient cost -- I'll be looking for a less expensive or move inclusive plan once my DirecTV commitment is complete and may not even have a phone plan when my kids are on their own. I have a DVR on every set in my home. I have an extensive library of my favorite things. In other words, I have what I want for a price I am happy with. That is what _this_ cord cutter wants.


You're lucky to have a choice in terms of internet, as that is where the monopolies get you.


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

Bigg said:


> ...In terms of the semantics of it, the Cord cutting world needs to stop calling people who get YouTube TV or DirecTV NOW "Cord cutters". They are Cord replacers. There are perfectly valid reasons to Cord replace, but calling them "Cord cutters" when they are getting a very similar cord through another mechanism is just dishonest.


There is no cord cutting world. There is no union, there are no meetings, and there are no rules. Cord cutting is a marketing term. I do not call myself a cord cutter. I do not know anyone who does. Two people asked me about installing an antenna Saturday. One guy said he wanted to install an antenna and the other said he wanted to get rid of Comcast. No one has ever asked me to help them cut the cord.



Bigg said:


> I thought that Cord cutting was a right-sizing of the market of people who didn't watching much TV, but boy was I wrong. It turns out that the way people are buying and enjoying content and the content itself is fundamentally changing with new distribution medium.


Nothing new about streaming or broadcasting. People have been getting TV over the air for a century and Netflix has been streaming since 2011. As long as you keep thinking of 'cord cutting' as a thing and 'cord cutters' as a race, you will continue to be surprised...and wrong.



Bigg said:


> However, to wrap around back to your original point, CloudAtlas's point is ill-informed, since cord cutting is all about alternative ways to subscribe to content. However, there will have to be a right-sizing of the whole industry. I believe that there are about half a dozen industries in the US that are severely bloated and ripe for disruption, but some, like healthcare and defense, literally require an Act of Congress to de-bloat, some are fairly well entrenched in various institutions and change very slowly like financial services and higher education while others, like pay tv, and thus professional and college sports leagues are much more susceptible to market pressure, and will have to radically change much sooner as a result.


Except that everyone isn't looking for a different way to subscribe to content. A lot of people just want to watch television. There's no magic 'right size' either. The premium providers size the market with their pricing. If Comcast offered high speed internet, VOIP, and a lot of channels for $50 a month, the right size would be 100%.



Bigg said:


> You're lucky to have a choice in terms of internet, as that is where the monopolies get you.


I can stream via my cell carrier as well. With 5g, that is about to get a lot better. Just the same, I'd be content with a TCL Roku TV, an antenna, and a cell phone.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

wizwor said:


> There is no cord cutting world. There is no union, there are no meetings, and there are no rules. Cord cutting is a marketing term. I do not call myself a cord cutter. I do not know anyone who does. Two people asked me about installing an antenna Saturday. One guy said he wanted to install an antenna and the other said he wanted to get rid of Comcast. No one has ever asked me to help them cut the cord.


Lots of things have a "world" that aren't run by a single central entity, so that argument makes no sense. Cord cutting is a term that was created by people going against the marketing of pay tv, and has since been used by companies selling products and services that are attractive to cord cutters. The term "cut the cord" is the commonly used term to describe getting rid of pay tv.



> Nothing new about streaming or broadcasting. People have been getting TV over the air for a century and Netflix has been streaming since 2011. As long as you keep thinking of 'cord cutting' as a thing and 'cord cutters' as a race, you will continue to be surprised...and wrong.


There is actually a lot new about the content available through streaming that has only happened in the last 4-5 years, if that. People have been streaming video over the internet for 20+ years, but streaming video didn't become a threat to the business model of pay TV until the mid 2010's. We've come a long way since the days of EBaum's world. Huh? When did I ever say cord cutters were a "race"?



> Except that everyone isn't looking for a different way to subscribe to content. A lot of people just want to watch television. There's no magic 'right size' either. The premium providers size the market with their pricing. If Comcast offered high speed internet, VOIP, and a lot of channels for $50 a month, the right size would be 100%.


