# DirecTV sees 18 million subscribers by year end '08



## lee espinoza (Aug 21, 2002)

NEW YORK, Feb 22 (Reuters) - DirecTV Group Inc. (DTV.N: Quote, Profile, Research), the largest U.S. satellite television service, on Wednesday said it expects to have 18 million subscribers by the end of 2008.

Earlier this month, the company said it would add 1 million subscribers in 2006, which would bring its total to 16.1 million. This would imply a continuing rate of nearly 1 million subscribers additions a year through 2008.

http://today.reuters.com/business/newsArticle.aspx?type=media&storyID=nN22362822


----------



## tbeckner (Oct 26, 2001)

lee espinoza said:


> NEW YORK, Feb 22 (Reuters) - DirecTV Group Inc. (DTV.N: Quote, Profile, Research), the largest U.S. satellite television service, on Wednesday said it expects to have 18 million subscribers by the end of 2008.
> 
> Earlier this month, the company said it would add 1 million subscribers in 2006, which would bring its total to 16.1 million. This would imply a continuing rate of nearly 1 million subscribers additions a year through 2008.
> 
> http://today.reuters.com/business/newsArticle.aspx?type=media&storyID=nN22362822


Do you work for DirecTV?

Are you a DirecTV Shill?

See Post: http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=3800543#post3800543


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

Actually at the rate they're going, it'll be 17,999,999 in 2008.


----------



## Redux (Oct 19, 2004)

dswallow said:


> Actually at the rate they're going, it'll be 17,999,999 in 2008.


I suspect many here are valued for their advice on such matters in their local spheres of influence, and I think there's a responsibility to take, say 15-20 others with you. Maybe get some geometric progression on top of that. Plus, some portion of the projected increase between now and 2008 comes from word of mouth, and writing, of (former) DirecTV advocates.

I think there is an individual impact to be made larger than simply minus one.


----------



## HogarthNH (Dec 28, 2001)

Redux said:


> I think there is an individual impact to be made larger than simply minus one.


17,900,000, then.


----------



## Hersheytx (Feb 15, 2003)

The only thing that would make me leave Directv is FOIS from Verizon.
At the moment I am planning on building a house in an area that I hope will have FOIS. I am not really upset with Directv, but I am a person that likes to be on the cutting edge. It looks like Verizon has a winner. I have a friend who just got it last month. I plan to check it out.
I will never give the Cable people my money. Even internet. Its like buying a car from GM, I gave them my money and they gave me the shaft. Now I go where the quality is good. If Directv gets stupid and follows these past losers then I will find another ship with better quality.


----------



## Phantom Gremlin (Jun 20, 2002)

tbeckner said:


> Do you work for DirecTV?
> 
> Are you a DirecTV Shill?
> 
> See Post: http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=3800543#post3800543


Why are you so nasty? Lee has posted lots of great information here. I don't care if he works for DirecTV or not.

Also I can't access your link. It says:

Phantom Gremlin, you do not have permission
to access this page. This could be due to one
of several reasons: ...


----------



## shanew1289 (May 7, 2004)

tbeckner said:


> Do you work for DirecTV?
> 
> Are you a DirecTV Shill?
> 
> See Post: http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=3800543#post3800543


I cant see it either. WTH?

shanew1289, you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

Im SURE glad he posted it here and could get reamed about something some of us cant see.................... wow, the love


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

Most likely the post or the entire thread has been moved to a private area on the forum and is no longer visible to us mere users. That's why you see that sort of message when trying to view it.


----------



## tbeckner (Oct 26, 2001)

Phantom Gremlin said:


> Why are you so nasty? Lee has posted lots of great information here. I don't care if he works for DirecTV or not.
> 
> Also I can't access your link. It says:
> 
> ...


The reason you couldn't get to that post is that the moderators deleted Lee's whole thread, because some information was posted by someone else (not me) in that thread that was deemed as an invasion of privacy.