The industry is too big to be economically sustainable. It will have to be right-sized. If you think the pay tv industry can keep spending on content at the same level that it is after it loses another 20 or 30 or 40 millions customers, then you're both delusional and can't do basic math. The industry WILL be right-sized to whatever size the market will bear. How much smaller that is compared to today's market remains to be seen. You don't seem to understand basic math. If Comcast offered that for $50/mo, like they do in France, then that very well could right size the industry, but the industry would be a LOT smaller than it is today, as there would be FAR less money going to content providers through carriage fees, and thus the content providers would have FAR less money to spend on content, thus the quality of the content would go down or there would be less of it, or some combination thereof. You don't seem to understand basic economics.



> I can stream via my cell carrier as well. With 5g, that is about to get a lot better. Just the same, I'd be content with a TCL Roku TV, an antenna, and a cell phone.


Cell phones aren't a replacement for wireline internet. If 5G pans out then that could introduce a lot of competition into the market.


----------



## mschnebly (Feb 21, 2011)

wizwor said:


> There is no cord cutting world. There is no union, there are no meetings, and there are no rules. Cord cutting is a marketing term. I do not call myself a cord cutter. I do not know anyone who does. Two people asked me about installing an antenna Saturday. One guy said he wanted to install an antenna and the other said he wanted to get rid of Comcast. No one has ever asked me to help them cut the cord.


These folks might disagree with you.

Cord Cutters News - All the news cord cutters need about cord cutting! Covering, Roku, Fire TV, Apple TV, Chromecast, Netflix, Hulu, & More!


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

It's their business.


----------



## Joe3 (Dec 12, 2006)

ej42137 said:


> Perhaps Joe3's outrage is due to his being unfamiliar with the commerce system of manufacturer to wholesaler to retailer to consumer. Or maybe he is a country boy and never actually bought pizza by the slice.


Perhaps, you are unfamiliar how Amazon broke that system with their technology by getting rid of wholesalers, retailers, lowering cost for consumers.

Only a country boy would call a slice of bread dunked in tomato juice a pizza, but I'm not one of them.


----------



## ej42137 (Feb 16, 2014)

Joe3 said:


> Perhaps, you are unfamiliar how Amazon broke that system with their technology by getting rid of wholesalers, retailers, lowering cost for consumers.
> 
> Only a country boy would call a slice of bread dunked in tomato juice a pizza, but I'm not one of them.


I think I can let this response speak for itself.


----------



## mschnebly (Feb 21, 2011)

wizwor said:


> It's their business.


It's a business built around cord cutters. All those people commenting on their articles consider themselves cord cutters. Maybe you should go there and tell them there is no such thing. There is also a very big Facebook page for cord cutters. Maybe you are from a part of the country that uses a different term?


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

mschnebly said:


> It's a business built around cord cutters. All those people commenting on their articles consider themselves cord cutters. Maybe you should go there and tell them there is no such thing. There is also a very big Facebook page for cord cutters. Maybe you are from a part of the country that uses a different term?


I'm simply a person who makes decisions based on my own personal values. I think it is dumb to identify with some habit or shopping preference. I happen to own five TiVos so I spend time on TiVo forums so I can gather information from others who own TiVos. If a better DVR comes along, I get some of those and look for people who know a lot about those. I do not currently have cable because it is expensive and I do not value local offerings. I didn't cut anything. I simply installed an antenna and stopped paying Comcast. If they offered me a great deal, I could hire them again. If I took pride in being a cord cutter, that would be much more difficult.

This is kind of a dumb hijacking of a thread anyway. The OP posted about TiVo's business outlook. It's not good. TiVo markets to a niche consumer who will pay a lot for a DVR that isn't really very special. There are lots of inexpensive alternatives out there and many are no longer interested in collecting programming locally. It was a good run.


----------



## mschnebly (Feb 21, 2011)

wizwor said:


> I'm simply a person who makes decisions based on my own personal values. I think it is dumb to identify with some habit or shopping preference. I happen to own five TiVos so I spend time on TiVo forums so I can gather information from others who own TiVos. If a better DVR comes along, I get some of those and look for people who know a lot about those. I do not currently have cable because it is expensive and I do not value local offerings. I didn't cut anything. I simply installed an antenna and stopped paying Comcast. If they offered me a great deal, I could hire them again. If I took pride in being a cord cutter, that would be much more difficult.
> 
> This is kind of a dumb hijacking of a thread anyway. The OP posted about TiVo's business outlook. It's not good. TiVo markets to a niche consumer who will pay a lot for a DVR that isn't really very special. There are lots of inexpensive alternatives out there and many are no longer interested in collecting programming locally. It was a good run.


You can believe whatever you want to believe. My point was simply that because you think there is no such thing doesn't make it so for others.


----------



## dlfl (Jul 6, 2006)

mschnebly said:


> You can believe whatever you want to believe. My point was simply that because you think there is no such thing doesn't make it so for others.


Dammit! Facts are facts. Either there was a pink elephant in your front yard at 3 am or there wasn't! Now which is it?


----------



## mschnebly (Feb 21, 2011)

Well, I've been told by a certain Kellyanne that there are alternative facts!


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

mschnebly said:


> You can believe whatever you want to believe. My point was simply that because you think there is no such thing doesn't make it so for others.


And my point is that simply because you believe what you read on a blog doesn't make it real. Let's compare your list of cord cutters to my list of people who do not consider themselves cord cutters and see whose imagination is working overtime.


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

dlfl said:


> Dammit! Facts are facts. Either there was a pink elephant in your front yard at 3 am or there wasn't! Now which is it?


There isn't. Cord cutter is a term made up by marketing types to encourage people whose primary purpose was to save money to spend money. Put an antenna on your roof and run a cable to your television (don't cut it!) and you get free tv. 'Real' cord cutters pay $800 for TiVos and subscribe to Sling TV. I am the kind of guy who pulls off the road when he sees someone standing in front of a home with an antenna and talks to the person. I know it's a crazy concept when I could simply read blogs, but that's how I am.


----------



## wizwor (Dec 18, 2013)

mschnebly said:


> Well, I've been told by a certain Kellyanne that there are alternative facts!


OK. That explains things.


----------



## tenthplanet (Mar 5, 2004)

mschnebly said:


> Well, I've been told by a certain Kellyanne that there are alternative facts!


Unless it's the Kellyanne from "The Mirror Universe"


----------



## mschnebly (Feb 21, 2011)

wizwor said:


> And my point is that simply because you believe what you read on a blog doesn't make it real. Let's compare your list of cord cutters to my list of people who do not consider themselves cord cutters and see whose imagination is working overtime.


Call it whatever you want to call it. The rest of the country will do the same. How about that?


----------



## TonyBlunt (Jan 28, 2014)

ajwees41 said:


> no cable company that I know of is replacing the motorola/cisco with Tivo


My cable co has just announced their new Tivo boxes, so I am not worrying about them making mine obsolete for quite a while!


----------



## NashGuy (May 2, 2015)

Maybe we'll finally hear on TiVo's quarterly call next week the results of their big strategic review. Light Reading says the rumor is that they plan to split the company in two, with one focused on licensing patents and the other focused on products and services, with the latter perhaps to be acquired by another company that would integrate TiVo into their product lines.

TiVo Might Do the Splits | Light Reading


----------



## Joe3 (Dec 12, 2006)

NashGuy said:


> Maybe we'll finally hear on TiVo's quarterly call next week the results of their big strategic review. Light Reading says the rumor is that they plan to split the company in two, with one focused on licensing patents and the other focused on products and services, with the latter perhaps to be acquired by another company that would integrate TiVo into their product lines.
> 
> TiVo Might Do the Splits | Light Reading


The spilt between the lawyers and R&D is an idea that is a good one and long overdue.

Going private for product and service would put Tivo's tech responsibility were it belongs, with the customer. ( what a novel idea)

Selling the R&D to another company would depend on what company they sell it to in order to be a good move.


----------



## NashGuy (May 2, 2015)

Joe3 said:


> Going private for product and service would put Tivo's tech responsibility were it belongs, with the customer. ( what a novel idea)
> 
> Selling the R&D to another company would depend on what company they sell it to in order to be a good move.


Yes. But who, if anyone, might want to acquire TiVo at this point? Would it be a company that keeps TiVo's current product lines more or less intact? Or one that just incorporates TiVo features into their own products? 2019 could be a big year for TiVo, one way or another.


----------



## wco81 (Dec 28, 2001)

I can't imagine Tivo is expanding its customer/user base by much or at all these days.

So their best chance for revenues is to sell upgrades to the loyal installed base.