And all I asked was if Lee was a DirecTV Shill, which is a reasonable question.

I wouldn't call that a being NASTY. Wouldn't you want to know if Lee worked for DirecTV, because if he did and was an actual DirecTV Shill there could be legal issues surrounding some of his posts, but not all of them.

I would bet that you haven't followed his posts on other forums from many years ago, where he divulged some very sensitive company contact information. I can only speculate that he or someone else might have posted some sensitive information in that other thread that was deleted, but since I didnt have access to any part of that thread after my post, that would be a very unfair assumption.

If Lee is truthful about his birthdate as posted in this forum, then he is only 18 years old and has been posting to this and other forums since he was 14, and so it is highly unlikely he has been working for DirecTV since he was 14.


----------



## tbeckner (Oct 26, 2001)

shanew1289 said:


> I cant see it either. WTH?
> 
> shanew1289, you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
> 
> Im SURE glad he posted it here and could get reamed about something some of us cant see.................... wow, the love


The reason you couldn't get to that post is that the moderators deleted Lee's whole thread, because some information was posted by someone else (not me) in that thread that was deemed as an invasion of privacy.

And all I asked was if Lee was a DirecTV Shill, which is a reasonable question based upon some of his DirecTV posts and access to some very sensitive DirecTV contact information that he has posted over the years.

I think that it is reasonable to know the basis and source of the information, and the reasons for some of decisions to support the company, when most people do not support those opinions. I really wasn't asking for person information, just some information to help me understand the basis of his responses.

Lee has decided NOT TO RESPOND in neither a positive or negative way, so I guess we will just have to question his reasoning based upon a possible company affiliation of some sort, if it does not reflect the majority consensus.

*Definition of a Shill or not a Shill*

_In online discussion media, such as message boards, discussion forums, and newsgroups, shills may pose as *independent experts, satisfied consumers, or innocent parties with specific opinions in order to further the interests of an organization in which they have an interest*, such as a commercial vendor or special-interest group. For example, *an employee of a company that produces a specific product may praise the product anonymously in a discussion forum or group in order to heighten and generate interest in that product*, or a member or sympathizer of a special-interest group may pose as a highly-qualified expert in a specific field in order to give apparently disinterested support to whatever cause the group promotes.

*In some jurisdictions and in some circumstances, this type of activity may be illegal.* In addition, reputable organizations may prohibit their employees and other interested parties (contractors, agents, etc.) from participating in public forums or discussion groups in which a conflict of interest might arise, or will at least insist that their employees and agents refrain from participating in any way that might create a conflict of interest.

*In some cases, the members of an organization or the employees of a company may monitor and/or participate in public discussions and groups. Such people are not shills, since they don't attempt to mislead others.* Some of them may monitor groups in order to better evaluate public and consumer attitudes about a certain product, issue, etc.; *others may participate in order to provide information about products or other topics in a neutral way.* Some companies allow their employees to participate anonymously in public discussion groups for the purpose of providing information or expressing opinions, as long as there is no intent to defraud and the employee's affiliation with the company is not mentioned (because mentioning the company might make a personal opinion seem like a corporate policy announcement, which would be both misleading and likely to incur liability for the company). *Occasionally employees of a company may participate openly in discussions but will include disclaimers making it clear that they speak only for themselves.* Finally, on rare occasions, employees of a company may participate openly in a discussion and speak officially on behalf of their employersbut when this occurs, often the employees are moderators of the discussion venue as well, and it is likely to be sponsored by the company (as opposed to venues operated by third parties or open to anyone, such as USENET)._


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

tbeckner said:


> Wouldn't you want to know if Lee worked for DirecTV, because if he did and was an actual DirecTV Shill there could be legal issues surrounding some of his posts, but not all of them.


I'm a fox mulder fan of the truth being out there. I'd be very interested in knowing what sensitive info he posted. Can you give me some links to see some of the dastardly deeds? Privacy is a big thing with me and if he's passing corporate secrets of course the CEO and Attorney General should be notified. I'll be first in line phone in hand.