And that can't happen unless there's a big upgrade like UHD HDR recording, either from cable or streaming. Not much reasons to record streams. Netflix and Amazon will let you download shows for offline viewing through their mobile apps.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

wco81 said:


> I can't imagine Tivo is expanding its customer/user base by much or at all these days.
> 
> So their best chance for revenues is to sell upgrades to the loyal installed base.
> 
> And that can't happen unless there's a big upgrade like UHD HDR recording, either from cable or streaming. Not much reasons to record streams. Netflix and Amazon will let you download shows for offline viewing through their mobile apps.


???? They have had UHD recording since the Bolt was released in 2015. You just need a cable provider that sends UHD over QAM. And unfortunately there are not many of those. But UHD recording from QAM does work with the Bolt.


----------



## wco81 (Dec 28, 2001)

Hmm, I thought Bolt only supported UHD from streaming services.

What cable networks even distribute UHD content? HBO has started releasing UHD Blu Ray box sets of WW and Game of Thrones but I would gather they're not releasing UHD versions of those shows to any cable TV company.

If anything they need to get on the ball and stream UHD HDR on HBO Now.

In any event, I think AFTER more and more networks start distributing UHD HDR content and some cable systems start adding those channels, Tivo should come out with new hardware, using much newer SOCs than the ones used in their current products.

That would be a more compelling purchase for current Tivo owners.

But I suspect that if we get a lot of UHD HDR content at all, it will be delivered through streaming rather than QAM or ATSC 3. If that happens, it will be very tough for Tivo, unless they are able to record UHD HDR streams on your DVR indefinitely, like we're able to do with recordings.


----------



## NashGuy (May 2, 2015)

wco81 said:


> What cable networks even distribute UHD content?


Well, there are some sports channels, like FS1, that distribute certain games in UHD or UHD HDR, but as far as I know, the only MVPDs that are carrying that are either satellite (DirecTV) or IP (both managed IPTV, e.g. Layer3 TV, and OTT, e.g. FuboTV). Not via regular ol' QAM. Rogers up in Canada was ahead of any US MVPD in embracing live UHD sports a few years ago but I'm pretty sure they've always done it via managed IPTV, not on their QAM system.

The only UHD cable channels I know of that have been carried via QAM at all in the US are specialty "non-brand-name" channels such as Nasa TV UHD and Fashion TV 4K from a company called SES:
https://www.multichannel.com/news/ses-touts-4k-progress

Remember years ago when DirecTV had HDNet and cable answered with their own channel called InHD? They were basically lower-budget catch-all channels, but with everything in sweet-looking HD so that those operators could say, "Hey, look, we have HD!" That seems to be what these few channels from SES are, except UHD rather than HD.

Comcast's official line for a couple years now has been that they'll only ever distribute 4K via IP, never via QAM. Of course, they're taking their sweet time about getting around to doing much with it via IP. And Charter hasn't made a peep about 4K or HDR that I know of. So the situation doesn't look great.

Altice/Optimum (the number 3 QAM cable TV MVPD) offers some content in UHD but I think you must have their AlticeOne system in place to do it. (Like Comcast's X1, AlticeOne is a hybrid QAM/IPTV platform.) My hunch is that it's via managed IPTV, not QAM. They've begun switching over from coaxial to all fiber-to-the-home, so I think that as homes are switched over, QAM is shutting down in those areas, although I may be wrong about that.

In the meantime, may I interest you in a small service called Netflix, which does have at least one or two titles in UHD? ;-)


----------



## wco81 (Dec 28, 2001)

We can only hope that the TV networks are saving 2020 as the time to roll out some UHD content, since it's a nice round number. Again, it would be a good time for HBO to stream in UHD.

BTW someone posted an article in AVS about how some broadcasters in Europe were experimenting with HFR. There were no 4K100 cameras or anything like that so they used two 4K50 cameras and recorders and had to run cables to assemble the output together. There aren't even professional displays capable of 4K100 yet.

I'll be just happy with 4K60. Just have to hope some network is planning on UHD for the 2020 Olympics but I don't know, they're not bothering to do it for the Superbowls, though they have been using 4K cameras for a couple of years.


----------



## NashGuy (May 2, 2015)

wco81 said:


> We can only hope that the TV networks are saving 2020 as the time to roll out some UHD content, since it's a nice round number. Again, it would be a good time for HBO to stream in UHD.
> 
> I'll be just happy with 4K60. Just have to hope some network is planning on UHD for the 2020 Olympics but I don't know, they're not bothering to do it for the Superbowls, though they have been using 4K cameras for a couple of years.


Yeah, I keep wondering when HBO and Showtime -- which are both just as much streaming as cable services now, competing against Netflix -- are going to launch 4K. Perhaps when Warner Media launches their new HBO-centric streaming service this fall, they'll come out of the gate with some 4K content. Or maybe HBO will surprise us with a final season of GoT in 4K, although I kinda doubt it.

I likewise wonder if Disney+ will launch this fall with 4K content and perhaps Disney will also roll out 4K on Hulu at the same time.

As for the Olympics, that's NBC, which is to say, Comcast. And so far all they've done is time-delayed 4K Olympics coverage, on-demand, nothing live. Perhaps 2020 will be the first time they offer live 4K coverage. The problem is that NBC's live broadcast has to go through their affiliates and I expect few, if any, will be broadcasting in 4K on ATSC 3.0 by mid-2020. (NBC has said zero so far in terms of plans to support ATSC 3.0.) That said, NBC broadcasts some Olympics coverage on their cable channels, like NBCSN, CNBC and USA. So any of that could be offered to MVPDs in live 4K. In fact, NBCSN already offers English soccer in 4K, I think.


----------



## wco81 (Dec 28, 2001)

Comcast has a streaming platform at Xfinity.com/stream, which appears to be the browser version of their Stream mobile app.

But probably not ready to stream in 4K and then exempt Xfinity customers from the data streamed from it from counting against the ap.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

NashGuy said:


> Yeah, I keep wondering when HBO and Showtime -- which are both just as much streaming as cable services now, competing against Netflix -- are going to launch 4K. Perhaps when Warner Media launches their new HBO-centric streaming service this fall, they'll come out of the gate with some 4K content. Or maybe HBO will surprise us with a final season of GoT in 4K, although I kinda doubt it.
> 
> I likewise wonder if Disney+ will launch this fall with 4K content and perhaps Disney will also roll out 4K on Hulu at the same time.
> 
> As for the Olympics, that's NBC, which is to say, Comcast. And so far all they've done is time-delayed 4K Olympics coverage, on-demand, nothing live. Perhaps 2020 will be the first time they offer live 4K coverage. The problem is that NBC's live broadcast has to go through their affiliates and I expect few, if any, will be broadcasting in 4K on ATSC 3.0 by mid-2020. (NBC has said zero so far in terms of plans to support ATSC 3.0.) That said, NBC broadcasts some Olympics coverage on their cable channels, like NBCSN, CNBC and USA. So any of that could be offered to MVPDs in live 4K. In fact, NBCSN already offers English soccer in 4K, I think.


Stations switching to ATSC 3.0 are supposed to be targeting 1080P with HDR for their broadcasting. Not 2160P.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

NashGuy said:


> The only UHD cable channels I know of that have been carried via QAM at all in the US are specialty "non-brand-name" channels such as Nasa TV UHD and Fashion TV 4K from a company called SES:
> https://www.multichannel.com/news/ses-touts-4k-progress


SETV in PA has these, and they work with TiVo. A poster around here has mentioned them a number of times, but I believe they don't have a 4k TV, or at least didn't when those channels launched.


----------



## NashGuy (May 2, 2015)

aaronwt said:


> Stations switching to ATSC 3.0 are supposed to be targeting 1080P with HDR for their broadcasting. Not 2160P.


Right. Which is one of the reasons why I said I doubted that any NBC local affiliates would be in a position to broadcast the 2020 Olympics in 4K.