Are you sure he just doesn't subscribe to dtv newsletters and google news etc? I know I've gotten info (which impresses the hell out of my friends by the way) from google news that people have no clue how I got and they are mystified.



tbeckner said:


> I would bet that you haven't followed his posts on other forums from many years ago, where he divulged some very sensitive company contact information. I can only speculate that he or someone else might have posted some sensitive information in that other thread that was deleted, but since I didnt have access to any part of that thread after my post, that would be a very unfair assumption.


Again, I'd appreciate links to the other forums to check out this sensitive stuff from years ago, or at least a general idea of the content. And if your other speculative question was about the deleted webcast thread here a few days ago, the reason it was deleted had NOTHING to do with him. Directv's PDF file contained personally identifying information of a customer and that info was posted (initially in jest because it was hard to believe that DTV would be that stupid, but then turned out to be valid) and TCF decided to delete the thread because of the personal information on there.



tbeckner said:


> If Lee is truthful about his birthdate as posted in this forum, then he is only 18 years old and has been posting to this and other forums since he was 14, and so it is highly unlikely he has been working for DirecTV since he was 14.


I dont hold out much credence in what anyone puts for birthdays. I always give fake ones in online registrations etc and dont see it as a mortal sin. But you seemed to actually make a case for him not working for dtv but then say he does. 



tbeckner said:


> I think that it is reasonable to know the basis and source of the information, and the reasons for some of decisions to support the company, when most people do not support those opinions. I really wasn't asking for person information, just some information to help me understand the basis of his responses.


I'd very much like to see exactly what you are questioning him on as i'm an information hound myself. Is he just speculating or enumerating things as gospel fact? I'm especially interested in what opinions "most people do not support" and hope that that's not your sole reason for questioning him. I know I love taking up positions that most people dont support because I think for myself and don't follow a crowd blindly.



tbeckner said:


> Lee has decided NOT TO RESPOND in neither a positive or negative way, so I guess we will just have to question his reasoning based upon a possible company affiliation of some sort, if it does not reflect the majority consensus.


How do you know that he's 'decided' not to respond? Are you a mindreader? Have you looked at his posting history for the past few days? I bet you haven't. Obviously you aren't familiar with the rules of the forum. I suggest you read them. Questioning mods publicly is a reason for banning so did you ever think he may be banned instead of your irrational explanation as to why he's not replying? To say he's not replying because of a possible affiliation with DTV doesn't make sense even in the realm of your world. To the contrary, I'd think if he could reply to your accusations he would.

I'd hope you dont come back and personally attack me as I'm just asking for


> some information to help me understand the basis of _"your"_ responses


----------



## BlankMan (Mar 30, 2002)

dswallow said:


> Actually at the rate they're going, it'll be 17,999,999 in 2008.


17,999,998 when the Series 3 HD TiVo box becomes available.


----------



## tbeckner (Oct 26, 2001)

newsposter said:


> I'd hope you dont come back and personally attack me as I'm just asking for


I wasn't personally attacking Lee, I was just asking him a question. When I said that he had chosen to NOT RESPOND, I did not know that he had been banned from this site for a week, because of something he had done in this forum.

Sorry that he got banned and I personally have no idea why.

You will notice that I was not calling him a Shill, I was asking if he was a Shill. All he need to do was respond that he wasn't a DirecTV employee and that would have answered the question.


----------



## BlankMan (Mar 30, 2002)

tbeckner said:


> I wasn't ...


Caught in the middle again I see eh?