I wonder if a deal couldn't be worked out as follows to allow MVPDs and vMVPDs to broadcast live network content in 4K and/or 1080p HDR regardless of whether a network's local affiliate does so OTA: the network (e.g. NBC) provides a national feed in the enhanced format (whatever it is, 4K,4K HDR, or 1080p HDR) directly to MVPDs. They MVPDs would take that stream and then, based on the viewer's location, digitally overlays the appropriate local affiliate channel logo, which would have been provided in advance by all the network's affiliates. (In fact, Hulu used to do that for their on-demand content from ABC, Fox and NBC.) This would be easy to do on managed IPTV, hybrid QAM/IPTV and OTT platforms; might be trickier to engineer with DBS satellite but still possible, I think. And, critically, during ad breaks, the MVPD would simply cut over to the regular HD broadcast stream that they source directly from the local affiliate, which would of course include local ads and promos.

I'm sure that the networks would have to get their local affiliates to agree to participate in such an arrangement but I'm not sure why they wouldn't. They'd still get all of their local ads seen. They'd still have their own branded local channel logo appear in the corner of the screen during the program. Some sort of automated trigger could be put in place so that, should a local affiliate switch away from the national program to cover local breaking news, etc., MVPDs would automatically cut over from the national 4K feed to the local HD feed, just as they do during the ad breaks. So the locals would still ultimately be in control of what their viewers were seeing. Even allowing for more complicated on-screen graphics from the local station -- news crawlers, weather warnings with motion radar images, etc. -- to be overlaid atop the national 4K network feed should be do-able for MVPDs that use IPTV or OTT transmission. But it would might require that the local station embrace a fully IP-based workflow or other tech upgrades.


----------



## wco81 (Dec 28, 2001)

I'm starting to think local stations, followed by broadcast networks, are the biggest obstacles to the onset of more 4K content.

We might be further along if they weren't part of the TV industry any more and streaming was more prevalent.


----------



## NashGuy (May 2, 2015)

wco81 said:


> I'm starting to think local stations, followed by broadcast networks, are the biggest obstacles to the onset of more 4K content.
> 
> We might be further along if they weren't part of the TV industry any more and streaming was more prevalent.


Yep. I'd say the biggest obstacle to more widespread 4K TV content is the broadcast network/local affiliate system. And the second biggest obstacle is the resistance/apathy of the two biggest cable companies (Comcast & Charter, which together account for a little over 40% of all US MVPD subscribers) in pushing the new format. That said, DirecTV, DISH and Altice are all pushing 4K to a decent extent and together they account for about one-third of all MVPD subs.

Direct-to-consumer streaming is so much simpler and cleaner from a business perspective. There are fewer industry players involved and it's up to consumers to update their own hardware, internet service, and home networks in order to benefit from the latest AV formats. So it's just a much more agile model than the creaky old broadcast and cable TV system.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

NashGuy said:


> Right. Which is one of the reasons why I said I doubted that any NBC local affiliates would be in a position to broadcast the 2020 Olympics in 4K.


I think NBC will have some 4k via their cable channels on DirecTV, whether via the cable channels themselves or a special channel. The problem is that the DirecTV market mostly isn't the 4k market and visa versa.

Local affiliates are a mess, and satellite doesn't have the bandwidth. Sports channels like NBC Sports, FS1, CBSSN, etc, would be good candidates for 4k, as would RSNs, which DirecTV has the bandwidth to carry for most/all of the markets nationwide.

From a business perspective, I could see affiliates upgrading to 4k, but only offering it via cable and streaming, as they get retransmission fees. However, I think this is unlikely, as it would cut out DBS, due to bandwidth limitations, and it would be very expensive to implement for little gain in the market.

However, I don't foresee 4k ever becoming widespread.


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

NashGuy said:


> So it's just a much more agile model than the creaky old broadcast and cable TV system.


Yeah it's more of a free market. Competition!


----------



## wco81 (Dec 28, 2001)

Well obviously when TV stations were conceived and built, that was the only delivery vehicle possible.

When were the first TV broadcasts, at least 60 years ago?

Now there are more modern methods of distribution.


----------



## NashGuy (May 2, 2015)

Bigg said:


> I think NBC will have some 4k via their cable channels on DirecTV, whether via the cable channels themselves or a special channel.


Yeah, DirecTV is already carrying NBCSN's English Premier League soccer games in 4K (but not HDR) on DTV ch. 106, their 4K/HDR sports channel that also carries stuff from FS1, etc.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

wco81 said:


> Now there are more modern methods of distribution.


Broadcast is still very efficient for popular live content. However, the business and legal ends of things have completely screwed up TV broadcasting in this country.


----------