----------



## tbeckner (Oct 26, 2001)

newsposter said:


> I'm a fox mulder fan of the truth being out there. I'd be very interested in knowing what sensitive info he posted. Can you give me some links to see some of the dastardly deeds? Privacy is a big thing with me and if he's passing corporate secrets of course the CEO and Attorney General should be notified. I'll be first in line phone in hand.
> 
> Again, I'd appreciate links to the other forums to check out this sensitive stuff from years ago, or at least a general idea of the content. And if your other speculative question was about the deleted webcast thread here a few days ago, the reason it was deleted had NOTHING to do with him. Directv's PDF file contained personally identifying information of a customer and that info was posted (initially in jest because it was hard to believe that DTV would be that stupid, but then turned out to be valid) and TCF decided to delete the thread because of the personal information on there.


Direct phone numbers and e-mail addresses of DirecTV Executive employees, posted by him I believe at SatelliteGuys about three years ago. If you are good with Google, just do a search with his name and you will find the posts.



newsposter said:


> I dont hold out much credence in what anyone puts for birthdays. I always give fake ones in online registrations etc and dont see it as a mortal sin. But you seemed to actually make a case for him not working for dtv but then say he does.


We differ at this point, I may withhold some information when I post information on a site, but the information I do post is never FAKE. Do you know his true age or birthdate? Maybe it is FAKE or maybe it is not. But if it isn't FAKE then we have our answer, we couldn't be a DirecTV Shill, just a young kid posting positive information and sometimes sensitive information.



newsposter said:


> I'd very much like to see exactly what you are questioning him on as i'm an information hound myself. Is he just speculating or enumerating things as gospel fact? I'm especially interested in what opinions "most people do not support" and hope that that's not your sole reason for questioning him. I know I love taking up positions that most people dont support because I think for myself and don't follow a crowd blindly.


It isn't just one post, it is a number of many different posts, I would advise just reading his posts and make up your own mind. See it really does not matter what I think, I only had a simple question.



newsposter said:


> How do you know that he's 'decided' not to respond? Are you a mindreader? Have you looked at his posting history for the past few days? I bet you haven't. Obviously you aren't familiar with the rules of the forum. I suggest you read them. Questioning mods publicly is a reason for banning so did you ever think he may be banned instead of your irrational explanation as to why he's not replying? To say he's not replying because of a possible affiliation with DTV doesn't make sense even in the realm of your world. To the contrary, I'd think if he could reply to your accusations he would.


That maybe what you read into that post, but I had no idea he was banned.

BTW, since you knew he was banned and didn't find that information on this forum, do you have an association with Lee on another forum?


----------



## tbeckner (Oct 26, 2001)

BlankMan said:


> Caught in the middle again I see eh?


Its okay, I assume that in the FORUM WORLD you can be SHOT if you ask a question.

BTW, I missed MUSIC CHOICE so much that I signed up for local cable when they ran their spring installation special.

It's too bad that DirecTV hasn't got the hint yet. The news about XM Radio's quarterly report and the director who decided to quit and issue a letter about their subscriber acquirement costs was really CHOICE.

I hope for you and others, including myself that you get through to DirecTV in some way.


----------



## Boston Fan (Feb 8, 2006)

My eyes are bleeding.


----------



## BlankMan (Mar 30, 2002)

tbeckner said:


> Its okay, ...


Hope you saw this.

That's not a bad idea, get cable for MC, I'll have to keep my eyes open for deals like you did. I'm planning on going that way anyway as soon as TiVo has a HD box out. Most of the deals TWC currently is pushing are their 3for package, they want you to buy their phone, Internet, & TV package.

I'm perfectly happy with my phone/DSL provider and wouldn't consider changing at all, especially if it's only to save $$. The service I get from my phone/DSL provider is way better then TWC could ever hope to be.

I was actually thinking about this over the weekend. In the 10 or so years that I was a cable TV customer the number of outages I had and the duration of those outages far exceeds the number of outages and duration of outages in ~40+ years of phone service. The phones hardly ever go out, but cable goes out all the time.

My sisters RoadRunner was out for close to a week last summer until they finally fixed it. Yep, tell TWC I'll get right in line and sign up for that service....


----------



## ddobson (Feb 23, 2004)

lee espinoza said:


> NEW YORK, Feb 22 (Reuters) - DirecTV Group Inc. (DTV.N: Quote, Profile, Research), the largest U.S. satellite television service, on Wednesday said it expects to have 18 million subscribers by the end of 2008.
> 
> Earlier this month, the company said it would add 1 million subscribers in 2006, which would bring its total to 16.1 million. This would imply a continuing rate of nearly 1 million subscribers additions a year through 2008.
> 
> http://today.reuters.com/business/newsArticle.aspx?type=media&storyID=nN22362822


Guess they'd better hope our TIVOs last that long. If I can't get a TIVO based DVR from DirecTV, I'm going to go back to cable when the series 3 with cable card comes out. Of course I'll stay if they go back to TIVO but we all know they won't.


----------



## tbeckner (Oct 26, 2001)

Boston Fan said:


> My eyes are bleeding.


You've been SHOT! Call 911! Hurry!


----------



## beanpoppa (Jan 7, 2004)

I was perfectly happy with my DSL service for 3 years up until 2 weeks ago. Then it went out. After opening 4 trouble tickets with Verizon, only to have them closed with no resolution, and being told I needed to pay $20 for a new DSL modem, even though a technician never came to my house to verify the signal, they tell me that due to an error in their provisioning system, my line was disconnected at the central office, and the only way to remedy would be to cancel my service, wait a few days, and then order new service.

So I've got (shudder) Comcast coming out today to install cable Internet service. It will cost me more, but at least I'll be able to get all my local HDTV channels without my antenna. And it will be nice to have a 4Mbps/768k connection instead of the 1.5M/256k that I've had with DSL. And I'm sure, at some point in the next couple of years, Comcast will F* up completely, and I'll switch back to DSL. (which is why I switched from Cable to DSL 3 years ago)

There's nothing magical about any of them. They all have their screw ups.



BlankMan said:


> ...
> I'm perfectly happy with my phone/DSL provider and wouldn't consider changing at all, especially if it's only to save $$. The service I get from my phone/DSL provider is way better then TWC could ever hope to be.
> 
> I was actually thinking about this over the weekend. In the 10 or so years that I was a cable TV customer the number of outages I had and the duration of those outages far exceeds the number of outages and duration of outages in ~40+ years of phone service. The phones hardly ever go out, but cable goes out all the time.
> ...


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

BlankMan said:


> I was actually thinking about this over the weekend. In the 10 or so years that I was a cable TV customer the number of outages I had and the duration of those outages far exceeds the number of outages and duration of outages in ~40+ years of phone service. The phones hardly ever go out, but cable goes out all the time.


hey why is that? My old cable went down much more that directv. I know it can't be rain fade on the satellite channels etc because cable uses bigger dishes than us!  - that's another point that gets me when cable disses satellite...looking at their dish farm out back...but that's another story

So why does cable go out more frequently?


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

newsposter said:


> So why does cable go out more frequently?


There's more potential points of failure along the path the signal takes to get from the cable head-end to your home. And that path is subject to technicians working on things along it which might adversely affect your service, too.


----------



## HiDefGator (Oct 12, 2004)

There were several of the slides I found interesting. 

First was the one on how ALL their boxes including the non-DVR's would all end up with the same interface software. I think this is a nice touch by them for the end user and certainly long over due.

Second was how $3 of every monthly bill goes directly to cover tech support costs. Maybe this is normal but i was surprised it is so high. No wonder they aren't enabliing all the standalone Tivo features.

Plus knowing that sometime in 2007 they will have capacity for over a hundred HD channels is impressive. That should allow them to compress less for better PQ.

The new signal box that allows you to use only one wire to the dish is also way over due. That will greatly reduce the costs of installations for them. 

I also like the idea of them doing DirecTV viewing over the internet. Now when I'm in a hotel on business or vacation I won't have to wait til I get home to watch my favorite show. I'll be able to connect my laptop to DTV.com and view it live over the net.

they also listed user expandable hard drive space as a coming option and a VOD capability. I played with VOD at my brother's house this weekend and I must admit it's a really nice feature. 

I know it's all just slides. But if they are showing them to analysts then these features are truely in the works because the analysts will grill them pretty good during one of these presentations. I would have liked to hear the Q & A that went with the power point slides.


----------



## newsposter (Aug 18, 2002)

So for historians who follow this: how close are the slides to reality. In other words, how much of the 2005 stuff came true?


----------



## ping (Oct 3, 2005)

dswallow said:


> There's more potential points of failure along the path the signal takes to get from the cable head-end to your home. And that path is subject to technicians working on things along it which might adversely affect your service, too.


More points of failure than what? Satellite? yes. Telephone? um, no. So the initial comparison was between cable and telephone. And the answer is regulation. If cable had to pay fines if they fell below five nines, they'd be reliable, too.

As for lee, I suspect the birthdate is correct.


----------



## BlankMan (Mar 30, 2002)

ping said:


> More points of failure than what? Satellite? yes. Telephone? um, no. So the initial comparison was between cable and telephone. And the answer is regulation. If cable had to pay fines if they fell below five nines, they'd be reliable, too.
> 
> As for lee, I suspect the birthdate is correct.


Telephone? Um, yes. The telephone companies have numerous CO's in major metropolitan areas, if you're in a metropolitan area within a 5 mile radius of your house I'll bet there are a number of them, not just the one you're connected to. I know that is the case by me. Therefore the connection from your house to the CO is nowhere near as long as some cable company runs are to get to your house. Cable companies typically have one head-end as Doug mentioned and from that point all cable customers are connected, if you're near the end, you see the most outages. I know, I was there at one point in time, right on the county line and had the worst service there, lots of outages and never fixed quickly.

I'm 7000 feet from my CO, I'm over 10 miles from TWC's head-end.


----------



## smark (Nov 20, 2002)

BlankMan said:


> Telephone? Um, yes. The telephone companies have numerous CO's in major metropolitan areas, if you're in a metropolitan area within a 5 mile radius of your house I'll bet there are a number of them, not just the one you're connected to. I know that is the case by me. Therefore the connection from your house to the CO is nowhere near as long as some cable company runs are to get to your house. Cable companies typically have one head-end as Doug mentioned and from that point all cable customers are connected, if you're near the end, you see the most outages. I know, I was there at one point in time, right on the county line and had the worst service there, lots of outages and never fixed quickly.
> 
> I'm 7000 feet from my CO, I'm over 10 miles from TWC's head-end.


Incorrect about headends. Here in WA for example we have about 9. Two of which are the MAIN headends.


----------



## BlankMan (Mar 30, 2002)

smark said:


> Incorrect about headends. Here in WA for example we have about 9. Two of which are the MAIN headends.


You got 9 that serve one metropolitan area? Are you counting the State or just Everett? Was that because of one cable comany buying another? That happened here when TWC bought Viacom there were 2 but it wasn't long before TWC dismantled Viacoms.

Just for grins I checked, I have 7 CO's within 5 miles, how many of those 9 are within 5 miles of you?

My point was, phones lines typically do not have to travel as far as cable therefore there are less points of failure.


----------



## smark (Nov 20, 2002)

Depends on how you define a metropolitan area.


----------



## BlankMan (Mar 30, 2002)

smark said:


> Depends on how you define a metropolitan area.


Yeah I looked on a map, I can see why there are 9 sites out by you. If they have to cover your metoplolitatn area from Everett to Olympia that looks to be about 60 miles. Whereas here sitting against Lake Michigan it's more like a half circle with a ~15 mile radius.


----------



## Tburt (Nov 29, 2004)

HiDefGator said:


> Plus knowing that sometime in 2007 they will have capacity for over a hundred HD channels is impressive. That should allow them to compress less for better PQ.


 Or allow them add more shopping channels! :down:


----------

